Ethics education is an important goal in higher education overall. It is not clear how well psychology programs are meeting this goal. The American Psychology Association’s Guidelines for the Undergraduate Psychology Major (APA 2013) were created to support high-quality education in psychology. The Guidelines focus on five goals including Ethical and Social Responsibility in a Diverse World. This study is a review of ethics information available online from Franciscan Colleges and Universities. We accessed 24 Franciscan institutions and reviewed the available (...) information provided by 22 of them. We asked several questions: Whether the psychology department provided a mission statement and was ethics addressed in it? What courses focused on ethics or mentioned ethics in their description? Were there other institutional ethics courses required for psychology majors? Was ethics mentioned in the institution mission? The results of this study indicate a need for more intentional inclusion of ethics in university and program mission statements as well as specific courses for the undergraduate psychology major. (shrink)

Avec son livre La machine sensible, Stefan Kristensen réalise, de façon magistrale, deux objectifs. D’abord, il met en lien la pensée de deux philosophes qui sont à première vue très éloignés l’un de l’autre. Il s’agit de Félix Guattari et de Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Traditionnellement, Merleau-Ponty est considéré comme le philosophe du corps, tandis que Guattari est connu comme le philosophe du corps sans organes. Merleau-Ponty est un phénoménologue, tandis que Guattari prétend abandonner le point de vue du sujet. Kristensen démontre (...) avec succès quel est le terrain commun des deux auteurs : la critique de la conception psychanalytique du sujet.Le deuxième objectif du livre découle directement du premier : présenter au lecteur une alternative à la conception intimiste de la subjectivité, soit comprendre la subjectivité comme fondamentalement parcourue par une altérité. Merleau-Ponty a été l’un des premiers, à l’instar de Paul Schilder, à mettre l’accent sur le caractère collectif et intersubjectif de cette altérité. Guattari a compris que cette altérité possède des sédiments politiques et historiques.With his book La machine sensible, Stefan Kristensen accomplishes two goals in a masterly way. First, he links the works of two philosophers who are very different at first sight: Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Félix Guattari. Traditionally, Merleau-Ponty is considered the philosopher of the body, whereas Guattari is known as the philosopher of the body without organs. Merleau-Ponty is a phenomenologist, whereas Guattari pretends to abandon the point of view of the subject. Kristensen identifies the common ground of the two authors: the criticism of the psychoanalytical conception of the subject.The second goal of the book derives directly from the first: present the reader with an alternative for the intimate conception of subjectivity, that is, present him or her with the idea that subjectivity is always characterized by an alterity. Merleau-Ponty, following the example of Paul Schilder, has been one of the first to stress the collective and intersubjective nature of this alterity. Guattari has understood that this alterity has political and historical sediments.Con il suo libro La machine sensible, Stefan Kristensen realizza magistralmente due obiettivi. Innanzitutto, egli mette in relazione il pensiero di due filosofi a prima vista molto distanti tra loro: Félix Guattari e Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Se tradizionalmente Merleau-Ponty è considerato il filosofo del corpo, Guattari è invece noto come il filosofo del corpo senza organi. Merleau-Ponty è un fenomenologo, mentre il pensiero di Guattari intende abbandonare il punto di vista del soggetto. Kristensen propone allora di leggere la critica della concezione psicoanalitica del soggetto come terreno comune tra i due autori. Il secondo obiettivo del libro discende direttamente dal primo: presentare al lettore un’alternativa alla concezione intimista della soggettività, ovvero concepire la soggettività come fondamentalmente percorsa da un’alterità. Merleau-Ponty è tra i primi, sulla scorta di Paul Schilder, a porre l’accento sul carattere collettivo e intersoggettivo di questa alterità. Dal canto suo, Guattari ha compreso che questa alterità possiede dei sedimenti politici e storici. (shrink)

