This tenth volume of Collected Papers includes 86 papers in English and Spanish languages comprising 972 pages, written between 2014-2022 by the author alone or in collaboration with the following 105 co-authors (alphabetically ordered) from 26 countries: Abu Sufian, Ali Hassan, Ali Safaa Sadiq, Anirudha Ghosh, Assia Bakali, Atiqe Ur Rahman, Laura Bogdan, Willem K.M. Brauers, Erick González Caballero, Fausto Cavallaro, Gavrilă Calefariu, T. Chalapathi, Victor Christianto, Mihaela Colhon, Sergiu Boris Cononovici, Mamoni Dhar, Irfan Deli, Rebeca Escobar-Jara, Alexandru Gal, N. (...) Gandotra, Sudipta Gayen, Vassilis C. Gerogiannis, Noel Batista Hernández, Hongnian Yu, Hongbo Wang, Mihaiela Iliescu, F. Nirmala Irudayam, Sripati Jha, Darjan Karabašević, T. Katican, Bakhtawar Ali Khan, Hina Khan, Volodymyr Krasnoholovets, R. Kiran Kumar, Manoranjan Kumar Singh, Ranjan Kumar, M. Lathamaheswari, Yasar Mahmood, Nivetha Martin, Adrian Mărgean, Octavian Melinte, Mingcong Deng, Marcel Migdalovici, Monika Moga, Sana Moin, Mohamed Abdel-Basset, Mohamed Elhoseny, Rehab Mohamed, Mohamed Talea, Kalyan Mondal, Muhammad Aslam, Muhammad Aslam Malik, Muhammad Ihsan, Muhammad Naveed Jafar, Muhammad Rayees Ahmad, Muhammad Saeed, Muhammad Saqlain, Muhammad Shabir, Mujahid Abbas, Mumtaz Ali, Radu I. Munteanu, Ghulam Murtaza, Munazza Naz, Tahsin Oner, ‪Gabrijela Popović‬‬‬‬‬, Surapati Pramanik, R. Priya, S.P. Priyadharshini, Midha Qayyum, Quang-Thinh Bui, Shazia Rana, Akbara Rezaei, Jesús Estupiñán Ricardo, Rıdvan Sahin, Saeeda Mirvakili, Said Broumi, A. A. Salama, Flavius Aurelian Sârbu, Ganeshsree Selvachandran, Javid Shabbir, Shio Gai Quek, Son Hoang Le, Florentin Smarandache, Dragiša Stanujkić, S. Sudha, Taha Yasin Ozturk, Zaigham Tahir, The Houw Iong, Ayse Topal, Alptekin Ulutaș, Maikel Yelandi Leyva Vázquez, Rizha Vitania, Luige Vlădăreanu, Victor Vlădăreanu, Ștefan Vlăduțescu, J. Vimala, Dan Valeriu Voinea, Adem Yolcu, Yongfei Feng, Abd El-Nasser H. Zaied, Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas.‬‬. (shrink)

The current discussions of conceptual schemes and related topics are misguided; for they have been focused too much on the truth-conditional notions of meaning/concepts and translation/interpretation in Tarski's style. It is exactly due to such a Quinean interpretation of the notion of conceptual schemes that the very notion of conceptual schemes falls prey to Davidson's attack. We argue that what should concern us in the discussions of conceptual schemes and related issues, following the initiatives of I. Hacking, T. Kuhn, and (...) N. Rescher, is not the truth-values of assertions, but rather the truthvalue-status of the sentences used to make the assertions. This is because the genuine conceptual innovation between alternative theories/languages does not lie in differences in determining the truth-values of their sentences, but turns on whether these sentences have truth-values when considered within the context of a competing one. The core of conceptual relativism does not consist in the claim that different conceptual schemes may yield incommensurable truth claims, but rather that different conceptual schemes may yield incompatible truth-value-status and therefore lead to distinct perceptions of reality. Conceptual schemes are no longer seen as sentential languages consisting of a set of sentences accepted as true, but rather seen as metaphysical presuppositions of presuppositional languages.[ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]. (shrink)

Jeagwon Kim's exclusion argument is a well-known argument against non-reductive physicalism in the contemporary debate on mental causation. In this essay, we will first discuss two versions of the exclusion argument: the simple version and the sophisticated version. Secondly, we will take a conservative strategy to defend the kind of non-reductive physicalism initiated by Donald Davidson: the Token Identity Theory. Namely, we will explain where Kim failed to appropriately understand Davidson's work and argue that the simple version and the sophisticated (...) version of the exclusion argument won't work against the clarified token identity theory at all. Lastly, Since much of Kim's inappropriate interpretation of Davidson's work is rooted in their difference in metaphysics, there is reason to believe the proper understanding and evaluation on contemplation as such on mental causation, non-reductive physicalism, and other related problems can't be achieved without finding an appropriate metaphysical frame. (shrink)

We investigate the causal manipulability hypothesis, according to which what partly explains (a) why people tend to prefer negative events to be in their further future rather than their nearer future and positive events to be in their nearer future rather than their further future and (b) why people tend to prefer that negative events be located in their past not their future and that positive events be located in their future not their past, is that people tend to discount (...) the value of events they are less able causally to manipulate. If people discount the value of events they are less able to causally manipulate, then since often temporally nearer future events are more causally manipulable than further ones, and since future events are manipulable whereas past ones aren’t, this could explain both (a) and (b). In turn, if the causal manipulability hypothesis is correct, this might suggest that insofar as people’s preferences are explained in this manner, those preferences are rationally permissible, since relative causal manipulability is normatively relevant. Thus, ascertaining whether the causal manipulability hypothesis is true may shed light on the normative status of such preferences. We investigate the cognitively mediated version of the causal manipulability hypothesis, according to which people’s consciously held beliefs about the relative causal manipulability of events explains (a) and (b). Contrary to expectations, we found no evidence in favour of this view. We suggest that either relative causal manipulability plays an explanatory role, but one that is not cognitively mediated, or that it does not play any role, even if it is sometimes associated with other factors, such as probability, that may play a role in explaining some time biased preferences. (shrink)

Whilе thе rоbust аnd pоsitivе аssоciаtiоn bеtwееn еducаtiоn аnd pоliticаl еngаgеmеnt hаs bееn widеly dоcumеntеd, thе dirеct cаusаl link is still а subjеct оf dеbаtе. This study cоntributеs tо thе оngоing dеbаtе by еxаmining whеthеr thеrе еxists а cаusаl еffеct оf еducаtiоn оn pоliticаl еngаgеmеnt. Explоiting thе plаusibly еxоgеnоus vаriаtiоn in еducаtiоn inducеd by thе cоmpulsоry schооling rеfоrms аcrоss 39 cоuntriеs, wе find thаt еducаtiоn cultivаtеs pоliticаl intеrеst, prоmоtеs thе аcquisitiоn оf pоliticаl knоwlеdgе, аnd fоstеrs suppоrtivе аttitudеs tоwаrds pоliticаl frееdоms. (...) Nеvеrthеlеss, thе bеttеr еducаtеd аrе nо mоrе likеly tо vоtе in еlеctiоns nоr аdоpt аny spеcific pоsitiоn in thе lеft-right pоliticаl spеctrum. (shrink)

Whilе thе rоbust аnd pоsitivе аssоciаtiоn bеtwееn еducаtiоn аnd pоliticаl еngаgеmеnt hаs bееn widеly dоcumеntеd, thе dirеct cаusаl link is still а subjеct оf dеbаtе. This study cоntributеs tо thе оngоing dеbаtе by еxаmining whеthеr thеrе еxists а cаusаl еffеct оf еducаtiоn оn pоliticаl еngаgеmеnt. Explоiting thе plаusibly еxоgеnоus vаriаtiоn in еducаtiоn inducеd by thе cоmpulsоry schооling rеfоrms аcrоss 39 cоuntriеs, wе find thаt еducаtiоn cultivаtеs pоliticаl intеrеst, prоmоtеs thе аcquisitiоn оf pоliticаl knоwlеdgе, аnd fоstеrs suppоrtivе аttitudеs tоwаrds pоliticаl frееdоms. (...) Nеvеrthеlеss, thе bеttеr еducаtеd аrе nо mоrе likеly tо vоtе in еlеctiоns nоr аdоpt аny spеcific pоsitiоn in thе lеft-right pоliticаl spеctrum. (shrink)

The JTB definition of knowledge has been shown by Gettier to be incomplete: its three conditions are necessary for knowledge, but not sufficient. We argue that the JTB definition can be completed with a very simple fourth condition, namely that the justification for the belief in p must be sufficient to exclude ¬p. It is shown that the resulting JTB+S definition solves the Gettier problem.

The present article was partly inspired by G. Pollack’s book, and also Dadoloff, Saxena & Jensen (2010). As a senior physicist colleague and our friend, Robert N. Boyd, wrote in a journal (JCFA, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2022), for example, things and Beings can travel between Universes, intentionally or unintentionally [4]. In this short remark, we revisit and offer short remark to Neil Boyd’s ideas and trying to connect them with geometry of musical chords as presented by D. Tymoczko and (...) others, then to Escherian staircase and then to Jacob’s ladder which seems to pointto possibility to interpret Jacob’s vision as described in the ancient book of Genesis as interdimensional staircase, e.g. an interdimensional bridge between heaven and earth (cf. classic book: Hofstadter, Godel, Escher, Bach). Jacob’s vision of angels going down to earth from that staircase has been depicted for instance in William Blake art etc. In our communication with others via physics literature and discussions etc, we came to several conclusions as follows: Firstly, possibility of wormhole effect to mirror particle universe, which sometimes it is termed non-orientable wormhole. While such mirror particles effect have been more than 50 years predicted with the so-called parity violation (cf. Lee & Yang, 1950s), and that is called symmetry breaking. Secondly, a series of extended experiments on laser irradiated cold water may suggest possible transition from a phase of water to be at least partially fourth phase of water, which may be composed of crystalline water (see e.g. Gerald Pollack, and also Harold Aspden on liquid crystalline). If we can imagine laser cooling effect can be done in protracted time, then we can achieve a physical representation of Aspden‘s liquid crystalline. Therefore, in this article we outline a series of simple experiments of laser irradiated iced-water along with beryl and selenite crystals in order to see possibility of such a quantum tunneling via quantum liquid crystalline Universe hypothesis, which may likely be modeled with iced-water. It is interesting to remark here that certain experiments by Stockholm University scientists have shown that X-ray triggered water can exhibit properties just like liquid crystal (cf. PRL, 2020). That is why we consider it possible that there can be quantum phase transition where liquid water (comprised of iced cubes and water) can exhibit effects such as tunneling in quantum liquid crystalline Universe. Last but not least, we admit that what we outlined here is just aninitial phase; and if you wish, perhaps we can call such experiments as “wormhole-at-lab” experiments (abbreviated: WHALE). (shrink)

