Bijdragen over de actuele betekenis van de filosofie, met name de Reformatorische Wijsbegeerte.

A review is given on statistical and modelling issues in ecotoxicology. The issues discussed are:1. How to estimate an (almost) no effect concentration chemicals in the laboratory.

Approximately three decades ago the question was first answered whether parasitoids are able to assess the number or origin of eggs in a host for a solitary parasitoid, Leptopilina heterotoma, by fitting theoretically derived distributions to empirical ones. We extend the set of different theoretically postulated distributions of eggs among hosts by combining searching modes and abilities in assessing host quality. In the models, parasitoids search either randomly (Poisson) (1) or by vibrotaxis (Negative Binomial) (2). Parasitoids are: (a) assumed to (...) treat all hosts equally, (b) able to distinguish them in unparasitised and parasitised hosts only, (c) able to distinguish them by the number of eggs they contained, or (d) able to recognise their own eggs. Mathematically tractable combinations of searching mode (1 and 2) and abilities (a,b,c,d) result in seven different models (M1a, M1b, M1c, M1d, M2a, M2b and M2c). These models have been simulated for a varying number of searching parasitoids and various mean numbers of eggs per host. Each resulting distribution is fitted to all theoretical models. The model with the minimum Akaike's information criterion (AIC) is chosen as the best fitting for each simulated distribution. We thus investigate the power of the AIC and for each distribution with a specified mean number of eggs per host we derive a frequency distribution for classification.Firstly, we discuss the simulations of models including random search (M1a, M1b, M1c and M1d). For M1a, M1c and M1d the simulated distributions are correctly classified in at least 70% of all cases. However, in a few cases model M1b is only properly classified for intermediate mean values of eggs per host. The models including vibrotaxis as searching behaviour (M2a, M2b and M2c) cannot be distinguished from those with random search if the mean number of eggs per host is low. Among the models incorporating vibrotaxis the three abilities are detected analogously as in models with random search. (shrink)

There is a claim that clinical ethics support services (CESS) improve healthcare quality within healthcare organisations. However, there is lack of strong evidence supporting this claim. Rather, the current focus is on the quality of CESS themselves or on individual learning outcomes. In response, this article proposes a theoretical framework leading to empirical hypotheses that describe the relationship between a specific type of CESS, moral case deliberation and the quality of care at the organisational level. We combine insights from the (...) literature on CESS, organisational learning and quality improvement and argue that moral case deliberation causes healthcare professionals to acquire practical wisdom. At the organisational level, where improving quality is a continuous and collective endeavour, this practical wisdom can be aggregated into morisprudence, which is an ongoing formulation of moral judgements across cases encountered within the organisation. Focusing on the development of morisprudence enables refined scrutinisation of CESS-related quality claims. (shrink)

ABSTRACT Match-fixing is a major ethical issue in sports. Although research interest in match-fixing has increased in recent years, we remain largely in the dark regarding how both betting- and non-betting-related match-fixing relate to the moral decision-making of those involved. Drawing on Rest’s theory of morality and on the perceptions of a large sample of participants in Flemish sports, this study indicates that most match-fixing incidents are non-betting-related, while moral motivation and associated challenges clearly differ according to the type of (...) match-fixing. Therefore, each type of match-fixing requires different preventive measures. (shrink)

The differential field of transseries extends the field of real Laurent series and occurs in various contexts: asymptotic expansions, analytic vector fields, and o-minimal structures, to name a few. We give an overview of the algebraic and model-theoretic aspects of this differential field and report on our efforts to understand its elementary theory.

This research note is penned in honour of Johan Vander Hoeven on his retirement as Editor-in-Chief of Philosophia Reformata. It is to acknowledge his helpful contribution to the critical exposition of phenomenology. I first read his work almost 30 years ago and it challenged me to develop a sympathetic Christian critique of this philosophical movement. This note is to offer some reflection upon the Christian interpretation of phenomeology. In particular, it raises questions about how some famous phrases, one by (...) Dilthey, the other by Husserl, have been construed. (shrink)

Is er een verschil tussen theologie en filosofie, en zo ja, waarin ligt dat verschil? Dat lijkt me de kern te zijn van de punten die Johan van der Hoeven als commentaar naar voren brengt in zijn zeer sympathieke bespreking van mijn bijdrage aan het cursusboek van de Open Universiteit. Ik zal proberen duidelijk te maken waarom ik denk dat dit de kern is, hoewel hij zelf een andere “hoofdvraag” lijkt te formuleren. Maar eerst twee opmerkingen vooraf.

Onderwerp en gezegde, door D. M. Bakker.--Enkele opmerkingen over het Godsbegrip van Justinus Martyr, door J. den Boeft.--Heidegger, Descartes, Luther, door J. van der Hoeven.--"Geschichtlichkeit" bij Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker, door G. Horsman.--Menselijke ontmaskering en Bijbels démasqué , door R. Huson.--Kleine geschiedenis van het begrip "niets" in de antieke wijsbegeerte (tot e met de Sofisten en Plato), door P. A. Meijer.--De structuur van opvoeden en opvoedkunde, door J. W. Mojet.--Individualiteit in de fysica, door M. (...) D. Stafleu. (shrink)