Profondeur et temps chez Merleau-Ponty et DeleuzeDans une note en bas de page de son second livre sur le cinéma, L’imagetemps, Deleuze admet que sa compréhension de la profondeur – qui est l’une desnotions centrales du livre et donc de sa théorie du temps et de sa présentation au cinéma – remonte à Bergson et à Merleau-Ponty. La référence à Bergson n’est pas surprenante étant donné sa dette à son égard, mais celle à Merleau-Ponty mérite une attention particulière car, comme (...) on le sait, les références de Deleuze à Merleau-Ponty sont plutôt rares et généralement négatives.Dans cet article, j’examine la portée de cette référence de Deleuze à Merleau-Ponty. Comment les deux auteurs comprennent-ils la nature temporelle de la profondeur? Dans le cas de Merleau-Ponty, je tente de répondre à cette question en lisant, dans la Phénoménologie de la perception, les passages qui concernent la vision de la profondeur et ceux qui se rapportent au rappel d’un souvenir. La « théorie » deleuzienne de la profondeur, quant à elle, peut être trouvée dans son analyse de la technique cinématographique de la profondeur de champ, présente notamment dans les films d’Orson Welles. J’examine quels caractères de la profondeur de champ en font une “image-temps” et j’analyse sous cet angle Citizen Kane de Welles et Muriel ou le temps d’un retour de Resnais. Les distinctions faites entre ces deux films aident à comprendre les différences qui existent entre les conceptions de la profondeur de Merleau-Ponty etde Deleuze.Profondità e tempo in Merleau-Ponty e DeleuzeIn una nota del suo secondo libro sul cinema, L’immagine-tempo, Deleuze riconosce che la sua comprensione del fenomeno della profondità – una delle nozioni centrali del libro, dunque della sua intera teoria del tempo e della sua presenza nel cinema – può esser fatta risalire a Bergson e Merleau-Ponty. Il primo di questi riferimenti non può sorprendere, dato il debito profondo che Deleuze contrae col pensiero bergsoniano. Il secondo riferimento, quello a Merleau-Ponty, merita particolare attenzione proprio perché, com’è noto, i riferimenti di Deleuze a questo filosofo sono rari e in gran parte critici. In questo articolo mi propongo quindi di esaminare la portata di questo secondo riferimento. In che modo Deleuze e Merleau-Ponty comprendono la natura temporale della profondità? Per quanto riguarda Merleau-Ponty, cercherò di rispondere a questa domanda esaminando tutti quei passaggi di Fenomenologia della percezione in cui è questione della visione in profondità e dello sforzo necessario a richiamare alla memoria un ricordo. La “teoria” deleuziana della profondità può invece essererintracciata nell’analisi che Deleuze propone della profondità di campo nel cinema, in particolare nel cinema di Orson Welles. Cercherò di mostrare come proprio certi caratteri della profondità, facciano sì che immagini di questo genere possano essere definite immagini-tempo; e in questa prospettiva analizzerò Citizen Kane di Welles, e Muriel ou le temps d’un retour di Alain Resnais. Le differenze che sussistono tra i due film potranno d’altra parte contribuire a mettere a fuoco le differenze tra le due maniere in cui Merleau-Ponty e Deleuze rendono conto dei problemi della profondità e del tempo. (shrink)

The Flesh as the Folding of the OutsideDeleuze’s Reading of the last Merleau-PontyBy describing the flesh in terms of a “torsion” of “an Outside more distant than any exterior,” Deleuze in his 1986 book on Foucault sketches an ambivalent reading of Merleau-Ponty’s final philosophy. Insofar as it grants to the Outside an ontological primacy, Deleuze’s definition seems to indicate that the Flesh is not an originary agency, but rather a derived state of a primordial folding. If the flesh is derived, (...) then the inconstituability of the carnal fold, which Merleau-Ponty defends, would be radically challenged. But at the same time, the difficulty that Merleau-Ponty encounters in his final writings – that of giving an account of the specificity of my Flesh in relation to the Flesh of the world – would in this way perhaps be overcome. We shall show in fact that the absence of a specific ontological difference between the Flesh of the body and the Flesh of the world in The Visible and the Invisible – an absence that Deleuze points out when he invokes an “ideal coincidence” between the two kinds of flesh, could be avoided by recourse to the living Flesh conceived as stemming from a torsion of aprimordial Outside. To what extent is Deleuze, in his metaphysical reconstruction of Merleau-Ponty’s project, still faithful to this primordial Outside? To what extent does he twist this speculative reformulation in the direction of his own conception of life? These are the questions which my article would like to disentangle.La carne come piega del FuoriDeleuze lettore dell’ultimo Merleau-PontyDescrivendo, in un passo del suo libro su Foucault, la carne come torsione di un “Fuori più lontano di ogni mondo esterno”, Deleuze abbozza una lettura ambigua della filosofi a dell’ultimo Merleau-Ponty. In quanto concede al Fuori un primato ontologico, questa defi nizione deleuziana sembra costituire l’indice di una concezione secondo la quale la carne non sarebbe più un’istanza originaria, ma uno stato derivato da un piegarsi primordiale. Se così fosse, è l’incostituibilità della piega carnale, difesa da Merleau-Ponty, che verrebbe rimessa in questione. Al contempo, però, la difficoltà di rendere conto della specificità della mia carne rispetto alla carne del mondo verrebbe semplicemente aggirata. Come si tratterà di dimostrare, l’assenza di una differenza ontologica netta tra la carne del corpo e la carne del mondo ne Il visibile et l’invisibile, sottolineata da Deleuze nell’evocazione di una “coincidenza ideale” delle due carni,potrebbe venir risolta dal richiamo ad una carne ricavata dalla torsione di un Fuori primordiale. In che misura Deleuze, nella sua ricostruzione metafisica del progetto merleau-pontiano, si mantiene fedele ad esso? In che misura Deleuze inflette questa riformulazione speculativa in direzione della sua propria concezione della vita? Sono le questioni che il presente articolo si propone di affrontare. (shrink)