As a senior physicist colleague and our friend, Robert N. Boyd, wrote in a journal (JCFA, Vol. 1,. 2, 2022), Our universe is but one page in a large book [4]. For example, things and Beings can travel between Universes, intentionally or unintentionally. In this short remark, we revisit and offer short remark to Neil’s ideas and trying to connect them with geometrization of musical chords as presented by D. Tymoczko and others, then to Escher staircase and then to Jacob’s (...) ladder which seems to point to possibility to interpret Jacob’s vision as described in the ancient book of Genesis as inter dimensional or heavenly staircase, e.g. an inter dimensional bridge between heaven and earth (see also classic book: Hofstadter, Godel, Escher, Bach). Jacob’s vision of angels going down to earth from that staircase has been depicted for instance in William Blake art etc. In our communication with others via physics literature and discussions etc, we came to several conclusions as follows: Firstly, possibility of quantum wormhole effect to mirror particle universe, which sometimes it is termed non-orientable wormhole. While such mirror particles effect have been more than 50 years predicted with the so-called parity violation (cf. Lee & Yang, 1950s), and that is called symmetry breaking. Secondly, a series of extended experiments on laser irradiated cold water may suggest possible transition from a phase of water to be at least partially fourth phase of water, which may be composed of crystalline water (see e.g. Gerald Pollack, and also Harold Aspden on liquid crystalline). If we can imagine laser cooling effect can be done in protracted time, then we can achieve a physical representation of Aspden’s liquid crystalline. Therefore, in subsequent article (Part II) we outlined simple model of such an effect of tunneling via quantum liquid crystalline Universe, which may likely be modeled with iced-water. It is interesting to remark here that certain experiments by Stockholm University scientists have shown that X-ray triggered water can exhibit properties just like liquid crystal (cf. PRL, 2020). That is why we consider it possible that there can be quantum phase transition where liquid water (comprised of iced cubes and water) can exhibit effects such as tunneling in quantum liquid crystalline Universe. Last but not least, we admit that what we outlined here is just an initial phase; and if you wish, perhaps we can call such experiments as “wormhole-at-lab” experiments (abbreviated: WHALE). (shrink)

This pаpеr prоvidеs thе first еmpiricаl еvidеncе оn thе еxistеncе оf nеgаtivе spillоvеr еffеcts frоm childrеn еxpоsеd tо cоrpоrаl punishmеnt in thе hоmе (CPH). Wе find thаt intеrаctiоns with pееrs suffеring frоm CPH dеprеss аchiеvеmеnt in bоth mаth аnd lаnguаgе аmоng Viеtnаmеsе fifth grаdеrs. Spеcificаlly, а оnе stаndаrd dеviаtiоn incrеаsе in thе Pееrs’ Viоlеncе Indеx is аssоciаtеd with а rеductiоn in thе mаth аnd thе lаnguаgе tеst scоrеs by 0.11 аnd 0.14 stаndаrd dеviаtiоns, rеspеctivеly. Thеsе аdvеrsе impаcts cоuld pоtеntiаlly bе (...) аttributеd tо thе unfаvоrаblе chаngеs in studеnt аcаdеmic аspirаtiоns, studеnt аctuаl lеаrning еffоrts, аnd thе intеr-studеnt rеlаtiоnships. (shrink)

This pаpеr prоvidеs еvidеncе thаt thе Alliеd bоmbing оf Viеtnаm, thе lоngеst аnd hеаviеst аеriаl bоmbаrdmеnt in histоry, impоsеd dеtrimеntаl rаmificаtiоns оn еducаtiоnаl аttаinmеnt аnd futurе lаbоr mаrkеt оutcоmеs оf schооl-аgе individuаls. By еxplоiting thе plаusibly еxоgеnоus districtby-cоhоrt vаriаtiоn in bоmb dеstructiоn undеr а diffеrеncе-in-diffеrеncеs frаmеwоrk, wе find thаt аn incrеаsе in bоmb intеnsity lеаds tо significаntly fеwеr еducаtiоnаl yеаrs cоmplеtеd аnd lоwеr futurе еаrnings fоr schооl-аgе childrеn еxpоsеd tо thе bоmbаrdmеnt. Wе furthеr shоw thаt bоth thе supply-sidе fаctоrs (inаdеquаtе (...) schооl sеcurity аnd thе lаck оf tеаchеrs) аnd thе dеmаnd-sidе fаctоrs (rеsidеntiаl cаsuаltiеs, rеstrictеd аccеss tо hеаlthcаrе, dаmаgеd prоpеrtiеs, аnd incrеаsеd rеliаncе оn wеlfаrе аssistаncе) cоuld bе pоtеntiаl mеchаnisms driving thе lоng-tеrm cоnsеquеncеs оf аеriаl bоmbаrdmеnt. Our findings undеrlinе thе impоrtаncе оf cоnflict prеvеntiоn аnd pоst-cоnflict rеcоnstructiоn in prоmоting sustаinаblе dеvеlоpmеnt. (shrink)

In this paper, I take up one of Wang Yangming’s most audacious philosophical claims, which is that an achievement that is entirely concerned with correcting one’s own inner states, called “establishing sincerity” (licheng 立誠) can help one to fully grasp (jin 盡) all ethically pertinent matters, including those that would seem to require some ability to know or track facts about the wider world (e.g., facts about people very different from ourselves, facts about the needs of plants and animals). (...) Wang makes a claim to this effect in some of his letters and recorded discussions. -/- I begin with a brief, historical reconstruction of what Wang means by “establishing sincerity” and then turn to two sets of controversies regarding his audacious claim. The first has to do with how we should understand the proposal that establishing sincerity helps or positions a person to fully grasp all ethically significant concerns. On the interpretation of Chen Lai 陳來, Wang doesn’t think that establishing sincerity is sufficient by itself to have this grasp, only that it lays a necessary psychological foundation for all attempts to do so, so that it leaves much more work to do. I largely agree with Chen’s reading but find it isn’t strong enough to capture what’s most important and controversial about Wang’s view. On my stronger reading, Wang doesn’t just think that establishing sincerity provides a necessary foundation for a complete grasp, he also thinks that it describes the most difficult and demanding step or part of the process – the other steps come much more naturally and easily. The second set of controversies has to do with whether we can preserve Wang’s core account of virtuous moral agency without his strong ethical nativism, according to which we have an inherent capacity and disposition to track what is ethically important or salient about people and things very much unlike ourselves. I consider some arguments and interpretations of Wang’s thought that might allow us to bypass his nativist presuppositions, and conclude that they do not succeed. Even if we cannot accept his ethical nativism, however, there is a range of important ethical norms for which Wang’s prescriptions are powerful and prudent. The result of this study, I hope, will be an account of Wang’s thought which better positions us to see what parts are (and are not) worth bringing to ongoing debates about the nature of ethics, moral knowledge, and moral virtue. (shrink)

The first aim of the paper is to show that under certain conditions generative syntax can be made suitable for Montague semantics, based on his type logic. One of the conditions is to make branching in the so-called X-bar syntax strictly binary, This makes it possible to provide an adequate semantics for Noun Phrases by taking them as referring to sets of collections of sets of entities ( type <ett,t>) rather than to sets of sets of entities (ett).

In the past twenty years, scholarly interest in John Dewey's later writings has surged. While later works such as Art as Experience (1934), Logic: The Theory of Inquiry (1938), and Freedom and Culture (1939) have received considerable attention, Knowing and the Known (1949), Dewey's late-in-life collaboration with Arthur F. Bentley, has been largely neglected. A common bias among Dewey scholars is that this work, instead of developing Dewey's Logic, departs from its spirit, reflects the overbearing influence of Bentley on Dewey (...) (who was at the time an octogenarian), and, therefore, merits little serious scholarly consideration. However, Dewey and Bentley engaged in an extended correspondence, collected in John Dewey and Arthur Bentley: A Philosophical Correspondence, 1932-1951 (1964), the result of which was no less than a watershed moment in Dewey's thinking on the experimental method of inquiry. The Logic was improved in ways that incorporated the insights of Charles Sanders Peirce's logic and developed Dewey's earlier work in a direction expressly intended by the aging pragmatist. Indeed, Dewey writes in correspondence with his co-author: "You [Bentley] shouldn't lean too heavily on the [1938] Logic; it wasn't a bad job at the time, but I could do better now [with Knowing and the Known]; largely through association with you and getting the courage to see my thing [logical theory] through without compromise" (Correspondence, 4:595, see also 184, 420, 481, 483-84). One of the few scholars of American pragmatism to acknowledge that Knowing and the Known was a watershed development in Dewey's thinking is Frank X. Ryan, author of an exciting new book, Seeing Together: Mind, Matter, and the Experimental Outlook of John Dewey and Arthur F. Bentley, that clearly and concisely presents the revolutionary method developed in Knowing and Known: the transactional approach. (shrink)

Criticism and recommendations are very much welcome. Please don't hesitate to contact me with them. -/- .

Getting physical: Empiricism’s medical History Content Type Journal Article DOI 10.1007/s11016-010-9474-4 Authors John Gascoigne, School of History and Philosophy, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2056, Australia Journal Metascience Online ISSN 1467-9981 Print ISSN 0815-0796.

