Theories of explanation are characterized as being either pragmatic or non-pragmatic, without a clear sense of what this is supposed to mean. The present paper offers a definition of a "pragmatic explanation-sentence", and in terms of this, of a "pragmatic theory of explanation". It is argued that van Fraassen's theory of explanation, despite claims to the contrary, is not genuinely pragmatic. By contrast, the author's own "illocutionary" theory is pragmatic. Attention is devoted particularly to sentences of the form "E is (...) a good explanation of q", which, it is urged, are pragmatic in a strong sense. In defense of this claim, and of the advantages of a pragmatic account generally, appeal is made to Rutherford's 1911 subatomic explanation of the results of his scattering experiments. Implications of a pragmatic theory are drawn for the debate between realists and anti-realists and absolutists and relativists. (shrink)

Measuring Chinese character recognition ability is essential in research on character learning among learners of Chinese as a second language. Three methods are typically used to evaluate character recognition competence by investigating the following properties of a given character: pronunciation, meaning, and pronunciation and meaning. However, no study has explored the similar or dissimilar outcomes that these three measurements might yield. The current study examined this issue by testing 162 CSL learners with various L1 backgrounds and Chinese proficiency levels. Participants' (...) performance in character recognition measured using a phonological method, a semantic method, and a PS method was compared, which led to two major findings. In terms of similarity, participants' performance in character recognition and the influence of L1 background and Chinese proficiency level on character recognition was similar across the three methods. As for differences, the semantic method could yield a character recognition test with better quality than the other two methods, and the three methods yielded different best fitting models and showed different predictions for Chinese proficiency across different L1 groups. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are proposed. (shrink)

The author of the Yogav sistha Mah r m yana has liberation (moksa) foremost on her or his mind and this focus appears to relegate virtue (dharma) to poor relation status. Yet, R ma's question to Vasistha is, 'How should one live in this world?' This signals a strongly ethical stance and opens another avenue of exploration; the possibility that the teachings on the realisation of liberation are concomitant with the teachings regarding the embodiment of virtue. The aim of this (...) paper is to flesh out the admittedly skeletal frame of virtue by comparing the theories in the Yogav sistha with Aristotle's elaboration of virtue in the Nicomachean Ethics. I argue that, in spite of fundamental metaphysical differences between the two philosophers, the stages of moral development described in the Yogav sistha harmonise with Aristotle's theories and provide insights into problems that arise in Aristotle's work. (shrink)

First published in 1999. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

Leo Tolstoy was on to behavioral ethics before there was such as a thing as behavioral ethics. Three scenes from his magnum opus, War and Peace, demonstrate that Tolstoy diagnosed some of the same problems that occupy modern behavioral ethics: confirmation bias, slippery-slope reasoning, and illusions of control. However, whereas modern behavioral ethics has done more to diagnose problems than to prescribe solutions, Tolstoy’s theories of moral psychology and leadership provide direction for human moral self-cultivation. This analysis of War and (...) Peace also suggests that literary fiction can depict worlds at least as fertile as the real world for studying business ethics. Building upon this example, in an age and field which seems too often to prioritize scientific wisdom over that of the humanities, I speculate about how literary fiction can expand our research into more diverse actors and worlds of modern capitalism. (shrink)

This is my contribution to a book symposium on Professor Geoffrey Claussen’s book, Sharing the Burden: Rabbi Simḥah Zissel Ziv and the Path of Musar. I focus on just two topics that figure prominently in Professor Claussen’s book: human nature and the virtue of love.