Nelkin presents a simple and natural account of freedom and moral responsibility which responds to the great variety of challenges to the idea that we are free and responsible, before ultimately reaffirming our conception of ourselves as agents. Making Sense of Freedom and Responsibility begins with a defense of the rational abilities view, according to which one is responsible for an action if and only if one acts with the ability to recognize and act for good reasons. The view is (...) compatibilist -- that is, on the view defended, responsibility is compatible with determinism -- and one of its striking features is a certain asymmetry: it requires the ability to do otherwise for responsibility when actions are praiseworthy, but not when they are blameworthy. In defending and elaborating the view, Nelkin questions long-held assumptions such as those concerning the relation between fairness and blame and the nature of so-called reactive attitudes such as resentment and forgiveness. Her argument not only fits with a metaphysical picture of causation -- agent-causation -- often assumed to be available only to incompatibilist accounts, but receives positive support from the intuitively appealing Ought Implies Can Principle, and establishes a new interpretation of freedom and moral responsibility that dovetails with a compelling account of our inescapable commitments as rational agents. (shrink)

Benardete paradoxes involve infinite collections of Grim Reapers, assassins, demons, deafening peals, or even sentences. These paradoxes have recently been used in arguments for finitist metaphysical theses such as temporal finitism, causal finitism, and discrete views of time. Here we develop a new finite Benardete-like paradox. We then use this paradox to defend a companions in guilt argument that challenges recent applications of patchwork principles on behalf of the aforementioned finitist arguments. Finally, we develop another problem for those applications by (...) examining the notion of exact duplication. (shrink)

Background: Current practice frequently fails to provide care consistent with the preferences of decisionally-incapacitated patients. It also imposes significant emotional burden on their surrogates. Algorithmic-based patient preference predictors (PPPs) have been proposed as a possible way to address these two concerns. While previous research found that patients strongly support the use of PPPs, the views of surrogates are unknown. The present study thus assessed the views of experienced surrogates regarding the possible use of PPPs as a means to help make (...) treatment decisions for decisionally-incapacitated patients. -/- Methods: This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews to determine the views of experienced surrogates [n=26] who were identified from two academic medical centers and two community hospitals. The primary outcomes were respondents’ overall level of support for the idea of using PPPs and the themes related to their views on how a PPP should be used, if at all, in practice. -/- Results: Overall, 21 participants supported the idea of using PPPs. The remaining five indicated that they would not use a PPP because they made decisions based on the patient’s best interests, not based on substituted judgment. Major themes which emerged were that surrogates, not the patient’s preferences, should determine how treatment decisions are made, and concern that PPPs might be used to deny expensive care or be biased against minority groups. -/- Conclusions: Surrogates, like patients, strongly support the idea of using PPPs to help make treatment decisions for decisionally-incapacitated patients. These findings provide support for developing a PPP and assessing it in practice. At the same time, patients and surrogates disagree over whose preferences should determine how treatment decisions are made, including whether to use a PPP. These findings reveal a fundamental disagreement regarding the guiding principles for surrogate decision-making. Future research is needed to assess this disagreement and consider ways to address it. (shrink)

In The Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir diagnoses “woman” as the “lost sex,” torn between her individual autonomy and her “feminine destiny.” Becoming a “real woman” in patriarchal societies demands that women lose their authentic, autonomous selves to become the “inessential Other” for Man. To better understand this diagnosis and how women might refind themselves, I rehabilitate the influence of Søren Kierkegaard and his concept of repetition as what must be lost to be found again in Beauvoir’s account of freedom (...) and, specifically, the liberation of women. Beauvoir offers a dual account of repetition, that of mundane repetition and sacrificial repetition, bringing them to bear both on her diagnosis of women’s oppression and her theorization of our liberation. Sacrificial repetition becomes a temporality for freedom—one must be able to repeat or retake their autonomy continuously toward an open future. For this to happen concretely, Beauvoir insists that we must sacrifice the (racist, classist) patriarchal ideals of the “real woman” and “real man” as we retake our autonomy and reconfigure the meaning of sex difference anew. (shrink)

One typical realist response to the argument from underdetermination of theories by evidence is an appeal to epistemic criteria besides the empirical evidence to argue that, while scientific theories might be empirically equivalent, they are not epistemically equivalent. In this article, I spell out a new and reformulated version of the underdetermination argument that takes such criteria into account. I explain the notion of epistemic equivalence which this new argument appeals to, and argue that epistemic equivalence can be achieved in (...) several, significantly different, ways. On the basis of this ‘multiple realisability’ of epistemic equivalence, I then proceed to explain and examine some of the main consequences of this reformulated underdetermination argument for both realists and anti-realists. (shrink)

Keine ausführliche Beschreibung für "Das Grenz- und Auslanddeutschtum" verfügbar.

Machine generated contents note: Introduction; Part I. Theoretical Views about Pity and Fear as Aesthetic Emotions: 1. Drama and the emotions: an Indo-European connection? 2. Gorgias: a strange trio, the poetic emotions; 3. Plato: from reality to tragedy and back; 4. Aristotle: the first 'theorist' of the aesthetic emotions; Part II. Pity and Fear within Tragedies: 5. An introduction; 6. Aeschylus: Persians; 7. Prometheus Bound; 8. Sophocles: Ajax; 9. Euripides: Orestes; Appendix: catharsis and the emotions in the definition of tragedy (...) in the Poetics. (shrink)

When people are making certain medical decisions – especially potentially transformative ones – the specter of regret may color their choices. In this paper, I ask: can predicting that we will regret a decision in the future serve any justificatory role in our present decision-making? And if so, what role? While there are many pitfalls to such reasoning, I ultimately conclude that considering future retrospective emotions like regret in our decisionmaking can be both rational and authentic. Rather than indicating that (...) one is about to make a mistake or that there is some underlying value that one already cares about but is overlooking, the prediction that one will regret a decision in the future makes one confront how her present values and priorities may change as a result of her choice in ways she cannot presently anticipate. (shrink)

Anknupfend an die platonische Begriffsbildung der "Kalokagathie" ("Schongute") wird seit dem 19. Jahrhundert diskutiert, inwieweit asthetischen Kategorien Aussagekraft auch fur Politik und Staat zukommt.