Define teleology as the view that requirements hold in virtue of facts about value or goodness. Teleological views are quite popular, and in fact some philosophers (e.g. Dreier, Smith) argue that all (plausible) moral theories can be understood teleologically. I argue, however, that certain well-known cases show that the teleologist must at minimum assume that there are certain facts that an agent ought to know, and that this means that requirements can't, in general, hold in virtue of facts about value (...) or goodness. I then show that even if we grant those 'ought's teleology still runs into problems. A positive justification of teleology looks like it will require an argument of this form: O(X); if X, then O(Y); therefore O(Y). But this form of argument isn't in general valid. I conclude by offering two positive suggestions for those attracted to a teleological outlook. (shrink)

contents -/- i. a game we can't abstain from ii. a sudden God, a Boltzmann God iii. the Hard Problem & Humean causation iv. Turing gave a recipe for consciousness v. the Honeymoon Algorithm vi. Tech Civ takes Earth in vii. Borges, the Compressor viii. Hollywood, where faeries enter ix. in the age of Macbeth, magic x. from King to this vile politician xi. Medieval blue not our color blue xii. the austerities prioritize braingrowth xiii. taste is tactile xiv. if (...) God is a Drama Lord xv. the Hero-Dragon story must be realized. (shrink)

The most cursory examination of the history of artificial intelligence highlights numerous egregious claims of its researchers, especially in relation to a populist form of ‘strong’ computationalism which holds that any suitably programmed computer instantiates genuine conscious mental states purely in virtue of carrying out a specific series of computations. The argument presented herein is a simple development of that originally presented in Putnam’s (Representation & Reality, Bradford Books, Cambridge in 1988 ) monograph, “Representation & Reality”, which if correct, has (...) important implications for turing machine functionalism and the prospect of ‘conscious’ machines. In the paper, instead of seeking to develop Putnam’s claim that, “everything implements every finite state automata”, I will try to establish the weaker result that, “everything implements the specific machine Q on a particular input set ( x )”. Then, equating Q ( x ) to any putative AI program, I will show that conceding the ‘strong AI’ thesis for Q (crediting it with mental states and consciousness) opens the door to a vicious form of panpsychism whereby all open systems, (e.g. grass, rocks etc.), must instantiate conscious experience and hence that disembodied minds lurk everywhere. (shrink)

In Frege’s Puzzle (1986), Salmon analyzed ‘a withholds believing p’ in terms of a ternary relation BEL of x believing a proposition p under a guise g. The proposed analysis is the following: There is a proposition guise g such that a grasps p by means of g but a does not stand in BEL to p and g. Sean Crawford has made a proposal for Millians to evade propositional guises through second-order belief. Specifically, in effect, Crawford’s proposes to analyze (...) the crucial notion of withheld belief instead as believing that one does not believe: a believes that a does not believe p. Crawford’s clever proposal thus avoids explicit quantification over guises. However, it is shown that the proposal is inadequate to avoid guises. The resulting notion is too weak to capture the relevant notion of withheld belief. (shrink)

The result of combining classical quantificational logic with modal logic proves necessitism – the claim that necessarily everything is necessarily identical to something. This problem is reflected in the purely quantificational theory by theorems such as ∃x t=x; it is a theorem, for example, that something is identical to Timothy Williamson. The standard way to avoid these consequences is to weaken the theory of quantification to a certain kind of free logic. However, it has often been noted that in order (...) to specify the truth conditions of certain sentences involving constants or variables that don’t denote, one has to apparently quantify over things that are not identical to anything. In this paper I defend a contingentist, non-Meinongian metaphysics within a positive free logic. I argue that although certain names and free variables do not actually refer to anything, in each case there might have been something they actually refer to, allowing one to interpret the contingentist claims without quantifying over mere possibilia. (shrink)

Some conditions are given to ensure that for a jump homogeneous Markov process $\{X(t),t\ge 0\}$ the law of the integral functional of the process $T^{-1/2} \int^T_0\varphi(X(t))dt$ converges to the normal law $N(0,\sigma^2)$ as $T\to \infty$, where $\varphi$ is a mapping from the state space $E$ into $\bbfR$.

