This chapter argues that special quantifiers such as 'something' when occurring in argument position are not ordinary or substitutional quantifiers; rather they have a reifying force introducing a domain of tropes or kinds of tropes to quantify over.

Opinion about neonatal male circumcision is deeply divided. Some take it to be a prophylactic measure with unequivocal and significant health benefits, while others consider it a form of child abuse. We argue against both these polar views. In doing so, we discuss whether circumcision constitutes bodily mutilation, whether the absence of the child's informed consent makes it wrong, the nature and strength of the evidence regarding medical harms and benefits, and what moral weight cultural considerations have. We conclude that (...) nontherapeutic circumcision of infant boys is a suitable matter for parental discretion. (shrink)

Analects 2.3 is a key passage in the construal of Confucius' political and legal thought, but readings of it diverge. Many scholars view it as a broader evaluation of the rule of law relative to that of rites, while some read it more specifically as pertaining to the coercive enforcement of morality. Some read the quotation as an instrumental, conformist tenet, whereas some perceive its humanistic and ethical nature. Textual and contextual findings show that the latter categories in both cases (...) are the more plausible. This clarification illuminates differences between Confucius' notion of virtue-rites guidance and later variations that may lack respect for moral autonomy. (shrink)

What do we owe to people in other countries around the globe? What do others owe to us? What does morality require of nation states in their policies toward other nation states and toward people other than co-nationals? (On the latter, see Buchanan 2004 and Rawls 1999). These questions define the subject matter of global justice theory.

In his paper, Josh Hayes argues that inclination (ῥοπή) is the nature of each element. It is an active and passive principle that explains why the elements move to their proper places. Thus, according to Hayes, by introducing inclination in De Caelo IV 1, Aristotle posits a single explanatory factor that accounts for all elemental motions. By doing so, he answers the question, posed in Physics VIII 4, of what the cause of elemental motion is. In my comments, I will (...) contest these claims. Aristotle’s theory of elemental motion does not rely on a single explanatory factor; yet, it is not, as Hayes claims, incoherent. Instead, the different strands merely reflect the special nature of the elements. (shrink)