Normic laws have the form "if A, then normally B." They are omnipresent in everyday life and non-physical 'life' sciences such as biology, psychology, social sciences, and humanities. They differ significantly from ceteris-paribus laws in physics. While several authors have doubted that normic laws are genuine laws at all, others have argued that normic laws express a certain kind of prototypical normality which is independent of statistical majority. This paper presents a foundation for normic laws which is based on generalized (...) evolution theory and explains their omnipresence, lawlikeness, and reliability. It is argued that the fact that normic laws are a product of evolution must establish a systematic connection between prototypical and statistical normality. (shrink)

In order to prove the validity of logical rules, one has to assume these rules in the metalogic. However, rule-circular ‘justifications’ are demonstrably without epistemic value. Is a non-circular justification of a logical system possible? This question attains particular importance in view of lasting controversies about classical versus non-classical logics. In this paper the question is answered positively, based on meaning-preserving translations between logical systems. It is demonstrated that major systems of non-classical logic, including multi-valued, paraconsistent, intuitionistic and quantum logics, (...) can be translated into classical logic by introducing additional intensional operators into the language. Based on this result it is argued that classical logic is representationally optimal. In sec. 6 it is investigated whether non-classical logics can be likewise representationally optimal. The answer is predominantly negative but partially positive. Nevertheless the situation is not symmetric, because classical logic has important ceteris paribus advantages as a unifying metalogic. (shrink)

The expansion or revision of false theories by true evidence does not always increase their verisimilitude. After a comparison of different notions of verisimilitude the relation between verisimilitude and belief expansion or revision is investigated within the framework of the relevant element account. We are able to find certain interesting conditions under which both the expansion and the revision of theories by true evidence is guaranteed to increase their verisimilitude.

The volume contains the written versions of all papers given at the workshop, divided into five chapters and followed by Alvin Goldman's replies in the sixth.

There has been considerable progress in investigating collective actions in the last decades. However, the real progress is different from what many scholars take it to be. It lies in the fact that there is by now a wealth of different approaches from a variety of fields. Each approach has carved out fruitful mechanisms for explaining collective action, but is also faced with limitations. Given that situation, we submit that the next step in investigating collective action is to acknowledge the (...) plurality of approaches and bring them into dialogue. With this aim in mind, the present article discusses the strengths and weaknesses of some of the to our mind most relevant approaches to collective action in current debates. We begin with the collective intentionality framework, the team reasoning approach, and social identity theory. Then, we move to ecological social psychology, participatory sense-making, and, through the lenses of those frameworks, dynamical systems theory. Finally, we discuss practice theory. Against this background, we provide a proposal for a synthesis of the successful explanatory mechanisms as they have been carved out by the different research programs. The suggestion is, roughly, to understand collective action as dynamical interaction of a self-organizing system with its environment, shaped by a process of collective sense-making. (shrink)

In this paper first order theories for nonmonotone inductive definitions are introduced, and a proof-theoretic analysis for such theories based on combined operator forms a la Richter with recursively inaccessible and Mahlo closure ordinals is given.

Der Wissenschaftsbegriff kann nicht einseitig auf den Begriff von "science" eingeengt werden. Eine strenge Scheidung in naturwissenschaftliche und geisteswissenschaftliche Methoden ist nicht möglich. Paradigmatisch für die Naturwissenschaften ist die hypothetisch-deduktive für die Geisteswissenschaften die hermeneutische Methode. Praktisch sind beide Methodenschemata immer ineinander verschränkt. Da die hermeneutische Methode auch nicht-wissenschaftlich verwendet wird, ist es notwendig Kriterien ihrer Wissenschaftlichkeit anzugeben. Der Vergleich beider Methoden zeigt, daß beide hypothetisch sind. Konkurrierenden Modellen entsprechen konkurrierende Deutungen. Die naturwissenschaftliche Methode kann im allgemeinen Entscheidungen erzwingen, da (...) sie immer neue Erfahrungen erzeugen kann. Demgegenüber ist das Erfahrungsmaterial in den Geisteswissenschaften vorgegeben und nicht beliebig vermehrbar. Entscheidungen zwischen konkurrierenden Deutungen sind daher nicht erzwingbar. (shrink)