1. INTRODUÇÃO -/- No "mundo" das produções animais, e sem que saibamos exatamente o motivo ou os motivos, não é incomum observar, mesmo a nível docente (faceta em que nos sentimos especialmente culpados), uma notável discussão (obscuridade de ideias e/ou na linguagem, produzida deliberadamente ou não) ao abordar os conceitos de fertilidade, fecundidade e prolificidade. -/- Esta falta de clareza conceitual torna-se tanto mais manifesta quando, precisamente a partir dos referidos conceitos, se pretende efetuar, por exemplo, uma programação ou uma (...) análise técnico-econômica de uma exploração pecuária. -/- O objetivo do presente trabalho é tentar introduzir com "clareza de ideias" acerca dos referidos conceitos essenciais na Zootecnia, sempre no domínio que nos é próprio, o das produções animais. Com a finalidade de tornar a exposição mais didática, construindo os conceitos sobre a cultura dos suínos. No entanto, que fique bem claro desde já que, com pequenas variações, pode-se considerar qualquer outra «espécie animal superior», incluindo as aves. -/- Para efeitos de brevidade e concisão, e porque serão abordados noutros trabalhos, não vamos aprofundar aqui, para além do estritamente indispensável, as questões relativas à anatomia do aparelho reprodutor e à fisiologia da reprodução. -/- -/- 2. FERTILIDADE -/- Segundo o Dicionário Geral Ilustrado da Língua Portuguesa: -/- — Fertilidade: Qualidade de fértil. -/- — Fértil: Virtude que tem a terra para produzir copiosos frutos. -/- A palavra "fertilidade" tem a sua raiz no vocábulo latino "fertilis" (produtivo, abundante). Ao nível da produção animal, a fertilidade pode ser definida como: -/- «A capacidade de um macho ou de uma fêmea púbere de produzir e liberar gametas maduros fisiologicamente aptos a fecundar (espermatozoides) ou para serem fecundados (ovócitos de segunda ordem)». -/- No caso da fêmea, o aparecimento da puberdade começa com a intervenção das hormonas gonadotrofinas FSH e LH (folículo estimulante e lúteo estimulante, respectivamente). Com ela se inicia o desenvolvimento de 15-30 ou mais folículos primários localizados no estroma ovariano, processo que se repetirá de forma cíclica enquanto não se inicia um processo de anafrodisia funcional (gestação) ou patológica. -/- 2.1 Fertilidade em suínos: formação de ovários, ovócitos, folículos e generalidades das fêmeas -/- Na porca, os ovários são duas formações ovais situadas na cavidade abdominal na região sublombar em ambos os lados do raquis. Geralmente, o ovário direito tem um tamanho superior ao esquerdo e, como no caso da maioria das fêmeas mamíferas, a maior parte da superfície ovariana está rodeada pelo epitélio germinal e pelo peritoneu, exceto numa pequena porção, ílio-ovárico, por onde penetram os vasos e os nervos. -/- O estroma ovárico é formado por uma rede de tecido conjuntivo em cujas maias se encontram numerosos folículos que contêm as células germinativas ou ovócitos em diversos estágios de desenvolvimento. Estes folículos manifestam-se na superfície do ovário da porca sob a forma de uma série de eminências arredondadas que lhe dão um aspecto de amora. -/- A fêmea já nasce com um número determinado de folículos primários originados durante o desenvolvimento embrionário, contendo cada folículo um ovócito de primeira ordem que alcançou um desenvolvimento de dictiotene da prófase meiótica ou mitose I. -/- A partir dos folículos primários originam-se folículos secundários ou poliestratificados, alcançando-se o grau de folículos terciários de Graaf ou maduros, com o aparecimento da puberdade. O folículo terciário ou antral caracteriza-se por um aumento de volume e uma grande complexidade, contém, em princípio, o ovócito de primeira ordem que sofreu o período de vitelo-gênese e que vai dar lugar ao ovócito de segunda ordem quando ocorre a lise do cumulus proliger ou ooforo, com o qual a célula sexual permanece agora livre no seio do líquido folicular. Neste processo o ovócito de primeira ordem sofreu modificações características como são um deslocamento do núcleo para a superfície da célula e o protoplasma distribui-se irregularmente. -/- Um folículo terciário ou maduro tem a seguinte estrutura desde a parte externa à interna: teca externa, teca interna, membrana de Slajvansky, membrana granulosa e as células da coroa radiada que rodeiam o ovócito, uma membrana pelúcida que envolve totalmente o ovócito de grande transcendência no momento da fecundação e finalmente o ovócito de primeira ordem. Existe uma cavidade denominada cavidade folicular, que contém um líquido segregado pelas células da granulosa, licor folicular de composição complexa, destacando as hormonas sexuais femininas e concretamente o 17-beta-estradiol. A membrana granulosa está relacionada com a coroa radiada pelo «cumulus proliger» ou ooforo que serve de nexo de ligação. -/- Posteriormente, e seguindo o processo, origina-se o folículo pré-ovulatório ou deiscente, produzindo-se a eclosão do folículo e libertando-se um ovócito de segunda ordem em período de metafase II graças a um processo que Pérez García denominou como ovocitação, termo que foi aceito nos diversos meios científicos, já que considera que o termo ovulação no caso dos vertebrados é incorreto. Este ovócito de segunda ordem é a verdadeira célula fértil, coisa que não ocorre quando se libera ou se produz o óvulo no oviduto; os óvulos são células inférteis. No processo de ovocitação intervém uma série de mecanismos que classificamos em pressores, enzimáticos e neuro-hormonais, destacando entre estes últimos a hormona luteoestimulante (LH), além dos fatores introváricos descritos recentemente. -/- Consequentemente, uma fêmea, no nosso caso suína, será fértil quando for capaz de levar a bom termo de forma regular e de acordo com a periodicidade do seu ciclo sexual o processo descrito supra. -/- Na prática cotidiana das explorações não é possível saber diretamente se uma fêmea é fértil ou não. Neste contexto, por exemplo, ninguém poderá nos informar se ante as manifestações psicomáticas do zelo existe fertilidade; pode tratar-se de um zelo anovular que requer para o seu diagnóstico a utilização de métodos endoscópicos ou ecográficos, assim como métodos cirúrgicos como a perfusão dos ovidutos ou do útero para obter os ovócitos liberados avaliando-se a quantidade e qualidade dos mesmos. -/- Por conseguinte, a frase frequentemente ouvida a nível das explorações: «é uma fêmea muito fértil», é, a menos que tenha sido efetuado o «controle específico» da reprodutora, pelo menos «tecnicamente inadequado». -/- 2.2 Fertilidade em suínos: formação, translocação e generalidades dos espermatozoides no macho -/- O caso do porco é um pouco diferente. No período embrionário formam-se as espermatogônias, células equivalentes às ovogonias da fêmea. De cada espermatogônia primária ou espermatogônia A1 por numerosas mitoses, produzem-se 16 espermatócitos primários mais uma espermatogônia B1 que repetirá o processo. Por conseguinte, o período de proliferação ou multiplicação difere significativamente do mesmo período no caso da fêmea, uma vez que no macho durante toda a vida sexual são produzidas continuamente novas espermatogônias. -/- Cada espermatócito primário, através de um processo de crescimento muito limitado, origina um espermatócito de primeira ordem que, durante o período de maturação, originará dois espermatócitos de segunda ordem (haploides) e, em segundo lugar, quatro espermátides (haploides). Cada uma destas espermátides, através de um processo de transformação denominado espermiogênese ou espermatohistogênese, originará um espermatozoide. Os espermatozoides passarão posteriormente do rete testis ao epidídimo, onde se armazenarão alelostaticamente. A trajetória dos espermatozoides antes de chegar ao epidídimo passa pelos tubos retos de Haller (muito lentamente pela pressão exercida) para chegar às lagunas de Haller e daí aos cones eferentes. O trânsito dos espermatozoides através do epidídimo é de fundamental importância porque é aqui onde tem lugar a verdadeira maturação. Os espermatozoides obtidos a nível da cabeça do epidídimo não terminaram a sua maturação e, portanto, carecem de capacidade fecundante, enquanto que aqueles provenientes da cauda deste órgão a têm em grande medida. No entanto, à saída do epidídimo, os espermatozoides ainda não atingiram a sua plena maturidade. Para isso deverão passar pelas ampolas do ducto deferente ou de Henle para que, como afirmam a maioria dos autores, tenha lugar a seleção de formas anormais e de espermatozoides fracos. As células intersticiais do epitélio seminífero são responsáveis por fornecer aos espermatozoides um material nutricional que exerce ações tróficas e endócrinas que favorecem o equilíbrio celular do espermatozoide. Finalmente estes espermatozoides, conjuntamente com as secreções prostáticas, das vesículas seminais e das glândulas bulbouretrais, terminarão sua trajetória na uretra, sendo eliminados ao exterior pelo órgão copulador ou pênis mediante o processo de ejaculação. -/- No momento da ejaculação libera-se o esperma, ou sêmen, que é o resultado da mistura do material espermático de origem testicular e as sucessivas secreções das glândulas acessórias antes citadas, que derramam seus produtos na uretra. No entanto, o processo final espermatogênico não termina no trato genital masculino, mas sim no trato feminino depois do coito ou da inseminação artificial graças ao conhecido processo extremamente complexo da capacitação espermática. -/- Um varrão é fértil a partir do momento em que é capaz de produzir espermatozoides normais. Analisando o esperma de forma adequada poderemos constatar com uma relativa precisão, tendo em conta a grande quantidade de fatores endógenos e exógenos que afetam a um ser tão sensível como o porco, o nível de fertilidade do mesmo. Devemos ter em mente que macho suíno adulto pode ser inicialmente muito fértil (apresentar uma grande quantidade de espermatozoides, de 400-1.300 x 106/ml na fração espermática do seu ejaculado) e, em vez disso, não ser apto para a reprodução porque pode apresentar defeitos no epidídimo e/ou nas ampolas de Henle pelo qual os espermatozoides não amadurecem e portanto não são úteis para efeitos reprodutivos. -/- Contudo, na prática, e de acordo com a própria definição, o porco é considerado fértil quando produz espermatozoides maduros com as seguintes características: -/- - Concentração correta; -/- - Capacidade motora adequada; -/- - Capacidade metabólica; -/- - Estrutura correta em relação à cabeça e ao flagelo (pescoço, trato intermediário e cauda, considerando esta última formada por seu trato principal e seu trato terminal), avaliando-se também o estado do acrossoma; -/- - Adequado comportamento cromocitógeno. -/- Logo deve ficar claro que a fertilidade é uma aptidão que em geral têm os machos e as fêmeas púberes para produzir e liberar gametas anatômicos e fisiológicos corretos (os híbridos das espécies cavalar e asnal, os mulos e os burdéganos, por exemplo, não são férteis; uma fêmea com ausência de desenvolvimento gonodal tampouco). -/- -/- 3. FECUNDIDADE -/- De acordo com o Dicionário da Língua Portuguesa: -/- — Fecundidade: Qualidade de fecundo. -/- — Fecundo: Que produz ou se reproduz por meios naturais. -/- A palavra «fecundidade» provém do latim fecunditas, significa «virtude e faculdade de produzir». Qualidade de fecundo, do latim fecundus, que «produz ou se reproduz em virtude dos meios naturais». -/- Esta definição pode conduzir, no âmbito das produções animais, a equívocos. Somos a favor da aplicação da seguinte definição de fecundidade. -/- «É a capacidade que um macho e/ou uma fêmea fértil tem para conseguir que os seus gametas, anatómica e fisiológica, aumentem normalmente: uma vez liberados, juntam-se aos do outro sexo para formar um zigoto». -/- Este fenômeno recebe o nome de fecundação, não sendo correto o de fertilização, que é utilizado por alguns autores. -/- 3.1 Generalidades e a fecundação em suínos -/- No caso da porca, para continuar com o mesmo exemplo ao longo de todo o trabalho, os gametas femininos, ovócitos de segunda ordem, sofrem uma descida ou migração, uma vez liberados do folículo maduro, através do oviduto para entrar em contato com os espermatozoides. -/- Esta migração pode ocorrer porque antes de ocorrer a mencionada deiscência folicular caracterizada por um congestionamento, tanto do próprio ovário como dos ovidutos ou trompas de Falópio, o pavilhão destas últimas aproxima-se do ovário (o oviduto de três partes: bandeira, corpo e istmo). Constituindo uma espécie de funil, graças à intervenção das fimbrias do pavilhão, no qual, em princípio, os oócitos deiscentes devem ser depositados com o respectivo líquido folicular. -/- As razões pelas quais o ovócito se dirige ao pavilhão não são bem conhecidas, embora se pense que a causa é devida às correntes que originam os cílios com seus movimentos. O ovócito percorre o oviduto num tempo adequado (reunindo, portanto, as condições adequadas de pH, pressão osmótica, etc.) para que o espermatozoide possa alcançá-lo e entrar em contato com ele. -/- Se o ovócito de segunda ordem não cair no infundíbulo ou transitar a uma velocidade inadequada pelo oviduto não poderá ter lugar a impregnação (penetração do espermatozoide no ovócito de segunda ordem) e portanto a fecundação (singamia e cariogamia). Há que ter em conta que a fecundação provoca a segunda etapa da maturação do ovócito caracterizada pela finalização da mitose II, já que como supracitado o ovócito de segunda ordem se libera no processo de metafase II (equacional), originando um óvulo que já contém o material cromossômico masculino e eliminando o segundo polocito. -/- Podemos interpretar que a eliminação deste segundo polocito, como consequência da penetração da cabeça do espermatozoide no ovócito originando-se um óvulo, seria como o resultado de uma espécie de incompatibilidade entre o pronúcleo do polocito e o que fornece o espermatozoide. Por conseguinte, no período de maturação da ovogênese produz-se, através de um processo reducional, um ovócito de segunda ordem e um primeiro pólcito. Posteriormente, o ovócito de segunda ordem originará por uma mitose equacional, que carece do período de duplicação do ADN no ciclo de Savel, um óvulo e um segundo pólcito. Às vezes, mas nem sempre, o primeiro polocito originará um terceiro e um quarto polocito