Since its origins, cinema makes an irruption into the world bringing a new reality that inserts itself into a changing social and cultural environment. Raising as an “art of the time” it contributes to the generation of a new perception development and a new aesthetic that brings a “state of encounter” that disrupts the usual relationship between the spectator and the visible while it emerges with a temporary space that interacts among the time experience. The present becomes a contracted past (...) and the memory can be visualized. Cinema becomes an event with a revealing function that will always question its definition and concept. (shrink)

Recently, amid growing awareness that computer algorithms are not neutral tools but can cause harm by reproducing and amplifying bias, attempts to detect and prevent such biases have intensified. An approach that has received considerable attention in this regard is the Value Sensitive Design (VSD) methodology, which aims to contribute to both the critical analysis of (dis)values in existing technologies and the construction of novel technologies that account for specific desired values. This article provides a brief overview of the key (...) features of the Value Sensitive Design approach, examines its contributions to understanding and addressing issues around bias in computer systems, outlines the current debates on algorithmic bias and fairness in machine learning, and discusses how such debates could profit from VSD-derived insights and recommendations. Relating these debates on values in design and algorithmic bias to research on cognitive biases, we conclude by stressing our collective duty to not only detect and counter biases in software systems, but to also address and remedy their societal origins. (shrink)

A partir del análisis crítico que Martha Nussbaum realizara sobre la obra de Judith Butler, proponemos examinar el vínculo entre la reflexión filosófica y la práctica política en el marco del feminismo. Para ello analizaremos el modo en que cada una de estas autoras reflexiona en torno al lenguaje, las identidades, el poder, la dominación y las formas de subvertirla.

[85] Les théories de la sexualité qui tendent à attribuer des fins naturelles au désir sexuel font très souvent partie d’un discours plus général sur les lieux légitimes du genre et du désir dans un contexte social donné2. Parler du désir naturel et corrélativement de la forme naturelle des relations sexuelles humaines revient à adopter un dis- cours invariablement normatif, puisque les formes du désir et de la sexualité qui tombent en dehors des paramètres du modèle naturel sont alors compri...

Judith Jarvis Thomson has recently proposed a new argument for the thesis that killing the one in the Trolley Problem is not permissible. Her argument relies on the introduction of a new scenario, in which the bystander may also sacrifice herself to save the five. Thomson argues that those not willing to sacrifice themselves if they could may not kill the one to save the five. Bryce Huebner and Marc Hauser have recently put Thomson's argument to empirical test by (...) asking people what they should do in the new trilemma case, in which they may also sacrifice themselves. They found that the majority judge that they should either kill the one or sacrifice themselves; Huebner and Hauser argue that those numbers speak against Thomson's argument. But Thomson's argument was about the dialectical effect of the new trilemma on the traditional dilemma, rather than about the trilemma itself. Here I present the results of a study in which I asked subjects first what they should do in the trilemma and then what they should do in the traditional Trolley Problem. I found that, if asked first about the trilemma, subjects then have the intuition that killing the one in the traditional Bystander at the Switch is not permissible?exactly what Thomson's argument had predicted. (shrink)