White (2015) proposes an a priori justification of the reliability of inductive prediction methods based on his thesis of induction-friendliness. It asserts that there are by far more induction-friendly event sequences than induction-unfriendly event sequences. In this paper I contrast White's thesis with the famous no free lunch (NFL) theorem. I explain two versions of this theorem, the strong NFL theorem applying to binary and the weak NFL theorem applying to real-valued predictions. I show that both versions refute the thesis (...) of induction-friendliness. In the conclusion I argue that an a priori justification of the reliability of induction based on a uniform probability distribution over possible event sequences is impossible. In the outlook I consider two alternative approaches: (i) justification externalism and (ii) optimality justifications. (shrink)

Keine ausführliche Beschreibung für "Die Philosophie im ersten Drittel des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts, Teil 1" verfügbar.

"Was sind epistemische Werte? Welcher Wert aus der Familie: Wissen, Wahrheit, Rechtfertigung, kognitive Leistung usw. ist fundamental, so dass aus ihm die anderen Werte abgeleitet werden können? Oder gilt ein Pluralismus? Welcher Wert wird final, d.h. um seiner selbst willen, geschätzt; welcher dient nur instrumentell der Realisierung eines anderen Werts? Ist, wie die Menon-Intuition nahe legt, Wissen mehr wert als wahre Überzeugung? Die Wertschätzung von Wissen scheint in dem erwarteten Ausschluss von epistemischem Zufall begründet zu sein. Aber welche Arten von (...) epistemischem Zufall können wir überhaupt ausschließen? Welche Rolle spielen dabei rechtfertigende Gründe? Ungeklärt ist auch das Verhältnis, das Werte, Normen und Ziele in unserer epistemischen Praxis eingehen. Ist Wissen und/oder Wahrheit nicht eher als gemeinschaftlich angestrebtes, durch Institutionen reguliertes Ziel unserer Erkenntnispraxis zu begreifen? Die Fragen stehen im Schnittpunkt zweier Debatten: einmal der seit ca. 50 Jahren geführten Debatte um eine Definition des Wissensbegriffs, die den Einwänden standhält, mit denen Gettier das klassische Paradigma von Wissen als wahrer, gerechtfertigter Überzeugung unterminiert hat. Zum anderen der jüngeren, seit ca. 15 Jahren geführten Debatte um den Wertbegriff. Die hier gesammelten Beiträge sind Lösungsvorschläge für die Problemfelder, die sich in der Verknüpfung der beiden Debattenstränge neu herausgebildet haben"--P. [4] of cover. (shrink)

Heidegger’s account of the anyone is ambiguous. Some interpreters applaud the anyone as the best description of human sociality, while others think of it as an important critique of modern mass society. This chapter introduces the main idea leading up to this volume: Heidegger’s anyone should neither be reduced to its pejorative nor its constitutive dimension. Rather, the ambiguity of the anyone reflects the tension between the constitutive function of norms, rules, and conventions for human action on the one hand, (...) and the critical aspects of conformism on the other. The anyone is the condition of possibility of all human action, but it does not provide its ultimate source of meaning or intelligibility. This evokes the question whether there are standards for our actions beyond the common sense of the anyone. I take this to be the question that Heidegger’s notion of Eigentlichkeit, translated as authenticity or ownedness, wants to address. After distinguishing two controversial dimensions for interpreting authenticity – romantic versus formal and individualistic-atomistic versus pluralistic-social – I will introduce the social dimension of authenticity as the focal point of this volume. In particular, I will identify as the main question whether authenticity can serve as a source of social critique and a motor for social change. (shrink)

Although I agree with Elqayam & Evans' (E&E's) criticisms of is-ought and ought-is fallacies, I criticize their rejection of normativism on two grounds: (1) Contrary to E&E's assumption, not every normative system of reasoning consists of formal rules. (2) E&E assume that norms of reasoning are grounded on intuition or authority, whereas in contemporary epistemology they have to be justified, primarily by their truth-conduciveness.