mediante mitose, pelo que no total podem originar-se três polocito. Estes polocitos podem ser chamados de ovos abortivos porque carecem praticamente de deutoplasma que ficou englobado no óvulo e que permitirá o desenvolvimento embrionário em seus primeiros estádios até que se estabeleçam as conexões feto-maternas. -/- O óvulo maduro apresenta o pronúcleo feminino capaz de conjugar-se com o pronúcleo masculino, dando lugar à formação do zigoto. Mas, insisto mais uma vez, a penetração do espermatozoide ocorre sempre no estágio de ovócito de segunda ordem e nunca quando a célula sexual tenha alcançado o estádio de óvulo. -/- Evidentemente e depois de todo o comentado: -/- UMA PORCA PODE SER FERTIL E NÃO FECUNDA -/- Por isso bastaria, por exemplo, que o pavilhão da tromba não conseguisse aproximar-se de maneira adequada ao ovário, com o que os ovócitos de segunda ordem, anatômica e fisiologicamente normais, cairiam na cavidade abdominal. Nestas circunstâncias a fecundação, logicamente, seria totalmente impossível. -/- O espermatozoide, por sua vez, tem que subir um trecho do oviduto para "encontrar" o ovócito. Este avanço ocorre como consequência das contrações peristálticas do útero que realiza uma sucção do esperma. Neste momento os espermatozoides experimentam uma importante seleção biológica dado que para atravessar o istmo tubárico necessitam ter uma adequada vitalidade (na porca a união uterotubárica, assim como a primeira parte do istmo, atuam parcialmente como uma barreira). -/- Evidentemente, o espermatozoide não o tem fácil, embora consiga aproximar-se do ovócito graças às quatro hormonas produzidas pelos gametas (dois androgamonas e duas ginogamonas), embora atualmente fala-se da existência de três ginogamonas já que o ovócito se comporta como um polo positivo e a parte terminal da cabeça do espermatozóide como um polo negativo. -/- Uma vez que o espermatozoide entra em contato com o ovócito, deve «salvar» a camada protetora do ovócito (formada por um aglomerado mucoso de natureza espessa e viscosa, além de uma camada interna que pode ser mais ou menos poliestratificada que constitui a coroa radiada procedente das células da membrana granulosa). Para superar estes obstáculos, os espermatozoides têm uma estrutura, o acrossoma. Esta estrutura contém um complexo específico de lipoglicoproteínas que inclui uma série de enzimas como hialuronidase e acrosina. A hialuronidase está provavelmente envolvida na dispersão do cumulus proliger. A acrosina está relacionada com a penetração do espermatozoide através da zona pelúcida. -/- Então também podemos afirmar, como fizemos no caso da reprodutora, que: -/- UM PORCO TAMBÉM PODE SER FERTIL E NÃO FECUNDO -/- Bastaria para isso que os espermatozoides experimentassem um hipocinese, por isso sendo excessivamente lentos não tinham suficiente motilidade de avanço. -/- No entanto, sem ter a necessidade de chegar a estes extremos, o que deve ficar claro é que: -/- a) Fertilidade e fecundidade são dois conceitos claramente distintos. -/- b) Para que um reprodutor ou uma reprodutora possam tornar-se fecundos antes devem ser férteis. -/- Assim, por exemplo, um macho fértil pode não ser fecundo; quando um reprodutor não tem ereção, não tem suficiente ardor genérico, não é capaz, obviamente, de introduzir seu aparelho copulador no trato genital da fêmea. Esta situação pode ser ultrapassada, pelo menos em alguns casos, mediante a utilização de um ejaculador elétrico e posterior aplicação da técnica de inseminação artificial. -/- Uma fórmula clássica para determinar a porcentagem global de fecundidade obtida num rebanho durante um determinado período de tempo (T) pode ser a seguinte: -/- Fecundidade (T)(%)=(N° de fêmeas gestantes (T))/(N° de fêmeas cobertas (T)) x 100 -/- A mesma fórmula é utilizada para determinar a «capacidade fecundante» (CF) de um macho X durante um período T. -/- CF(x)(T)(%)=(N° de fêmeas cobertas / macho X (T) gestantes)/(N° de fêmeas cobertas / macho X (T) ) x 100 -/- Obviamente, na prática, a «capacidade fecundante final» do macho X não é apenas função das suas próprias aptidões, é também função da aptidão fecundante das fêmeas por ele cobertas. -/- Por esta razão, para que o parâmetro CFX(T) seja «fiável», o macho X deve ter coberto um elevado número de fêmeas durante o período T. Consequentemente, este período de tempo não pode ser excessivamente curto, dependendo do ciclo sexual da espécie. -/- Analisados os termos fertilidade e fecundidade, vamos tratar a despeito da prolificidade. -/- -/- 4. PROLIFICIDADE -/- Segundo o Dicionário da Língua Portuguesa: -/- — Prolífico: Que tem a virtude de gerar.; -/- — Gerar: Dar origem a um novo ser. -/- No âmbito das produções animais é um termo realmente fácil de de compreender, não existindo discrepância entre os autores. -/- Poderíamos estabelecer a seguinte definição para a prolificidade: -/- "É a capacidade que a fêmea reprodutora tem para proporcionar aos zigotos um meio adequado em que possam realizar o seu desenvolvimento e chegar ao término". -/- 4.1 Generalidades e prolificidade em suínos -/- No caso da porca, poderíamos definir, em primeiro lugar, a prolificidade como o número de leitões nascidos por parto. A maioria dos autores consideram os leitões nascidos vivos e os nascidos mortos; outros só computam os nascidos vivos. Nós nos inclinamos pela primeira consideração. -/- No seio da fêmea, uma vez realizada a fecundação, a «fusão» das células germinativas do macho e da fêmea, inicia-se a divisão das células do zigoto, que constituem uma massa ou um aglomerado de células não especializadas. (Quando no processo de divisão forem atingidas as 16 células, a mencionada massa celular não identificada recebe a denominação de mórula, a qual dará lugar à blástula ou blastocisto.) -/- Durante os primeiros dias este zigoto em divisão, que irá transformar-se em embrião, desloca-se; primeiro, ao longo do oviduto; depois, no útero. Uma vez alcançado o útero é quando ocorre a nidificação. Esta nidificação pode ocorrer porque a mórula segrega uma enzima que é capaz de fixar-se em uma porção do endométrio, resultando em uma cavidade. É precisamente nesta cavidade que tem lugar a «implantação». -/- Nos suínos, o momento da nidificação situa-se entre 10 e 15 dias a contar do início da gestação. Aproximadamente entre os 15-16 dias de gestação os embriões estão totalmente fixados nas paredes uterinas. A partir deste momento pode-se iniciar o desenvolvimento das estruturas que vão permitir com que a mãe possa alimentar os novos seres (durante os primeiros dias, os ovos fertilizados alimentam-se do seu próprio deutoplasma e do chamado leite uterino de Williams proveniente do endotélio uterino). -/- Uma vez desenvolvidas todas as estruturas necessárias (saco vitelino, corioalantoides, saco amniótico, etc.), o embrião pode desenvolver-se no limite das suas possibilidades, transformar-se num feto e tentar atingir o seu objetivo que não é outro senão o de chegar com vida ao final, quero dizer, na altura do parto. -/- Em suma, de acordo com o exposto até aqui, acerca prolificidade da porca, um cálculo para medir o índice reprodutivo é dado por: prolificidade Y em seu parto n será: -/- Prolificidade porca Yn = Número de leitões nascidos (vivos+mortos) -/- Quando se fala da prolificidade média de um lote de reprodutoras (entendendo-se por «lote de reprodutoras» um conjunto de porcas que se encontram no mesmo estado fisiológico), considera-se o número médio de crias durante o período de partos. -/- Assim, por exemplo, a prolificidade média de um lote de 20 porcas que pariram, na respectiva maternidade, 180 leitões vivos e 6 leitões mortos é: -/- Prolificidade médiando lote=(180 l.v.+ 6 l.m.)/(20 porcas paridas)=9,3 leitões/porca -/- Se nos referirmos a uma exploração com 200 porcas reprodutoras ativas presentes na propriedade, desde o dia 1 de Janeiro a 31 de Dezembro, ao qual foram «obtidos» 1800 leitões vivos e 40 leitões nascidos mortos, a prolificidade média da exploração durante este ano será: -/- Prolificidade média do rebanho=(1800 l.v+40 l.m.)/(200 reprodutoras)= 9,2 leitões/reprodutora ativa -/- Este número, a nível prático e referente exclusivamente a um ano, é pouco indicativo dado que dependerá da calendarização no programa de gestão da exploração. -/- Normalmente, o parâmetro mais utilizado para refletir o desempenho de uma exploração no aspecto reprodutivo é o da produtividade definida pela expressão: -/- Produtividade final real=prolificidade média x (N° de fêmeas paridas)/(N° total de fêmeas) -/- Suponhamos que, numa exploração de 200 porcas reprodutoras, tenham parido 150 leitões (vivos+mortos) com uma prolificidade média de 9,0 leitões, a produtividade será: -/- Produtividade final real=9,0 leit./porca x (150 porcas paridas)/(200 porcas total)=6,75 leit./porca -/- Se esta produtividade for referente à um ano, a fórmula será: -/- Produtividade final anual = prolificidade média x (N° de fêmeas paridas)/(N° total de fêmeas) x (365 dias)/I -/- Sendo I – Intervalo médio entre dois partos. -/- No exemplo (exploração) anterior, se o intervalo médio entre dois partos é de 154 dias, a produtividade final anual será: -/- Produtiv. final anual = 9,0 leit./porca x (150 p.paridas)/(200 p.presentes) x (365 dias)/(154 dias)=16 leit./porca/ano -/- Trata-se de um valor muito indicativo do nível médio de «eficácia produtiva» ou eficiência reprodutiva da exploração. -/- Tal como foi calculado para as reprodutoras, estima-se a eficácia produtiva de um macho reprodutor X a partir de uma fórmula semelhante, dada por: -/- Produtividade(mX) = prolificidade x (N° de fêmeas paridas)/(N° de fêmeas cobertas) -/- Onde a prolificidade é a média de crias das fêmeas paridas. -/- Se um macho reprodutor tiver coberto (inseminado) 200 porcas, ao qual 140 pariram um total de 850 leitões vivos e 20 leitões mortos, seu coeficiente produtivo é: -/- Produtiv.macho X=(870 leitões (vivos+mortos))/(140 porcas paridas) x (140 p.paridas)/(200 p.cobertas)=4,35 leit./porca coberta -/- Este parâmetro expressa o número médio de crias nascidas por fêmea coberta. -/- Numa exploração pecuária (especialmente numa exploração suinícola) torna-se muito interessante, na prática, estudar a evolução da produtividade dos machos reprodutores ao longo do tempo. -/- Numa exploração pode também ser interessante calcular a eficácia reprodutiva das fêmeas da exploração que exprime o número de dias necessários para obter uma criação (índice Ni). Este índice permite comparar a diferente eficácia reprodutiva de duas fêmeas e é definido pela seguinte expressão: -/- Ni=Ii/(Prolificidade i) -/- Sendo: -/- Ii = Intervalo médio entre dois partos de uma fêmea i. -/- Prolificidade i = Número médio de crias nascidas por parto na fêmea i. -/- Em nosso caso, a porca 134 tem um intervalo médio entre partos de 156 dias e uma prolificidade média de 9,1 leitões. Por sua vez, a porca 143 tem um I = 163 dias e uma prolificidade média de 9,5 leitões. Com base nos dados apresentados achamos o índice Ni, mediante os cálculos: -/- N134 = (156 dias)/(9,1 leitões)=17,14 dias/leit. -/- N143 = (163 dias)/(9,5 leit.) =17,16 dias/leit. -/- Neste caso, ao contrário do que se poderia perceber a olho nu, as duas reprodutoras possuem a mesma eficácia reprodutiva (quanto menor o índice Ni, maior a eficácia reprodutiva). Esta é a razão, de que numa exploração nem sempre um desmame precoce dos leitões (18-24 dias) é melhor que um desmame mais tardio (24-28 dias). -/- A eficácia reprodutiva numa exploração de R fêmeas reprodutoras durante um período de T dias é avaliada através da fórmula: -/- NiR = (T x R)/(N° de crias nascidas em T) -/- Se, numa exploração de 200 porcas reprodutoras, tiverem nascido, nos últimos 365 dias, um total de 1840 leitões (1800 leitões vivos e 40 leitões mortos), a eficácia reprodutiva será: -/- N200 = (365 dias x 200 porcas)/(1840 leit.nascidos)=39,67 dias/leit. -/- Ao qual equivale a uma prolificidade média do rebanho, no tempo considerado, de: -/- Prolificidade média do rebanho=(365 dias)/(39,67 dias/leit.)=9,2 leit. -/- Tal e como havia sido estimado anteriormente. -/- Não é necessário insistir na importância prática que tem, a nível das explorações, a correta consideração e a adequada utilização dos conceitos, parâmetros e índices expostos nas páginas precedentes. Neste sentido, em muitas das nossas explorações, também aqui, há ainda um longo caminho a percorrer. -/- -/- 5. RESUMO E PRIMEIRAS CONCLUSÕES -/- Ao longo deste trabalho venho tentado expor de uma forma mais clara e simples possível a realidade conceitual dos termos fertilidade, fecundidade e prolificidade dentro da perspectiva das produções animais. -/- Em todos os casos, trata-se de capacidades ou aptidões anatômica-fisiológicas dos reprodutores ligadas ao exercício da sua atividade no âmbito da exploração. -/- Nessa presente exposição, objetivou-se deixar claro que: -/- a) Fertilidade, fecundidade e prolificidade são conceitos totalmente distintos embora estejam correlacionados. -/- b) Um reprodutor e/ou reprodutora pode ser fértil e não fecundo. -/- c) Consequentemente, um reprodutor e/ou reprodutora não pode ser fecundo se não for fértil antes. -/- d) Um reprodutor e/ou reprodutora pode ser fértil e fecundo e não ser prolífico. -/- e) Consequentemente, para que um reprodutor e/ou reprodutora possa ser prolífico antes tem que ser fecundo. E se for fecundo, significa que também é fértil. -/- f) Na prática, as explorações só podem estimar, no âmbito do conceito geral de «eficácia reprodutiva», a fecundidade e a prolificidade dos reprodutores, nunca a sua fertilidade. -/- Uma vez classificados e estudados os referidos conceitos, estamos em condições de enfrentar outros temas ligados ao processo reprodutivo. -/- -/- 6. REFERÊNCIAS BIBLIOGRÁFICAS -/- -/- BRACKETT, B. G.; JÚNIOR, G. E. A.; SEIDEL, S. M. Avances en zootecnia. Nuevas técnicas de reproducción animal. 1ª ed. Zaragoza: Editorial Acribia, 1988. -/- COLE, H. H.; CUPPS, P. T. Reproduction in domestic animals. 1ª ed. Londres: Academic Press, 1977. -/- FERREIRA, A. H. et al. Produção de suínos: teoria e prática. Brasília: ABCS, 2014. -/- GORDON, I. Reproducción controlada del cerdo. Zaragoza: Editorial Acribia, 1999. -/- HAFEZ, E. S. E.; HAFEZ, B. Reprodução animal. São Paulo: Manole, 2004. -/- HUGHES, P. E.; VARLEY, M. A. Reproducción del cerdo. Zaragoza: Editorial Acribia, 1984. (shrink)