Un tema transversal que aparece en la obra de la filósofa Judith Butler, especialmente en Vida precaria y Marcos de guerra, tiene que ver con la experiencia afectiva que tienen los sujetos. Por esta razón, el objetivo del presente artículo teórico es analizar la manera como la filósofa norteamericana trata el tema de los afectos o las emociones. El texto se centra en demostrar la pertinencia de la reflexión en torno a los afectos, ya que es un elemento crítico-social (...) que ayuda a comprender la constitución de la subjetividad y la agencia, tanto individual como colectiva; asimismo, pretende ofrecer nuevos aportes para el entendimiento de las situaciones contemporáneas de discriminación y opresión, pero también de resistencia en contextos democráticos. Aun cuando el sujeto, desde sus experiencias afectivas, se encuentra condicionado por los marcos normativos sociales, es posible pensar en luchas desde el afecto, como una salida ante los efectos restrictivos que este genera. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Diacritics 29.3 (1999) 81-101 [Access article in PDF] Sex without Sex, Queering the Market, the Collapse of the Political, the Death of Difference, and AIDS: Hailing Judith Butler Brett Levinson It is interesting to note that in Judith Butler's study of the social construction of sex, Gender Trouble (as well as in the sequel, Bodies That Matter), one finds barely a trace of sex. Or to put (...) matters more bluntly: in Butler's study of gender critiques that avoid or dismiss the matters of hetero- and homosexuality, in her examination of the relationship of gayness and lesbianism to feminism, and in her exposition of a politics of queerness--as to fucking, not a word. This omission is not tangential to Gender Trouble. It determines Butler's entire undertaking. 1. The (In)difference of Performance By illustrating that sex, like gender, is a social construction, Butler strives to tear not sex but both sex and gender from biological essentialism. For as Butler insists, as soon as we imagine sex (woman/man) as naturally given, and gender (feminine/masculine) as a product of social forces, we fall into the very gender essentialism that we seemingly called into question. This is because the sex/gender binary makes sex the ground of gender: a woman may be masculine or feminine, and she may subvert the social norms that demand that women act in a certain manner. But throughout all of these gender reversals, she remains a woman. Her behavior, therefore, is either far from her sex (if she is subversive) or close to it (if she conforms). But in either case, it is measured in terms of that sex, which stands as the essence or foundation of the conduct. Hence, within such a discourse, gender stereotypes do not actually emerge as social (thereby deconstructible) constructs since the substructure (sex) of their edifice is given prior to production.This thesis, which ultimately reveals that the sex/gender split reproduces the woman/man binary--the foundation of sexism--opens the way for one of Butler's most renowned interventions: her theory of performativity. Butlerian performance traces the intersection of Derrida's concept of mimesis and Foucault's understanding of power. Derrida argues that if a mark (in writing) or a sound (in speech) is to form part of a language, it must be iterable. Language hinges on social conventions, and social conventions on repetition, ritual. Repetition, therefore, does not follow (from) a pregiven [End Page 81] [Begin Page 83] sign but is a condition of its possibility: a sign must be repeatable before it is a sign. 1Derrida often translates these ideas into an analysis of "the citation," a fact Butler fully exploits. An articulation, Derrida argues, must be a priori citable (again, iterable) if it is to function as an articulation, as a "speech act." This means that deviance, miscitation, recontextualization, and the possible transformation or loss of an enunciation--any or all of which could occur via a citation--belong essentially to that enunciation. The repetitions that yield rituals, habits, and then norms are the same iterations that undermine those norms. But this is true not only for speech. It holds as well for the law: the citing, execution, reading, writing, and acknowledgment of the law, hence the possibility of the law's shift and even disappearance, pertain to the law's groundwork.Gender Trouble posits patriarchy and compulsive heterosexuality as two such citable laws. And as laws, they are powerful but not inevitable. Indeed, because the law of normalcy harbors its own deviance as a condition of its public emergence or deployment, this normalcy opens the way for its own transgression. One is indeed subject to the law of the norm. But this subjection cannot not grant the very alternative agency/subjectivity it strives to suppress.Hence for Butler, queer types such as the "femme" or the "butch," as they perhaps flaunt (through dress, bodily image, or public demonstration) the constructed character of their own sexual identities, recite and dis-cover the constructed, artificial... (shrink)

