We offer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distrustful information transmissions. The semantics of such relations is analysed in view of rules that define the behaviour of a receiving agent. We justify this approach in view of human agent communications and secure system design. We further specify some properties of such relations.

We analyze the results from three different risk attitude elicitation methods. First, the broadly used test by Holt and Laury, HL, second, the lottery-panel task by Sabater-Grande and Georgantzis, SG, and third, responses to a survey question on self-assessment of general attitude towards risk. The first and the second task are implemented with real monetary incentives, while the third concerns all domains in life in general. Like in previous studies, the correlation of decisions across tasks is low and usually statistically (...) non-significant. However, when we consider only subjects whose behavior across the panels of the SG task is compatible with constant relative risk aversion, the correlation between HL and self-assessed risk attitude becomes significant. Furthermore, the correlation between HL and SG also increases for CRRA-compatible subjects, although it remains statistically non-significant. (shrink)

Nel pensiero politico di Ralf Dahrendorf un tema ricorre costantemente, sia che si tratti di liberalismo sia della democrazia rappresentativa: le costituzioni politiche sono radicate nelle strutture sociali, stato politico e stato sociale sono mutualmente interdipendenti. In assenza di specifiche strutture sociali, la democrazia rappresentativa non può divenire effettiva, e quindi corrispondere a una realtà evidente perfettamente valutabile. Ancora. Le strutture sociali pongono limiti molto ristretti all’effettività delle forme politiche. Esistono, in altri termini, precisi elementi strutturali che permettono l’oggettivazione della (...) democrazia liberale, e non altri. Si tratta certo di una concezione che deve molto a Tocqueville, la sua immagine illumina il pensiero dahrendorfiano sulla democrazia. Pur tuttavia non è l’unico elemento ricorrente. Ideale e reale qui si confrontano. L’idea di democrazia, infatti, si misura con la realtà sul terreno della prassi politica. Non a caso Ralf Dahrendorf è presente in quattro diversi parlamenti in cui ha visto all’opera il cambiamento senza violenza, l’argomentazione razionale, l’espressione della maggioranza e il controllo del governo. Non si tratta solo dei princìpi fondamentali della teoria politica democratica, ma anche della sua formula politica, con la quale interpreta i cambiamenti negli spazi politici globali. Si tratta di spazi nei quali il potere è libero da vincoli, si misura sulla base di rapporti di forza, non conosce regole e procedure se non quelle dell’economicismo, della tecnica, della finanziarizzazione. Tuttavia lo Stato nazionale e la democrazia parlamentare sono ancora decisivi. Proprio perché pensa questo, egli crede che nello spazio globale i principi della democrazia rappresentativa devono essere tradotti in realtà. Certo, Dahrendorf non è in grado di indicare nuove soluzioni, ma si limita a mostrare delle semplici proposte per gestire il dibattito pubblico nel passaggio da una democrazia classica ad una «nuova democrazia». (shrink)

_Riassunto_: La _Deep Brain Stimulation _(DBS) è un dispositivo annoverato tra le interfacce-cervello computer e che si qualifica come una promettente soluzione medica per far fronte al decorso di alcune malattie neurodegenerative come il Parikinson. Decenni di utilizzo clinico della DBS hanno permesso di comprenderne gli effetti collaterali e il loro impatto sul PIAAAS (_Personality, Identity, Agency, Authenticity, Autonomy and Self_). In tal senso, per sondare cambiamenti psicologici legati all’uso della DBS si è fatto ricorso a metodi quantitativi, come questionari (...) incentrati su valutazioni di ordine numerico, e metodi qualitativi, che si appoggiano alle esperienze riportate dai pazienti tramite interviste. Questo articolo ha l’obiettivo di evidenziare come, a prescindere dai metodi di indagine utilizzati, la ricerca sia stata sempre focalizzata sugli effetti collaterali della DBS e gli eventuali cambiamenti sulle dimensioni comprese nel PIAAAS, lasciandosi sfuggire l’occasione di usare i numerosi dati raccolti per effettuare un’analisi fenomenologica che potesse restituirci una descrizione della sintesi uomo-macchina. Per colmare questo iato, proponiamo l’utilizzo sinergico di due metodi di raccolta e analisi dati di origine fenomenologica. _Parole chiave_: Deep Brain Stimulation; Effetti collaterali; Sintesi uomo-macchina; Fenomenologia _Deep Brain Stimulation and the human-machine synthesis: A possible phenomenological perspective_ _Abstract_: Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is a device included among the brain-computer interfaces and that qualifies as a promising medical solution to cope with the course of some neurodegenerative diseases such as Parikinson’s. Decades of clinical use of DBS have allowed us to understand its side effects and their impact on PIAAAS (_Personality, Identity, Agency, Authenticity, Autonomy and Self_). In this sense, to investigate psychological changes related to the use of DBS, quantitative methods, such as questionnaires focused on numerical assessments, and qualitative techniques, which are based on experiences by patients through interviews, have been used. This article aims to highlight how, regardless of the survey methods used, research has always been focused on the side effects of DBS and possible changes in the concepts included in the PIAAAS, missing the opportunity to use the numerous data collected to carry out a phenomenological analysis that could give us a description of the human-machine synthesis. To bridge this hiatus, we propose the synergistic use of two phenomenological methods of data collection and analysis. _Keywords_: Deep Brain Stimulation; Side Effects; Human-machine synthesis; Phenomenology. (shrink)

In their 2002 seminal paper Hauser, Chomsky and Fitch hypothesize that recursion is the only human-specific and language-specific mechanism of the faculty of language. While debate focused primarily on the meaning of recursion in the hypothesis and on the human-specific and syntax-specific character of recursion, the present work focuses on the claim that recursion is language-specific. We argue that there are recursive structures in the domain of motor intentionality by way of extending John R. Searle’s analysis of intentional action. We (...) then discuss evidence from cognitive science and neuroscience supporting the claim that motor-intentional recursion is language-independent and suggest some explanatory hypotheses: linguistic recursion is embodied in sensory-motor processing; linguistic and motor-intentional recursions are distinct and mutually independent mechanisms. Finally, we propose some reflections about the epistemic status of HCF as presenting an empirically falsifiable hypothesis, and on the possibility of testing recursion in different cognitive domains. (shrink)

Antonio Signorini’s contribution to the constitutive theory of non-linear elasticity is reconstructed and analyzed. Some uninformed opinions suggesting he had a minor role, lacking of significant results, are discussed and refuted. It is shown that Signorini should be rightly credited for being among the first scholars aware of the central problem of non-linear elasticity: the determination of the general form of the elastic potential.

Comprising some of the key texts, this collection illustrates not only Kant's influence on British thought in the 19th century, but also gives a greater insight into British intellectual attitudes of that time.

What is 'rebirth' in Buddhism? The contribution of hypnotic regression.

Novas Repeto Vias. A Note on Heidegger and Time This essay begins from the observation that a “theory of time” contradicts the Heideggerian intention to experience temporality based on a “pre-theoretical” condition and to emancipate it in this way from instances of the Western metaphysical discourse. Such a claim leads to the conclusion that Heidegger never elaborated a theory of time and therefore was never, strictly speaking, “a philosopher of time.” Thus, the necessary condition for releasing thought from the metaphysical (...) mortgage would have to pass through the deconstruction of any “concept” intended to exhaust the nature of time. This gives rise to implications of varying intensity with respect to the structure and functions of Dasein. Most importantly, it concerns the tension between Entschlossenheit and Augenblick, on which Heidegger’s structure of Dasein depends. (shrink)