A new non-Archimedean approach to interacted quantum fields is presented. In proposed approach, a field operator φ(x,t) no longer a standard tempered operator-valued distribution, but a non-classical operator-valued function. We prove using this novel approach that the quantum field theory with Hamiltonian P(φ)_4 exists and that the corresponding C^*­ algebra of bounded observables satisfies all the Haag-Kastler axioms except Lorentz covariance. We prove that the λ(φ^2n )_4,n≥2 quantum field theory models are Lorentz covariant.

“X-Firsters” hold that there is some normative feature that is fundamental to all others (and, often, that there’s some normative feature that is the “mark of the normative”: all other normative properties have it, and are normative in virtue of having it). This view is taken as a starting point in the debate about which X is “on first.” Little has been said about whether or why we should be X-Firsters, or what we should think about normativity if we aren’t (...) X-Firsters. Hence the chapter’s two main goals. First, to provide a simple argument that one shouldn’t be an X-Firster about the normative domain, which starts with the observation that analogous views have dubious merits in analogous domains. Second, to offer an alternative view—taking normativity to be a determinable explained in terms of its determinates—that offers an interesting way to think about the structure and unity of normativity. (shrink)

Experimental philosophy (x-phi) is all the rage. But shouldn't all philosophy be experimental? Jeff Hawley looks at the views of three philosophers on the role and value of x-phi. This month’s PhilosophyNews 'WHiP: The Philosophers' focuses on a chapter from The Compact Compendium of Experimental Philosophy edited by A. Bauer and S. Kornmesser (forthcoming). 'All in the Family: The History and Philosophy of Experimental Philosophy' by Justin Sytsma, Joseph Ulatowski, and Chad Gonnerman digs into the history of various philosophers who (...) have argued for the need to go beyond the tradition methods of the ‘armchair’ philosopher and include empirical research into the mix. (shrink)

Suppose that X and Y can’t possibly exist apart in reality; then—by definition—there’s no real distinction between them, only a conceptual distinction. There’s a conceptual distinction between a rectilinear figure’s triangularity and its trilaterality, for example, but no real distinction. In fundamental metaphysics there is no real distinction between an object’s categorical properties and its dispositional properties. So too there is no real distinction between an object and its properties. And in fundamental metaphysics, for X and Y to be such (...) that there is no real distinction between them is for them to be identical. (shrink)

Azərbaycan elm tarixini tədqiq edərkən dövrün tələbindən çıxış edilərək ərəb və fars dillərində yazılmış çoxlu əsərlərə rast gəlirik. Bu əsərlərdən biri də dahi alim Nəsirəddin Tusinin fars dilində məntiqə dair yazdığı Əsasül-iqtibas əsəridir. Əsər ilk dəfə 2022-ci ildə nəşr edilərək oxucu və tədqiqatçıların ixtiyarına verilmişdir. Əsasül-iqtibas əsəri XIII əsrin ortalarında yazılmışdır. Əsərin yazılmasından təqribən səkkiz əsrə yaxın vaxt keçmişdir. Bu müddət ərzində həmin əsərdə istifadə edilən bir sıra termin və sözlər artıq müasir fars dilində istifadə edilmir. Əsərin məntiqə aid olması (...) və həm də bir sıra sözlərin günümüzdə istifadə edilməməsi onun tərcüməsini çətinləşdirən amillər kimi qeyd etmək olar. Bundan əlavə burada istifadə edilən bəzi terminlərin gündəlik danışığımzda fərqli mənada istifadə edildiyindən həmin sözlərin və terminlərin izah edilməsi zərurəti yaranmışdır. Habelə orta əsr müəlliflərinin əsərlərinin tədqiqi zamanı eyni bir sözün müxtəlif müəlliflər tərəfindən fərqli mənalarda işlədildiyinin də şahidi oluruq ki, bu da həmin termin və anlayışların Azərbaycan dilinə tərcüməsi zamanı izahının verilməsinə ehtiyac yaradır. Hal-hazırda müraciət etdiyiniz bu kitab Nəsirəddin Tusinin ən mühüm və genişhəcmli əsərlərindən biri olan “Əsasül-iqtibas”-ın tərcüməsi zamanı əsərin orijinalında işlədilmiş ərəb-fars sözlərinin izahlı tərcüməsi yönündə tərtib edilmişdir. Bu lüğətlərin tərcüməsi və izahı ilə tanış olmaqla Nəsirəddin Tusinin ərəb-fars dillərində yazılmış digər əsərlərinin tərcüməsi zamanı da yararlanmaq olar. Müəyyən bir ixtisas və peşəni və ya həmin peşə və ixtisasa aid olan terminləri başa düşmək üçün həmin istiqamət üzrə tərtib edilən terminolji lüğətlərə ehtiyac duyulur. Bu istiqamətdə zaman-zaman müxtəlif ixtisaslar üzrə terminoloji lüğətlərin nəşr edildiyini müşahidə edirik. Azərbaycan dilində məntiqi terminlərin izahından ibarət xüsusi termonoloji lüğətlərin də tərtib edilməsi zərurəti vardır. Çünki məntiq terminlərinin izahınına adətən rus dilində yazılmış ədəbiyyatda, bir neçə terminin izahı verilmiş məntiq kitablarında və ya fəlsəfi terminlərdən ibarət ensiklopediya və lüğətlərdə rast gəlmək mümkündür. Bir tərəfdən, yaranmış boşluğu doldurmaq, digər tərəfdən isə məntiq ixtisası üzrə təhsil alan tələbə və mütəxəssislərə kömək etmək üçün bu lüğəti tərtib etmək qərarına gəldik. 222 sözün izah və tərcüməsindən ibarət olan bu kitabı həmin istiqamətdə olan boşluğu doldurmaq üçün kiçik və eyni zamanda mühüm bir addım hesab etmək olar. Burada sözlərin tərcüməsi ilə yanaşı bir sıra terminlərin izahı da verilmişdir. Əsasən Əsasül-iqtibas adlı məntiqi əsəri tərcümə edərkən qarşıya çıxan çətin və mürəkkəb sözlərin izahının verilməsinə üstünlük verilmişdir. Tərcümə zamanı müxtəlif illərdə nəşr edilən Əsasül-iqtibas əsərlərinə də müraciət edilmişdir. Bu əsərlərin bəzisində Əsasül-iqtibas əsərində istifadə edilən bəzi terminlərin izahı da verilmişdir. Bu izahlar bəzən tərcümə zamanı ifadənin daha səlis və daha dəqiq başa düşülməsinə imkan vermişdir. Bu lüğət kitabı tərtib edilərkən həmin əsərlərdə mövcud olan terminlər və onların izahından da istifadə edilmişdir. Bəzən məntiqi terminlərlə yanaşı kəlam, fəlsəfə və s. elmlərdə istifadə edilən terminləri də qeyd etmişik. Çünki bu terminlər bizə məntiqdə işlədilən bəzi ifadələrin daha asan başa düşülməsinə imkan verəcəkdir. “Əsasül-iqtibasa dair terminlər” lüğəti adlı bu kitabı bu sahədə atılmış ilk addımlardan biri olduğu üçün gələcəkdə daha sanballı və həcmcə daha geniş terminoloji lüğətlərin hazırlanması nəzərdə tutulur. (shrink)

Statements such as “X is beautiful but I don’t like how it looks” or “I like how X looks but it is not beautiful” sound contradictory. How contradictory they sound might however depend on the object X and on the aesthetic adjective being used (“beautiful”, “elegant”, “dynamic”, etc.). In our study, the first sentence was estimated to be more contradictory than the latter: If we describe something as beautiful, we often intend to evaluate its appearance, whereas it is less counterintuitive (...) to appreciate an appearance without finding it beautiful. Furthermore, statements including “beautiful” appeared more contradictory than those including “elegant” and “dynamic”, pointing to its greater evaluative component. When related to artworks, sentences could appear less contradictory due to readers’ consideration of the divergence between conventional beauty and art-related sensory pleasures that can even include negative valence. Such ambivalence might be more frequent in art-objects than in other artefacts. Indeed, in our study, sentences referring to artworks were estimated to be less contradictory compared to sentences referring to other artefacts. Meanwhile, an additional small group of graphic design students showed a less clear difference between art-related and non-art-related sentences. We discuss the potential influence of art experience and interest as well as theoretical and methodological challenges like the conceptualization of beauty. (shrink)