This essay focuses on the approach to the study of political and legal phenomena that can be defined “critical realism” and with its apparent paradox. By “critical realism” I understand a way of looking at political and legal phenomena that combines a blunt analysis of social reality with a transformative, non-resigned critical attitude towards the status quo. I argue that this is the approach that inspired Danilo Zolo’s lifelong reflections on politics and law. The same approach, moreover, is in my (...) opinion shared by authors such as Raymond Geuss and Bernard Williams, who, since the beginning of the new millennium, have contributed to re-shape the international debate on the methods of political philosophy. Inherent in this approach is a paradox that can be encapsulated in the following two questions. First, if the theoretical analysis should not start from ideals and principles, but must instead take as point of departure the social and political situation in which we are inescapably entangled (both central assumptions of the critical realism), how is it possible to gain the distance necessary for criticisms? Second, if we cannot transcend our societal reality and cannot therefore rely on external and objective values, on which basis is it possible to suggest “better” alternatives to the status quo? The mentioned authors could not explain convincingly, in my opinion, how these two questions can be answered. However, and this is the central claim of the article, the paradox is not unresolvable. The two questions mentioned above can be answered, so my argument, by recurring, respectively, to the negativism characteristic of Judith Shklar’s approach to political and legal theory and to the concept of “immanent critique” as understood by Rahel Jaeggi. Shklar convincingly shows that the critique of the status quo can be made not notwithstanding the blunt analysis of social reality, but exactly in reason of it. In order to recognise abuses of power and injustices, so her argument, we do not need an ideal theory of justice or of the perfect state. On the contrary, nothing better than history and the analysis of contemporary social reality can show us that injustices and abuses of power are a recurring and ever possible characteristics of politics. Jaeggi’s concept on immanent critique, moreover, indicates how it is possible to build an alternative to the criticized situation that is not anchored on transcendent principles and yet can plausibly explain why the suggested alternative is “better” than the status quo. Finally, I argue that both Shklars’ negativism and Jaeggi’s concept of immanent critique operate implicitly in Zolo’s approach, but that they, having not being made explicit, could not develop their whole potential. (shrink)

A review of Butler's first book. An English version has been posted.

Bolzaneto, Abu Grahib, Guantanamo: luoghi in cui la tortura è riemersa nel “civile”occidente contemporaneo. A perpetrarla sono i rappresentanti di uno Stato che si definisce “di diritto”: uno Stato la cui giustificazione ultima è la difesa e la protezione dei diritti inviolabili degli individui. La tortura, lungi dall’essere scomparsa, dunque permane come tecnica di potere nei moderni stati democratici. Essa non solo persiste come dato di fatto. Al contrario, negli ultimi decenni sono riemerse giustificazioni della tortura come pratica legale e (...) legittima per garantire la sicurezza dello Stato. Di fronte a queste nuove giustificazioni della tortura è oggi più che mai importante lasciarsi guidare dall’esperienza storica piuttosto che da ipotetici scenari futuri e, seguendo l'amonimento della studiosa statunitense Judith Shklar, fondare la difesa dei diritti sull’assunto, “ampiamente giustificato da ogni pagina di storia politica, che alcuni rappresentanti del potere statale si comporteranno regolarmente, su piccola o grande scala, in modo illegale e brutale, a meno che non venga loro impedito di farlo”. (shrink)

With the same intellectual courage with which she addressed issues of gender, Judith Butler turns her attention to speech and conduct in contemporary political life, looking at several efforts to target speech as conduct that has become subject to political debate and regulation. Reviewing hate speech regulations, anti-pornography arguments, and recent controversies about gay self-declaration in the military, Judith Butler asks whether and how language acts in each of these cultural sites.

The concept of a right is fundamental to moral, political, and legal thinking, but much of the use of that concept is selective and fragmentary: it is common merely to appeal to this or that intuitively plausible attribution of rights as needed for purposes of argument. In The Realm of Rights Judith Thomson provides a full-scale, systematic theory of human and social rights, bringing out what in general makes an attribution of a right true.