Een poging om de geschiedenis van een denkwijze door de eeuwen heen, in dit geval die van het schema van “het midden- en middellijkheidsdenken” , resp. het “denken in termen van ‘midden’ en ‘bemiddeling’” , kritisch in kaart te brengen valt op het eerste gezicht onder het genre Ideengeschichte of history of ideas. Zeker wanneer men ideeëngeschiedenis enerzijds enger, maar anderzijds daarbinnen weer breder opvat dan de invulling die Arthur Lovejoy daaraan gaf in zijn bekende The Great Chain of Being (...) .Het enerzijds betreft de inperking tot het terrein van de filosofie. Het anderzijds raakt hetgeen als idea wordt geaccepteerd. Lovejoy spreekt over ideeën vaak als “unit ideas” en vergt dat deze eenvoudig en ook enkelvoudig zijn. Ik zou in de ideeëngeschiedenis ook ruimte willen maken voor meer complexe filosofische noties, schema’s en zelfs filosofische theorieën. Wel lijkt me dat moet worden vastgehouden aan de eis dat deze ideeën naspeurbaar zijn door filosofische stromingen heen en dat zij bij voorkeur een zekere breedheid vertonen, ook in de zin van toepassing blijken te vinden in meerdere deelgebieden van de filosofie. En hier zij alvast maar genoteerd dat ook Van der Hoeven Lovejoy en diens studie noemt. (shrink)

The original Dutch version of this book, whose translator is Herbert D. Morton, was a 1979 doctoral dissertation in philosophy at the Free University of Amsterdam. J. van der Hoeven of the Free University and G. Nuchelmans of the University of Leiden were supervisors of the dissertation. Undoubtedly this monograph was an excellent dissertation which showed its author to be capable of making significant contributions to the history and philosophy of logic. In his commentary on a fragment of John (...) Stuart Mill's logical theory, de Jong shows that he is capable of selecting relevant material from several medieval and early modern logicians and of using interpretations and criticisms of contemporaries. For instance, the concluding chapter, "Appraisal," compares Mill and Kripke on naming. The historical and contemporary sources are relevant for establishing significant theses about Mill's logical theory. He exhibits a talent for portraying logical and semantical theories on charts and diagrams. These several charts and diagrams are some of the most valuable parts of the book. His numerous critical comments on the many views and doctrines summarized indicate an awareness of crucial philosophical problems. Unfortunately, features which fulfill the dissertation function of showing the author capable of making significant contributions may hinder readers from appreciating this book itself as being a significant contribution to the history or philosophy of logic or to the interpretation of John Stuart Mill. The display of so many themes from so many historical figures becomes confusing. The need in a dissertation to show critical awareness leads, in my judgment, to frequent use of the correct but superficial criticism that a writer used concepts in an unclear way. We are led to fear this type of unsympathetic criticism when we read on the first page of the introduction the phrase: "Mill's outrageously sloppy manner of formulating." We should hope that de Jong exploits his dissertation to develop more narrowly focused and more penetrating analyses in papers and in monographs whose significance can be more readily appreciated. (shrink)

The central theme of this book is the question, Why do scientists pursue scientific investigation? Of course, Bert Theunissen begins by pointing out that the answers scientists offer will be socially acceptable answers. Even so, Theunissen asserts, the historian may infer from the answers what motivated the persons questioned. Moreover, insights may be gleaned concerning science, society, and the relations between the two in the period the scientists lived.In this book the author discusses the notions of the objective of science (...) endorsed, respectively, by Jan Hendrik van Swinden , Jan van der Hoeven , Pieter Harting , Gerrit Jan Moll , Franciscus C. Donders , Hugo de Vries , Martinus W. Beijerinck , and Hendrik Antoon Lorentz .From this list of names it appears that Theunissen has focused his study on the nineteenth century. That period is especially interesting with respect to the changing images of science, as the ideas of the main goal of the university altered completely during that period. At the beginning of the century providing an academic education was seen as the prime task. Research was not seen as part of the duties of a professor at all. Those that did any experimentation chose to do so for their own sake, not because it was an element of the curriculum. That had changed completely by the end of the century. By then scientific investigation was considered a regular—in fact the most important—task of the university. This change in focus went hand in hand with the establishment of a number of new laboratories for most Dutch universities.In the accounts of the above‐mentioned men the content and development of their ideas about the pursuit of science are examined. From this analysis the common element that emerges in their images of science is gain for society, as expressed in the title, which translates into English as something like “Profit and more profit.” In the view of these men the pursuit of science is profitable for society; it is not pursued just for its own sake, let alone for the pleasure of the pursuer. In the beginning of the century the well‐trained minds of an intellectual elite that had completed academic training was regarded as the prime benefit for society. By the end of the century the profit was understood to come from scientific investigation of nature: science was seen as an instrument to further human welfare.Initially, I found it surprising that each and every one of the leading persons confidently asserts that the pursuit of science is for the benefit of society at large. Yet, on closer inspection, that was not so surprising, as Theunissen has studied and quotes almost exclusively from published sources, from treatises written for fellow scholars, for administrators, and for the lay public. The author seems not to have studied correspondence or other private papers in which a man may have voiced less elevated purposes for the pursuit of science.One thing amazed me: in the whole of this work, covering over a hundred years of discussion and the ideas of some 300 Dutch scholars on the subject at hand, there is not one woman mentioned. Admittedly, by the time the present story finishes, in the early twentieth century, only a few women had been appointed to academic positions in Dutch universities, so there is presumably not much material to draw on. However, one argument in the debate raging in the last quarter of the nineteenth century about the admission of women to the universities was the view that women, like men, should have the benefit of a higher education so as to fully develop their minds.Most of the contents of this book have appeared in print already in the form of separate articles in various journals, some in English but mostly in the Dutch language. Presumably that explains why the author has chosen to publish his treatise in Dutch rather than English. Even though the author has stressed the national character of his exposé by discussing at length some controversies among Dutch historians of science on points he addresses, the issues considered in this book and the scope of the inquiry warrant international notice and discussion.This book has a pleasantly unpretentious layout and typography and is, moreover, very carefully produced: I have seen but one printing error—which I leave it to you to discover. (shrink)