Tarixi biliklər məcmusu olan- idrak və onun istiqamətləri, insan hissləri, qavrayış, təsəvvür və onların müasir ictimai həyatdakı əksinin tədqiqi, həm də “müsəlman idrakı” anlayışı İslam fəlsəfəsində xüsusi mövqeyə malikdir. Müxtəlif alimlər ət-Tirmizi, Əbu Əbdullah əl-Haris, Əbu Əbdullah əl-Qurtubi, ibn Həcər əl-Əsqalani və başqalarının bu mövzuda xüsusi yanaşması olmuşdur. Bu məsələ ilə əlaqədar olan “mötəzililər”, “ismailililər”, “mistisistlər” (sufilər), “işraqilər”, həmçinin Şərq peripatetizminin ardıcılları varlıq, bilik təlimləri, “nəfs və qəlbin ölməzliyi” və idrakın əsas elementi olan təcrübə haqqında qiymətli fikir xəzinələri qoymuşlar. Bu (...) da müasir tədrisdə vacib yer tutur. Məqalədə “İdrak fəlsəfəsi” anlayışına nəzər salınmış, onun yaranması, əhəmiyyəti, canlı və cansız təbiətdəki əksi, istiqamətləri və fərqliliyi ilə əlaqədar fikirlər şərh edilmiş, müasir islamşünaslıqda bu anlayışın tədrisində istinad ediləcək məqamlara diqqət yetirilmişdir. Bu məqsədlə araşdırmada “İdrak- beyin xüsusiyyətidir”, “Cansız təbiətdə idrakın əksi”, “Canlı təbiətdə idrakın təzahürü”, “Dərk necə yaranıb?”, “İdrakın mahiyyəti nədir?”, “İdrakın istiqamətləri”, “İdrak dəyişkənliyi” və digər suallara Şərq-Qərq fəlsəfi görüşlərinə əsasən nəzər salınaraq qeyd edilən problemin həllinə cəhd edilmişdir. Zənginliyi və müxtəlifliyi ilə seçilən İslam fəlsəfəsində dini idrak ilə birgə həm də dünyəvi və real düşüncə mövcud olmuşdur. Bu axın yeni dövrün tələbi ilə müəyyən dəyişikliyə uğramış və nəinki Şərq, həm də dünyaya öz təsirini göstərmişdir. (shrink)

Plausibly, how much is at stake in some salient practical task can affect how generously people ascribe knowledge of task-relevant facts. There is a metaphysical puzzle about this phenomenon, and an empirical puzzle. Metaphysically: there are competing theories about when and how practical stakes affect whether it is correct to ascribe knowledge. Which of these theories is the right one? Empirically: experimental philosophy has struggled to find a stakes-effect on people’s knowledge ascriptions. Is the alleged phenomenon just a philosopher’s fantasy? (...) I propose a new psychological account of when and why people’s knowledge ascriptions are sensitive to stakes. My hypothesis is motivated by empirical research on how people’s judgements are sensitive to their social context. Specifically, people’s evaluations are sensitive to their ‘psychological distance’ from the scenarios they are considering. When using ‘fixed-evidence probes’, experimental philosophy has found that what’s at stake for a fictional character in a made-up scenario has little or no effect on how participants ascribe knowledge to them. My hypothesis predicts this finding: the scenarios are too ‘psychologically distant’ to participants. Our empirical puzzle is resolved: the stakes-effect often present in the wild won’t be present in vignette studies. (This illustrates a widespread problem with X-phi vignette studies: if people might judge differently in other social contexts, we can’t generalize from the results of these experiments. That is, vignette studies are of doubtful ‘external validity’.) The hypothesis also resolves our metaphysical puzzle. It predicts that people do not ascribe knowledge in a way deemed correct by any of the standard philosophical views, namely classical invariantism, interest-relative invariantism, and contextualism. Our knowledge ascriptions shift around in the way that’s most useful for social beings like us, and this pattern in our judgements can only be endorsed by a genuinely relativist metaphysics for knowledge. (shrink)

This pаpеr prоvidеs thе first еmpiricаl еvidеncе оn thе еxistеncе оf nеgаtivе spillоvеr еffеcts frоm childrеn еxpоsеd tо cоrpоrаl punishmеnt in thе hоmе (CPH). Wе find thаt intеrаctiоns with pееrs suffеring frоm CPH dеprеss аchiеvеmеnt in bоth mаth аnd lаnguаgе аmоng Viеtnаmеsе fifth grаdеrs. Spеcificаlly, а оnе stаndаrd dеviаtiоn incrеаsе in thе Pееrs’ Viоlеncе Indеx is аssоciаtеd with а rеductiоn in thе mаth аnd thе lаnguаgе tеst scоrеs by 0.11 аnd 0.14 stаndаrd dеviаtiоns, rеspеctivеly. Thеsе аdvеrsе impаcts cоuld pоtеntiаlly bе (...) аttributеd tо thе unfаvоrаblе chаngеs in studеnt аcаdеmic аspirаtiоns, studеnt аctuаl lеаrning еffоrts, аnd thе intеr-studеnt rеlаtiоnships. (shrink)

This paper examines the interplay of semantics and pragmatics within the domain of film. Films are made up of individual shots strung together in sequences over time. Though each shot is disconnected from the next, combinations of shots still convey coherent stories that take place in continuous space and time. How is this possible? The semantic view of film holds that film coherence is achieved in part through a kind of film language, a set of conventions which govern the relationships (...) between shots. In this paper, we develop and defend a new version of the semantic view. We articulate it for a pair of conventions that govern spatial relations between viewpoints. One such rule is already well-known; sometimes called the "180° Rule," we term it the X-Constraint; to this we add a previously unrecorded rule, the T-Constraint. As we show, both have the effect, in different ways, of limiting the way that viewpoint can shift through space from shot to shot over the course of a film sequence. Such constraints, we contend, are analogous to relations of discourse coherence that are widely recognized in the linguistic domain. If film is to have a language, it is a language made up of rules like these. (shrink)

The experiments reported herein probe the visual cortical mechanisms that control near–far percepts in response to two-dimensional stimuli. Figural contrast is found to be a principal factor for the emergence of percepts of near versus far in pictorial stimuli, especially when stimulus duration is brief. Pictorial factors such as interposition (Experiment 1) and partial occlusion Experiments 2 and 3) may cooperate, as generally predicted by cue combination models, or compete with contrast factors in the manner predicted by the FACADE model. (...) In particular, if the geometrical conŽ guration of an image favors activation of cortical bipole grouping cells, as at the top of a T-junction, then this advantage can cooperate with the contrast of the conŽ guration to facilitate a near–far percept at a lower contrast than at an X-junction. Varying the exposure duration of the stimuli shows that the more balanced bipole competition in the X-junction case takes longer exposure times to resolve than the bipole competition in the T-junction case (Experiment 3). (shrink)

Consider two epistemic experts—for concreteness, let them be two weather forecasters. Suppose that you aren’t certain that they will issue identical forecasts, and you would like to proportion your degrees of belief to theirs in the following way: first, conditional on either’s forecast of rain being x, you’d like your own degree of belief in rain to be x. Secondly, conditional on them issuing different forecasts of rain, you’d like your own degree of belief in rain to be some weighted (...) average of the forecast of each. Finally, you’d like your degrees of belief to be given by an orthodox probability measure. Moderate ambitions, all. But you can’t always get what you want. (shrink)

What is attention? On one influential position, attention constitutively is the selection of some stimulus for coupling with a response. Wayne Wu has proposed a master argument for this position that relies on the claim that cognitive science commits to an empirical sufficient condition (ESC), according to which, if a subject S perceptually selects (or response-couples) X to guide performance of some experimental task T, she therein attends to X. In this paper I show that this claim about cognitive science (...) is false. Cognitive science allows for inattentive selection-for-task, or inattentive response-coupling. This means that Wu’s account is without independent support. (shrink)

In this paper, the authors show that there is a reading of St. Anselm's ontological argument in Proslogium II that is logically valid (the premises entail the conclusion). This reading takes Anselm's use of the definite description "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" seriously. Consider a first-order language and logic in which definite descriptions are genuine terms, and in which the quantified sentence "there is an x such that..." does not imply "x exists". Then, using an ordinary logic (...) of descriptions and a connected greater-than relation, God's existence logically follows from the claims: (a) there is a conceivable thing than which nothing greater is conceivable, and (b) if <em>x</em> doesn't exist, something greater than x can be conceived. To deny the conclusion, one must deny one of the premises. However, the argument involves no modal inferences and, interestingly, Descartes' ontological argument can be derived from it. (shrink)

In this paper, I argue that, as far as Gettier cases are concerned, appearances are deceiving. That is, Gettier cases merely appear to be cases of epistemic failure (i.e., failing to know that p) but are in fact cases of semantic failure (i.e., failing to refer to x). Gettier cases are cases of reference failure because the candidates for knowledge in these cases contain ambiguous designators. If this is correct, then we may simply be mistaking semantic facts for epistemic facts (...) when we consider Gettier cases. This, in turn, is a good reason not to assign much, if any, evidential weight to Gettier intuitions (i.e., that S doesn’t know that p in a Gettier case). (shrink)

The statement that we are currently failing to address some of humanity’s greatest challenges seems uncontroversial—we are not doing enough to limit global warming to a maximum of 2 °C and we are exposing vulnerable people to preventable diseases when failing to produce herd immunity. But what singles out such failings from all the things we did not do when all are unintended? Unlike their individualist counterparts, collective inaction and omission have not yet received much attention in the literature. collective (...) inaction, I argue, can be attributed to a group of agents where a collective action x that the agents did not perform was collectively feasible at time t where each agent in that group had sufficient reason to contribute to performing x or others had a reasonable expectation that they would perform x. I show that, perhaps surprisingly, we can speak of collective inaction even where only one member of the group fails to act. However, where large and dispersed groups of agents are concerned, there is often no meaningful way of attributing collective failings. Still, I contend that the failure to close the global emissions gap and—in some cases—to generate herd immunity are indeed on us. (shrink)

Is knowledge consistent with literally any credence in the relevant proposition, including credence 0? Of course not. But is credence 0 the only credence in p that entails that you don’t know that p? Knowledge entails belief (most epistemologists think), and it’s impossible to believe that p while having credence 0 in p. Is it true that, for every value of ‘x,’ if it’s impossible to know that p while having credence x in p, this is simply because it’s impossible (...) to believe that p while having credence x in p? If so, is it possible to believe that p while having (say) credence 0.4 in p? These questions aren’t standard epistemological fare, at least in part because many epistemologists think their answers are obvious, but they have unanticipated consequences for epistemology. Let ‘improbabilism’ name the thesis that it’s possible to know that p while having a credence in p below 0.5. Improbabilism will strike many epistemologists as absurd, but careful reflection on these questions reveals that, if improbabilism is false, then all of the most plausible theories of knowledge are also false. Or so I argue in this paper. Since improbabilism is widely rejected by epistemologists (at least implicitly), this paper reveals a tension between all of the most plausible theories of knowledge and a widespread assumption in epistemology. (shrink)