This book brings together a group of Judith Butler's philosophical essays written over two decades that elaborate her reflections on the roles of the passions in subject formation through an engagement with Hegel, Kierkegaard, Descartes, Spinoza, Malebranche, Merleau-Ponty, Freud, Irigaray, and Fanon. Drawing on her early work on Hegelian desire and her subsequent reflections on the psychic life of power and the possibility of self-narration, this book considers how passions such as desire, rage, love, and grief are bound up (...) with becoming a subject within specific historical fields of power. Butler shows in different philosophical contexts how the self that seeks to make itself finds itself already affected and formed against its will by social and discursive powers. And yet, agency and action are not necessarily nullified by this primary impingement. Primary sense impressions register this dual situation of being acted on and acting, countering the idea that acting requires one to overcome the situation of being affected by others and the linguistic and social world. This dual structure of sense sheds light on the desire to live, the practice and peril of grieving, embodied resistance, love, and modes of enthrallment and dispossession. Working with theories of embodiment, desire, and relationality in conversation with philosophers as diverse as Hegel, Spinoza, Descartes, Merleau-Ponty, Freud, and Fanon, Butler reanimates and revises her basic propositions concerning the constitution and deconstitution of the subject within fields of power, taking up key issues of gender, sexuality, and race in several analyses. Taken together, these essays track the development of Butler's embodied account of ethical relations. (shrink)

In this profound appraisal of post-September 11, 2001 America, Judith Butler considers the conditions of heightened vulnerability and aggression that followed from the attack on the US, and US retaliation. Judith Butler critiques the use of violence that has emerged as a response to loss, and argues that the dislocation of first-world privilege offers instead a chance to imagine a world in which that violence might be minimized and in which interdependency becomes acknowledged as the basis for a (...) global political community. (shrink)

Vulnerability and resistance have often been seen as opposites, with the assumption that vulnerability requires protection and the strengthening of paternalistic power at the expense of collective resistance. Focusing on political movements and cultural practices in different global locations, including Turkey, Palestine, France, and the former Yugoslavia, the contributors to Vulnerability in Resistance articulate an understanding of the role of vulnerability in practices of resistance. They consider how vulnerability is constructed, invoked, and mobilized within neoliberal discourse, the politics of war, (...) resistance to authoritarian and securitarian power, in LGBTQI struggles, and in the resistance to occupation and colonial violence. The essays offer a feminist account of political agency by exploring occupy movements and street politics, informal groups at checkpoints and barricades, practices of self-defense, hunger strikes, transgressive enactments of solidarity and mourning, infrastructural mobilizations, and aesthetic and erotic interventions into public space that mobilize memory and expose forms of power. Pointing to possible strategies for a feminist politics of transversal engagements and suggesting a politics of bodily resistance that does not disavow forms of vulnerability, the contributors develop a new conception of embodiment and sociality within fields of contemporary power. -/- Contributors. Meltem Ahiska, Athena Athanasiou, Sarah Bracke, Judith Butler, Elsa Dorlin, Basak Ertür, Zeynep Gambetti, Rema Hammami, Marianne Hirsch, Elena Loizidou, Leticia Sabsay, Nükhet Sirman, Elena Tzelepis. (shrink)

Height-pitch associations are claimed to be universal and independent of language, but this claim remains controversial. The present study sheds new light on this debate with a multimodal analysis of individual sound and melody descriptions obtained in an interactive communication paradigm with speakers of Dutch and Farsi. The findings reveal that, in contrast to Dutch speakers, Farsi speakers do not use a height-pitch metaphor consistently in speech. Both Dutch and Farsi speakers’ co-speech gestures did reveal a mapping of higher pitches (...) to higher space and lower pitches to lower space, and this gesture space-pitch mapping tended to co-occur with corresponding spatial words (high-low). However, this mapping was much weaker in Farsi speakers than Dutch speakers. This suggests that cross-linguistic differences shape the conceptualization of pitch and further calls into question the universality of height-pitch associations. (shrink)

Eliade, Mircea, 1907-1986; religious; thoughts; philosophy.