Although ethics is increasingly integrated in the curriculum of U.S. medical schools, it remains not well integrated with system issues, and social and structural contexts of illness. Moreover, ethical analysis is not often taught as a clinical skill. To address these issues, an outcomes driven course in Social Sciences, Humanities, Ethics and Professionalism (SHEP) was created. Within the course, a web-based concept mapping device, SHEP Case Analysis Tool (SCAT), was created which schematizes the structure and flow of clinical cases from (...) diagnosis to treatment options, to shared decision making to outcome, and includes key stakeholders, influences, and structural features of the health system. In the course, each student analyzes a case in which they were directly involved using SCAT and presents their analysis to faculty and peers. This exercise 1) reinforces knowledge-based portions of the course pedagogy, 2) supports meta-cognition and critical thinking through concept mapping, 3) applies multidimensional analysis to identify ethical, social, and system issues that impact patient-care. 4) develops problem solving skills, 5) counters the hidden curriculum/support professional identity formation, and 6) develops skills in reflective discourse. This paper outlines the development and use of this concept mapping case analysis tool in an undergraduate medical education curriculum. (shrink)

Schon seit längerer Zeit hatten in der Pädagogik zwei Richtungen, eine mehr geisteswissenschaftlich-philosophische und eine betont empiristische, verhältnismäßig unabhängig voneinander bestanden, ohne sonderlich viel voneinander Notiz zu nehmen. Aber in letzter Zeit ist der seit langem untergründig schwelende Methodenstreit mit einer neuen Heftigkeit aufgeflammt. Neben manchen anderen Belegen gibt die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Brezinka und Rombach im letzten Jahrgang dieser Zeitschrift davon ein eindrucksvolles Zeugnis.

Sorgf ltig bearbeiteter Nachdruck des Originals von 1912.

Excerpt from Die Metaphysik und Ethik des Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita: Im Systematischen Zusammenhange DargestelBis auf den heutigen Tag ist die sogenannte areopagitische Frage noch nicht gelost, obwohl die Litteratur uber dieselbe bereits eine betrachtliche ist. Die erste Erwahnung der areopagitischen Schriften fand auf einer Zusammenkunft der monophysitischen Severianer und der Katholiker zu Konstantinopel im Jahre 532 statt. Bei dieser Konferenz beriefen sich die ersteren auf dieselben, wahrend die letzteren ihre Echtheit bestritten. Aber der Protest hielt nicht lange an; vielmehr hielt man (...) bis zum funfzehnten Jahrhundert an der Authentie dieser Schriften fest, und sowohl in der romischen wie in der syrischen und giechischen Kirche galten sie fur "wunderbare und fast gottliche Schriften." Da begann endlich im funfzehnten Jahrhundert der gelehrte und scharfsinnige Kritiker Laurentius Valla von neuem den Kampf gegen ihre Echtheit, ein Kampf, der bis auf unsere Zeit noch nicht entschieden ist. Die einen suchten mit allen erlaubten und unerlaubten Mitteln die Echtheit der areopagitischen Schriften nachzuweisen, wahrend die anderen im Gegensatz zu ihnen die Unechtheit derselben darzulegen sich bemuhten. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.". (shrink)

This paper focuses on the role of culpability in determining the degree of liability to defensive harm, and asks whether there are any restrictions on when culpability is relevant to liability. A natural first suggestion is that it is only relevant when combined with an actual threat of harm in the situation in which defensive harm becomes salient as a means of protection. The paper begins by considering the question of whether two people are equally liable to defensive harm in (...) a situation if both culpably intend to harm another, but due to circumstances outside the control of the two people only one has a chance of succeeding in causing harm. I argue that there is no difference in liability between the two. I then turn to a kind of slippery slope challenge that accepting this conclusion would lead to a vast over-inclusiveness in those liable to defensive harm, and consider a recent attempt at meeting it that requires that a person’s culpability can only affect liability if it concerns the very situation in which defensive harm is relevant. Finally, I put forward and assess a new way of meeting the challenge that appeals to a particular conception of culpability together with auxiliary theses concerning how culpability can decrease over time, among others. (shrink)

Recently, there have been several illuminating discussions highlighting a connection between the appropriate conditions for morally responsible agency and for valid informed consent in health care (including for personal medical decisions and for participation in clinical trials). In this chapter, I begin by drawing parallels between debates in both areas (e.g. “substantive” versus “procedural” accounts, “capacity” versus “flow” accounts) and then briefly defend the idea that we should focus on a particular family of substantive views that appeal to high-enough quality (...) opportunities for decision-making which are determined by both agents’ reasons-responsive capacities and situational factors. Notably, even if reasons-responsiveness conditions feature in both accounts of responsible agency and of informed consent, it remains an open question just how similar the conditions are in each area. In particular, since the basis for and the quality of our reasons-responsive capacities come in degrees, there is a question of when a threshold is met so that a person can be said to have a capacity, or a sufficiently high-quality capacity, which is a difficult question to answer in both realms. In this chapter, I assess possible answers and consider how constrained those answers should be by independent reasons to treat responsible agency and eligibility for informed consent similarly. (shrink)

JANSSEN: DAS ERLEBENDE ICH UND SEIN DASEIN.

Keine ausführliche Beschreibung für "Die Ontologie der Kultur" verfügbar.