In artificial intelligence (AI), responses generated by machine-learning models (most often large language models) may be unfactual information presented as a fact. For example, a chatbot might state that the Mona Lisa was painted in 1815. Such phenomenon is called AI hallucinations, seeking inspiration from human psychology, with a great difference of AI ones being connected to unjustified beliefs (that is, AI “beliefs”) rather than perceptual failures). -/- AI hallucinations may have their source in the data itself, that is, the (...) source content, or in the training procedure, i.e. the way the knowledge was encoded in the model’s parameters, so that errors in encoding and decoding textual and non-textual representations can cause hallucinations. In this paper, we will observe how such errors come to life and how they might be mitigated. For this purpose, we will analyze the usability of justification logics, to behave as a proof checker for validating the correctness of large language models’ (LLM) responses. Justification logic was developed by S. Artemov, and later on mostly by Artemov and M. Fitting, deriving its main idea from the logic of proofs (LP): knowledge and belief modalities are seen as justification terms, i.e. t:X stands for t is a (proper) justification for X. Justification logic originated from attempts to create semantics for intuitionistic logic where proofs were the most proper justifications, but in further development, justification logic could be applied to different kinds of justifications). With the recent attempts to mitigate incorrect LLM responses, we will analyze various guardrails that are currently used for LLM responses, and see how the logic of justification may provide its benefits as an AI safety layer against false data. (shrink)

Is evidential support transitive? The answer is negative when evidential support is understood as confirmation so that X evidentially supports Y if and only if p(Y | X) > p(Y). I call evidential support so understood “support” (for short) and set out three alternative ways of understanding evidential support: support-t (support plus a sufficiently high probability), support-t* (support plus a substantial degree of support), and support-tt* (support plus both a sufficiently high probability and a substantial degree of support). I also (...) set out two screening-off conditions (under which support is transitive): SOC1 and SOC2. It has already been shown that support-t is non-transitive in the general case (where it is not required that SOC1 holds and it is not required that SOC2 holds), in the special case where SOC1 holds, and in the special case where SOC2 holds. I introduce two rather weak adequacy conditions on support measures and argue that on any support measure meeting those conditions it follows that neither support-t* nor support-tt* is transitive in the general case, in the special case where SOC1 holds, or in the special case where SOC2 holds. I then relate some of the results to Douven’s evidential support theory of conditionals along with a few rival theories. (shrink)

James Sterba describes the egoist as thinking only egoist reasons decide the rationality of choices of action, the altruist, only altruistic reasons, that each in effect begs the question of what reasons there are against the other, and that the only non-question-begging and therefore rationally defensible position in this controversy is the middle-ground position that high-ranking egoistic reasons should trump low ranking-altruistic considerations and vice versa, this position being co-extensive with morality. Therefore it is rationally obligatory choose morally. I object (...) that the mere fact that a position is intermediate between two extremes does not mean it isn’t question-begging; that Sterba’s style of argument could be used to prove anything and therefore proves nothing; that it can be used to prove obvious falsehoods and therefore doesn’t necessarily track the truth; that it can be used to prove the truth of contingent, empirically obvious falsehoods when, since it is necessary a prior that one ought to be moral, something can be a good argument for the rationality of morality only if the argument’s style would entail only truths necessary a priori; that Sterba’s argument cannot inherit plausibility from what Sterba describes as the decision theoretic idea that when choosing among options where we have no evidence that one is more appropriate than the other, we must treat them as equally choice-worthy, since there is no such idea in decision theory, and shouldn’t be (for when, for example, there is no evidence that x exists and no evidence that x does not exist, one should believe that x does not exist; one should not chose as if x’s existence and non-existence were equally likely); that Sterba’s argument style is not analogous to the compromise strategies recommended in bargaining theory, nor in negotiating situations (although it would profit Sterba to consider David Gauthier’s approach in seeking to demonstrate that morality is both a middle ground between egoism and altruism, and is rationally obligatory); that it is problematic to see egoistic and altruistic reasons as commensurable and therefore admitting of a middle ground, especially a unique middle ground; that in any case, egoistic and altruistic reasons are not exhaustive of the reasons there could be; that the only sense in which moving to middle ground results in the parties not begging the question against each other is that it means they would be agreeing with each other and therefore not holding positions against each other, whether question-beggingly or otherwise, a fact which offers neither any rationally compelling reason to move her position closer to that of the other (for how can the mere fact that if we agreed we wouldn’t be begging the question against each other be a reason to agree?); and that even if morality is both rationally obligatory and a middle ground between egoism and altruism, it won’t be in any interesting sense true that this holds because the alternative would be question-begging, which means that analyzing the basis of the rationality of morality as being found in this principle of argumentation theory misconceives the nature of morality. (shrink)

Normal 0 false false false EN-CA X-NONE X-NONE The purpose of this paper is to reconstruct Hilary Kornblith’s argument for excluding conceptual analysis from epistemological inquiry, and then provide three objections to it. More specifically, Kornblith argues that epistemological properties such as ‘knowledge’ reduce to natural kinds which can only be discovered and investigated using the a posteriori methods of the natural sciences. Thus, he continues, conceptual analysis can’t properly illuminate the target domain. The three objections to Kornblith’s argument which (...) I present are as follows: Multiple Realizeability, Psychological Explanation, Starting Points. On strength of these objections, I conclude that Kornblith’s brand of a posteriori epistemology both eliminates our ability to make epistemic evaluations in general, and also implies a strong form of scepticism. /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}. (shrink)

Agent relativists about vagueness (henceforth ‘agent relativists’) hold that whether or not an object x falls in the extension of a vague predicate ‘P’ at a time t depends on the judgemental dispositions of a particular competent agent at t. My aim in this paper is to critically examine arguments that purport to support agent relativism by appealing to data from forced-march Sorites experiments. The most simple and direct versions of such forced-march Sorites arguments rest on the following (implicit) premise: (...) If competent speakers' judgements vary in a certain way, then the extensions of ‘P’ as used by these speakers must vary in the same way. This premise is in need of independent support, since otherwise opponents of agent relativism can simply reject it. In this paper, I focus on the idea that one cannot plausibly reject this premise, as that would commit one to implausible claims about linguistic competence. Against this, I argue that one can accommodate the data from forced-march Sorites experiments in a way that is compatible with a plausible picture of linguistic competence, without going agent relativist. Thus, there is reason to be sceptical of the idea that such data paired with considerations about linguistic competence can be invoked in order to lend any solid support to agent relativism. Forced-march Sorites arguments of this kind can, and should be, resisted. (shrink)

Moral contextualism is the view that claims like ‘A ought to X’ are implicitly relative to some (contextually variable) standard. This leads to a problem: what are fundamental moral claims like ‘You ought to maximize happiness’ relative to? If this claim is relative to a utilitarian standard, then its truth conditions are trivial: ‘Relative to utilitarianism, you ought to maximize happiness’. But it certainly doesn’t seem trivial that you ought to maximize happiness (utilitarianism is a highly controversial position). Some people (...) believe this problem is a reason to prefer a realist or error theoretic semantics of morals. I argue two things: first, that plausible versions of all these theories are afflicted by the problem equally, and second, that any solution available to the realist and error theorist is also available to the contextualist. So the problem of triviality does not favour noncontextualist views of moral language. (shrink)

Trust is commonly defined as a metaphysically-hybrid notion involving an attitude and an action. The action component of trust is defined as a special form of reliance in which the trustor has: (1) heightened expectations of their trustee; and (2) a disposition to justifiably feel betrayed if their trust is broken. The first aim of this paper is to reject the view that trust is a form of reliance. -/- The second aim of this paper is to develop and defend (...) a non-reliance-based variation of Katherine Hawley’s commitment trust account. Roughly, on my variant account, if X trusts Y to ϕ, then X has a belief with the following counterfactual as its content: ‘if I were to rely on Y to keep a commitment to ϕ, then I believe that Y would keep that commitment to ϕ.’ I defend this account against the objection that non-reliance accounts cannot explain the intuition that trust involves heightened expectations, and that it elicits justified betrayal when broken. I also respond to the argument that such accounts can’t provide adequate explanations of therapeutic trust, which is taken to be a counterexample of belief trust insofar as it describes instances where trustors trust trustees despite not believing that they are trustworthy. (shrink)

In this paper, I argue that, if transcendental arguments are to proceed from premises that are acceptable to the skeptic, the Transcendental Premise, according to which “X is a metaphysically necessary condition for the possibility of Y,” must be grounded in considerations of conceivability and possibility. More explicitly, the Transcendental Premise is based on what Szabó Gendler and Hawthorne call the “conceivability-possibility move.” This “inconceivability-impossibility” move, however, is a problematic argumentative move when advancing transcendental arguments for the following reasons. First, (...) from “S cannot conceive of P” it doesn’t necessarily follow that P is inconceivable. Second, from “P is inconceivable” it doesn’t necessarily follow that P is metaphysically impossible. Third, rather than block skeptical doubts, the conceivability-possibility move introduces skeptical doubts. For these reasons, transcendental arguments fail to deliver on their promise to overcome skeptical doubts. (shrink)

The article first rehearses three deflationary theories of reference, (1) disquotationalism, (2) propositionalism (Horwich), and (3) the anaphoric theory (Brandom), and raises a number of objections against them. It turns out that each corresponds to a closely related theory of truth, and that these are subject to analogous criticisms to a surprisingly high extent. I then present a theory of my own, according to which the schema “That S(t) is about t” and the biconditional “S refers to x iff S (...) says something about x” are exhaustive of the notions of aboutness and reference. An account of the usefulness of “about” is then given, which, I argue, is superior to that of Horwich. I close with a few considerations about how the advertised theory relates to well-known issues of reference, the conclusions of which is (1) that the issues concern reference and aboutness only insofar as the words “about” and “refer” serve to generalise over the claims that are really at issue, (2) that the theory of reference will not settle the issues, and (3) that it follows from (2) that the issues do not concern the nature of aboutness or reference. (shrink)

En el presente artículo, introducimos el conjunto plitogénico (como generalización de conjuntos nítidos, borrosos, intuicionistas, borrosos y neutrosóficos), que es un conjunto cuyos elementos se caracterizan por los valores de muchos atrib utos. Un valor de atributo v tiene un grado correspondiente (difuso, intuicionista difuso o neutrosófico) de pertenencia d (x, v) del elemento x, al conjunto P, con respecto a algunos criterios dados. Para obtener una mejor precisión para los operadores d e agregación plitogénica en el conjunto plitogénico, y (...) para una inclusión más exacta (orden parcial), se define un grado de contradicción (disimilitud difusa, intuicionista difusa o neutrosófica) entre cada atributo del valor y el valor del atributo domina nte (el más importante). La intersección y la unión plitogénicas son combinaciones lineales de los operadores difusos t norm y tconorm, mientras que el complemento plitogénico, la inclusión (desigualdad), la igualdad está influenciados por los grados de co ntradicción (disimilitud) de los valores de los atributos. Por tal motivo el objetivo del presente trabajo es ofrecer algunos ejemplos y aplicaciones de los nuevos conceptos que se proponen, para su aplicación en la vida cotidiana. (shrink)