The unlivable is the most extreme point of human suffering and injustice. But what is it exactly? How do we define the unlivable? And what can we do to prevent and repair it? These are the intriguing questions Judith Butler and Frédéric Worms discuss in a captivating dialogue situated at the crossroads of contemporary life and politics. Here, Judith Butler criticizes the norms that make life precarious and unlivable, while Frédéric Worms appeals to a "critical vitalism" as a (...) way of allowing the hardship of the unlivable to reveal what is vital for us. For both Butler and Worms, the difference between the livable and the unlivable forms the critical foundation for a contemporary practice of care. Care and support, in all their aspects, make human life livable, that is, "more than living." To understand it, we must draw on the concrete practices of humans who are confronted with the unlivable: the refugees of today and the witnesses and survivors of past violations and genocide. They teach us what is intolerable but also undeniable about the unlivable, and what we can do to resist it. Crafted with critical rigor, mutual respect, and lively humor, the compelling dialogue transcribed and translated in this book took place at the École Normale Supérieure (ENS) on April 11, 2018, at a time when close to two thousand migrants were living in nearby makeshift camps in northern Paris. The Livable and the Unlivable showcases this 2018 dialogue in the context of Butler's and Worms's ongoing work and the evolution of their thought, as presented by Laure Barillas and Arto Charpentier in their equally engaging introduction. It concludes with a new afterword that addresses the crises unfolding in our world and the ways a philosophically rigorous account of life must confront them. While this book will be of keen interest to readers of philosophy and cultural criticism, and those interested in vitalism, new materialism, and critical theory, it is a far from merely academic text. In the conversation between Butler and Worms, we encounter questions we all grapple with in confronting the distress and precarity of our times, marked as it is by types of survival that are unlivable, from concentration camps to prisons to environmental toxicity, to forcible displacement, to the Covid pandemic. The Livable and the Unlivable at once considers longstanding philosophical questions around why and how we live, while working to retrieve a philosophy of life for today's Left. (shrink)

This study compares corporate social performance in terms of charitable contributions of minority-owned and nonminority-owned small businesses. In this sample, minority-owned small businesses are younger, have less full-time employees, and lower annual sales. Minority-owned small businesses donate more funds to religious organizations than nonminority-owned small businesses. When annual sales are accounted for, minority-owned businesses contribute more total dollars to all charitable organizations than nonminority-owned firms. Suggestions for future research in this area are delineated.

"The premise of the Jewish attitude toward illness is that living is sacred, that good health enables us to live a fully religious life, and that disease is an evil. Any effective therapy is permitted, even if it conflicts with Jewish law. To bring about healing is a responsibility not only of the person who is ill and of the professional caregivers, but also of the loved ones, and of the larger circle of family, friends, and community." "Illness and Health (...) in the Jewish Tradition is an anthology of traditional and modern Jewish writings that highlights these basic principles."--BOOK JACKET.Title Summary field provided by Blackwell North America, Inc. All Rights Reserved. (shrink)

Nas últimas décadas, a ideia de criatividade tem obtido um aumento de interesse nos campos da filosofia, ciências cognitivas, sociologia, etc. e tem havido uma contribuição renovada com relação à ideia clássica de criatividade. Consideramos que a contribuição do pragmatismo clássico merece uma menção especial – em especial, as obras de Charles S. Peirce e John Dewey. Neste artigo, iremos nos referir, exclusivamente, ao tratamento deweyiano a essa ideia. Sustentaremos que a teoria de Dewey fornece elementos interpretativos que são inovadores (...) e disruptivos com relação à tradição filosófica, inclusive, uma nova concepção de imaginação criativa. Exporemos algumas consequências de sua posição – como nós a interpretamos. Com efeito, sustentaremos que Dewey afasta-se das demandas clássicas para as quais um produto criativo envolve, necessariamente, uma transformação radical da vida humana, segundo a ideia de níveis de criatividade; essa teoria deweyiana constitui um insight interessante para a promoção da atitude criativa; esse processo criativo preserva a mesma estrutura em todos os casos – ciência e arte, por exemplo – e essa criatividade é, agora, uma potencialidade intrínseca dos seres humanos – a qual pode ser realizada ou não. Por fim, consideramos a relevância de alguma tese deweyiana para as posições atuais, como no caso do psicólogo cognitivo Robert Weisberg, enfatizando as coincidências e desacordos de ambos. (shrink)

Traduzione di Ausgleichung eines auf Mißverstand beruhenden matematischen Streit. Il testo fu pubblicato per la prima volta nel 1796 in "Berlinische Monatsschrift", 2, pp. 368-370.

