The uncanny valley—the unnerving nature of humanlike robots—is an intriguing idea, but both its existence and its underlying cause are debated. We propose that humanlike robots are not only unnerving, but are so because their appearance prompts attributions of mind. In particular, we suggest that machines become unnerving when people ascribe to them experience, rather than agency. Experiment 1 examined whether a machine’s humanlike appearance prompts both ascriptions of experience and feelings of unease. Experiment 2 tested whether a machine capable (...) of experience remains unnerving, even without a humanlike appearance. Experiment 3 investigated whether the perceived lack of experience can also help explain the creepiness of unfeeling humans and philosophical zombies. These experiments demonstrate that feelings of uncanniness are tied to perceptions of experience, and also suggest that experience—but not agency—is seen as fundamental to humans, and fundamentally lacking in machines. (shrink)

According to models of objectification, viewing someone as a body induces de-mentalization, stripping away their psychological traits. Here evidence is presented for an alternative account, where a body focus does not diminish the attribution of all mental capacities but, instead, leads perceivers to infer a different kind of mind. Drawing on the distinction in mind perception between agency and experience, it is found that focusing on someone's body reduces perceptions of agency but increases perceptions of experience. These effects were found (...) when comparing targets represented by both revealing versus nonrevealing pictures or by simply directing attention toward physical characteristics. The effect of a body focus on mind perception also influenced moral intuitions, with those represented as a body seen to be less morally responsible but more sensitive to harm. These effects suggest that a body focus does not cause objectification per se but, instead, leads to a redistribution of perceived mind. (shrink)

Keine ausführliche Beschreibung für "Platon" verfügbar.

This title from the De Gruyter Book Archive has been digitized in order to make it available for academic research. It was originally published under National Socialism and has to be viewed in this historical context. Learn more. >.

This volume contains the political works and the personal texts written by Benjamin Constant between June 1814 and July 1815. The collection is arranged into five thematic sections and placed in the order best suited to reflect their actual chronology. It comprises Constant's articles on the freedom of the press, his texts on the Kingdom of Naples affair, the two versions of the "Mémoires de Juliette", political texts written during the last few months of the Première Restauration, and writings published (...) during the Cent Jours. The most important texts in the volume are the treatise "De la Responsabilité des Ministres", the "Acte additionnel aux constitutions de l'Empire", in which Constant was closely associated, and above all the 1815 version of the "Principes de politique applicables à tous les gouvernements représentatifs", one of his major political works. The volume rounds out with a chronology, annexes, a bibliography and an index of proper names. (shrink)

Individuals’ implicit theories that people’s character is fixed versus malleable are associated with their holding beliefs that morality is primarily determined by fulfilling prescribed duties versus upholding basic rights of others, respectively. Three studies provide evidence that the ability to recognize that a situation can legitimately be considered from a moral point of view is interactively dependent upon the nature of perceivers’ implicit theories and the extent to which the issue involves a violation that emphasizes a failure to fulfill a (...) prescribed duty versus a failure to uphold a fundamental right of others. The studies experimentally manipulated the characteristics of a hypothetical business situation to involve either a duty-based violation or a rights-based violation or no behavioral violation. In addition, Study 1 experimentally manipulated subjects’ implicit theories, while Studies 2 and 3 measured subjects’ chronically held implicit theories. Collectively, the studies provide consistent evidence that entity theorists have greater moral awareness than incremental theorists when considering situations involving duty-based violations, while incremental theorists have greater moral awareness than entity theorists when considering situations involving rights-based violations, and moral awareness is not significantly different for perceivers who are neither strongly entity nor incremental theorists, when considering situations involving duty- versus rights-based violations. Study 3 also found evidence of a moderated-mediated association between violation type and moral intentions, through moral awareness as a mediator, moderated by perceivers’ implicit theories. (shrink)

The article gives a tentative interpretation of the history of the Churches in Germany starting 1945 to 1989. Crucial points are the relations oftheGerman Churches to questions of modern pluralism, to questions of peace and war and to questions of the transformation of Churchstructures. Common points are mentioned between the Churches of the older FRG and the former GDR-Churches just so differences between them.

Historians of science have proposed many theories to explain why Copernicus rejected the Ptolemaic system and advanced his own heliocentric system. In support of his new cosmological system Copernicus always employed theoretical considerations and never the existence of discrepancies between the positions given in the Tables and those observed. It is shown that the general acceptance of the heliocentric system through the work of the astronomers resulted not so much from empirical considerations but rather from the fact that this system (...) was suited to a comprehensive, general dynamics. (shrink)

Allies are extremely important to LGBT rights. Though we don’t often enumerate what tasks we expect allies to do, a fairly common conception is that allies “support the LGBT community.” In the first section I introduce three difficulties for this position that collectively suggest it is conceptually insufficient. I then develop a positive account by starting with whom allies are allied to instead of what allies are supposed to do. We might obviously say here that allies are allied to the (...) LGBT community, but I will argue that this community is better thought of as a loose coalition because there are often intersectional issues and conflicting interests that challenge any unified sense of community. I argue that people typically become allies because a friend or family member is experiencing some kind of specific harm; if that harm or discrimination is what causally explains why people become allies, then allies are required to do more than we commonly think. Although allies have a prima facie obligation to honor what members of a subcommunity identify as a harm, this obligation is defeasible if an ally believes fulfilling the obligation would be harmful. I conclude by looking at how we can understand what an ally is in terms of a larger discussion about moral obligations. If people already have these obligations, whatever they are, because morality requires it, then the status “ally” is redundant. I conclude by showing that certain social statuses can not only transform or reprioritize prior moral commitments, but can also introduce new kinds of responsibility that an agent did not have before. (shrink)

Die naive Idee des wissenschaftlichen Fortschritts beruht auf der irrtümlichen Annahme, daß es absolute Tatsachen und Grundsätze gibt, auf denen aufbauend die Wissenschaft ein ständig verbessertes Bild der Wirklichkeit liefert und sich mehr und mehr einer absoluten Wahrheit nähert. Im Gegensatz dazu wird gezeigt, daß wissenschaftliche Tatsachen und Grundsätze nur innerhalb der Interpretationsschemata von "Systemmengen" vermittelt werden können, von denen die jeweiligen "historischen Situationen" bestimmt werden. Die Entwicklung der Wissenschaften wird durch Unstimmigkeiten innerhalb solcher Systemmengen und durch den darin begründeten (...) Wandel hervorgerufen. Dabei liegt ein historischer Relativismus bloßer Fatalität oder Willkür nicht vor, weil nicht nur Kriterien für die Wahrheit von Aussagen innerhalb von Systemen logisch, sondern weil auch die Systeme selbst samt ihren Veränderungen, und zwar situationslogisch begründet werden können. Ist nun Wissenschaftsgeschichte "Systemgeschichte", so kommen nur zwei Bewegungsformen in Frage, in denen Fortschritte erzielt werden können: Nämlich erstens "Systemexplikation" und zweitens "Systemmutation". Entsprechend ist ein Fortschritt I von einem Fortschritt II zu unterscheiden. Beide werden mit Hilfe des Begriffs "Harmonisierung einer Systemmenge" genauer definiert. (shrink)