Sixteen studies in religious phenomena, including _Psychology and Religion _and _Answer to Job_.

This fourth part of the 'Materialien zur Geschichte der Ramanuja-Schule' is an attempt to trace in philological and historical terms the theologoumenon's development of the doctrine of the 'Inner Ruler' following the texts handed down to us and to prevent an expose of its theological substance. The doctrine is followed up in the work of Sankara (ca. 800 A.D.), in the Subalopanisad, in Bhaskara's Bhedabhedavada (about 900 A.D.) up to the adoption of Antaryami in the Brahma-doctrine of Ramanuja. Finally, after (...) the exposition of the influence of tantric thought, the doctrine of Antaryami is treated with regard to the late period of the Ramanuja-school. This investigation is of importance not only because of the collection of the relevant texts regarding this doctrine, but also in view of the necessity of examining the emergence and development of this school not only from the standpoint of the Vedantic Brahmadoctrine, but to evaluate this school as what it has become in the sense of 'Sitz im Leben', i.e. one of the significant 'religious traditions' of Vaisnavism, whose Brahma-doctrine has developped into a fully-fledged theological world view. (shrink)

Aim of the deliberation is to identify the presuppositions for the analysis of use of language on the level of semantic interpretation. Pragmatics has no self-sufficiency semantic core-theory. The requirements of theories in semantic are discussed ana further the consens and disserts of the approaches in semantic analysis is demonstrated. Special references are the problem of analytic and synthetic (W.v.O. Quine. J.J. Katz, S. Haack, H. Pumam, D. Davidson), the debat about B. Russells analysis of denoting and the critics of (...) P.F. Strawson ana K.S. Donnellan. The non-self-sufficiency of the semantic conceptualization on the level of pragmatics is valid even though semantic is deliminated through pragmatics. (shrink)

The current debate on shared or collective emotions has seen a rediscovery of Max Scheler. In this debate, Scheler’s work is mostly read independent from its historic context. In particular, the influence of crowd psychology on Scheler’s thought has not been taken into consideration, despite Scheler’s explicit references to Le Bon’s (1895) The Crowd. In this paper, I show that Scheler’s understanding of emotional contagion is deeply indebted to Le Bon’s mass psychology. Against this background, I critically discuss Scheler’s distinction (...) of emotional contagion (Gefühlsansteckung) and feeling-with-one-another (Miteinanderfühlen). This leads to the conclusion that, at least in the formulation provided by Scheler, this distinction hinders rather than enhances research on emotional sharing. (shrink)

Two major works in recent evolutionary biology have in different ways touched upon the issue of cultural replicators in language, namely Dawkins’ Selfish Gene and Maynard Smith and Szathmáry’s Major Transitions in Evolution. In the latter, the emergence of language is referred to as the last major transition in evolution, a claim we argue to be derived from a crucial property of language, called Duality of Patterning. Prima facie, this property makes natural language look like a structural equivalent to DNA, (...) and its peer in terms of expressive power. We will argue that, if one takes seriously Maynard Smith and Szathmáry’s outlook and examines what has been proposed as linguistic replicators, amongst others phonemes and words, the analogy meme-gene becomes problematic. A key issue is the fact that genes and memes are assumed to carry and transmit information, while what has been described as the best candidate for replicatorhood in language, i.e. the phoneme, does by definition not carry meaning. We will argue that semiotic systems with Duality of Pattering force us to reconsider either the analogy between replicators in the biological and the cultural domain, or what it is to be a replicator in linguistics. (shrink)

Donald Davidson's unified theory of language and action can be understood as a continuation of the traditional analytic approach within philosophy of language and action. In the following we give an outline of some of the main themes of his philosophy centered around his core theory of radical interpretation (RI). His theory of rationality, his thesis of the anomalousness of the mental, and the externalist approach in his model of triangulation all follow in a systematic way from RI. Yet, Davidson's (...) philosophy can also be seen as giving a new systematic elaboration of central perspectives of W,v.O Quine's theory of language. In order to follow Davidson's main theses one therefore has to clarify the main differences and correspondences between both approaches. (shrink)