In everyday contexts we do numerous things together. Philosophers of collective intentionality have wondered how we can distinguish parallel cases from cases where we act together. Often their theories argue in favor of one characteristic, feature, or function, that differentiates the two. This feature then distinguishes parallel actions from joint action. The approach in this book is different. Three claims are developed: (1) There are several functions that help human agents coordinate and act together. (2) This entails that joint action (...) should be understood through these different, interrelated, types of coordination. (3) A multidimensional conceptual space, with three levels of control and coordination, will allow us to connect these different forms of coordination and their interdependencies. This allows us to understand the jointness of an action in a more differentiated and encompassing way. This approach has ramifications for several distinctions that are typically understood to be binary, including those between action and mere bodily movement, joint action and parallel action, and action together and not together. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Ideas 63.3 (2002) 501-519 [Access article in PDF] Nietzsche and Early Romanticism Judith Norman Nietzsche was in many ways a quintessentially romantic figure, a lonely genius with a tragic love-life, wandering endlessly (through Italy, no less) before going dramatically mad, taken by his gods into the protection of madness (to quote Heidegger's epithet on Hölderlin, one of Nietzsche's childhood favorites). 1 But this (...) is to be a romantic in an uncapitalized manner, and has nothing to do with the literary movement of Romanticism, a movement from which, as is well-known, Nietzsche distanced himself loudly and vigorously. Nietzsche famously follows Goethe in his verdict that Romanticism is a form of sickness and classicism a form of strength, and commentators, for the most part, have accepted this self-description. 2 That is, they do not blithely identify Nietzsche with that nineteenth-century artistic movement, whose proponents include Victor Hugo, Eugene Delacroix, and Richard Wagner. 3But Romanticism is a plural phenomenon. When Goethe made his famously dismissive remark, he was clearly not talking about Hugo and Wagner; he meant Romanticism in an earlier incarnation. Commentators have been less reticent about finding all sorts of affinities between Nietzsche and some of these earlier movements. In particular Nietzsche is frequently and positively compared to Jena Romanticism (also known as early Romanticism), a movement whose principal figures included August and Friedrich Schlegel, Novalis, Tieck, Schleiermacher, and Schelling, and the writings they published in the 1790s, principally in the journal, Athenaeum. It is this romantic movement that will be the focus of my paper. Jena romantics, while Grecophile, had nothing to do with Rousseauean primitivism (they were well aware that their image of the [End Page 501] Greeks reflected contemporary fantasies more than historical reality), they had no cult of the genius, and they did not valorize emotion above reason. 4 What was central to their movement was profound skepticism about the viability of traditional attitudes towards truth, an intellectually rigorous theory of art that gave particular weight to playfulness, fragmented writing, the notion of literary irony, a sense that the philosopher ought to be or become more of an artist (though not a genius)—and, correlatively, that philosophy is or ought to become more artistic. All of which sounds decidedly Nietzschean. Romanticizing Nietzsche While Nietzsche himself never makes the connection, he never explicitly distances himself from the authors of Jena romanticism in the way he does from later romantic figures. 5 Indeed, he barely mentions the Jena romantics by name and probably never read Friedrich Schlegel, the figure most closely associated with this romantic movement. 6 As such, there is certainly space for commentators to argue for a close if tacit intellectual connection between Nietzsche and Jena romanticism; indeed, one commentator speaks of a fundamental affinity, 7 another calls Nietzsche the last romanticist, and yet another claims that "[Nietzsche's] story makes sense only when read in the larger context of his Romantic predecessors' history." 8It is undeniable that Nietzsche came out of a philological tradition inaugurated by the Schlegels (and developed by Schelling) which juxtaposed the Dionysian and the Apollinian in Greek tragedy. According to Lacoue-Labarthe, "an entire tradition of academic philosophy (which, on his own initiative, Nietzsche had joined) revolved around precisely this opposition." 9 At least in [End Page 502] his earlier works Nietzsche's view of the Greeks was influenced by (if not predicated on) the scholarly research and interpretative theories of figures associated with Jena romanticism. How profound and enduring this influence might have been is an interesting question, but not one I will explore at present. I will not discuss the influence of the Jena romantics in their scholarly capacity as classical philologists, but rather focus on any impact they may have had as philosophically minded literary critics during the 1790s. Similarly, I will not look at The Birth of Tragedy but rather focus on claims made concerning the romantic tendencies of Nietzsche's later work. A body of scholarship has been building which claims that the critical theories of Jena... (shrink)