The purpose of this article is to present a summary of a consistent European Union (EU) energy and energy-related emissions outlook for the period to 2020. The material presented here is based on quantitative analysis and on a process of communication with and feedback from a number of energy experts and organizations. All the results presented for EU energy trends are based on the PRIMES partial equilibrium model for the European energy system, version 2. The PRIMES model provides simulation of (...) the energy system and the decisions of the agents and the markets, covering in detail several sectors, uses, and technologies. The results of this analysis indicate that the EU will not meet the obligations for greenhouse gas emissions reductions it undertook at Kyoto unless it introduces policy initiatives for the abatement of energy-related emissions. Although the industrial, tertiary, household, and transportation sectors can all make significant contributions to CO2 emissions reductions, the electricity- and steam-generation sector appears to offer the greatest potential because of its relative flexibility in terms of technology and fuel choice. Finally, when the only criterion for emissions reductions is economic efficiency, our analysis indicates that reduction levels differ significantly among EU countries. (shrink)

The Euthyphro might well be given to undergraduates to read early in their philosophical training. The arguments are apparently simple, but some of them, as I shall show, lead naturally on to thorny problems of modern philosophy. Another benefit that could be gained from reading the Euthyphro is that the reader may learn to be forewarned against some common fallacies and debating tricks in moral disputes.

Rid and Wendler propose the development of a Patient Preference Predictor (PPP), an actuarial model for predicting incapacitated patient’s life-sustaining treatment preferences across a wide range of end-of-life scenarios. An actuarial approach to end-of-life decision making has enormous potential, but transferring the logic of actuarial prediction to end-of-life decision making raises several conceptual complexities and logistical problems that need further consideration. Actuarial models have proven effective in targeted prediction tasks, but no evidence supports their effectiveness in the kind of broad (...) spectrum prediction task that is the proposed goal of the PPP. We argue that a more focused approach, targeting specific medical conditions and generating treatment predictions based on the preferences of individuals with actual disease experience, is both more firmly grounded in past research and is a more prudent initial strategy for exploring the efficacy of actuarial prediction in end-of-life decision making. (shrink)

Doubts the adequacy of teh accounts of Humes' successful refutation of the theory of a social contract. Groups Humes' refutation into three arguments: 1) hardly any social contracts are idscernible in the hoistories of actual governments 2) contract theory must be wrong because it conflicts with ordinary people's views on the sunject 3) utilitarian Argues that it is doubtful whether any of these arguments or clusters of arguments really refutes contract theory; certainly, none achieves a refutation of the 'simple and (...) overwhelming' kind so often attributed to Hume. (shrink)

One thing which has struck me most as I have read the articles of the Encyclopedia of Unified Science is the complexity that can be discerned in many of the operations which for the purpose of the article are treated as elementary. It is apparent that Unity of Science, like every other discipline, has its own stock of “atoms of discourse”, suited to its own purposes. Experience in physics would prepare one to expect that for certain purposes it may be (...) profitable to attempt to analyze these atoms further. The atom of discourse, or presupposition commonly made by most adherents of the Unity of Science movement, with which I shall be chiefly concerned, is with regard to the nature of “science“. My present concern with this matter has arisen from my extreme difficulty in communicating my meaning to other people. The difficulty has been a genuine puzzle to me, until quite recently a discussion with one of my colleagues disclosed a difference of attitude on fundamental matters so revelatory that I am encouraged to return again to the attack. (shrink)

The problem of ethics may arise in any circumstances, at all times and in all places. For it is an ever-present problem which confronts every individual at all stages of his career after the dawn of consciousness. It is not limited to any particular aspect or department of life; it concerns the whole life of every human being from the cradle to the grave. Its existence may not be consciously recognized, and generally the choice of right and wrong action is (...) unaccompanied by reflection; but the problem begins to operate as soon as the development of character begins, and people are always deciding between good and evil, whether they look inside their minds or not. For the formation of character depends on the manner in which the problems of conduct or morals are solved by each individual for himself. If he solves them correctly, he becomes good; If he solves them badly, he sows in himself the seeds of evil. The general problem, moreover, is essentially the same for all, though in each particular case its specific nature may vary according to particular circumstances. (shrink)

Social and political scientists, historians and others, have put forward a number of widely differing views concerning the ‘character’ of Islamic millenarian and/or Mahdist movements in Africa. The same is true of course with regard to the opinions ofscholars concerning the transformative capacity of Islam as an ideology. In this paper I want to look at one aspect only of Islamic millenarianism in the West African context, viz. its allegedly revolutionary character.

Medieval Thomists such as the Dominican master John of Paris, on the other hand, attempted to defend Aquinas against such charges. Adopting Thomas’s notion of the passivity of the will, John nonetheless denied that such a position necessarily interferes with moral responsibility. He justified this stance on the grounds that an agent’s freedom is only violated when it is necessitated contrary to its own nature. Because the will is naturally suited to follow practical deliberation, its necessitation by the intellect leaves (...) its freedom intact. (shrink)

Tocqueville se montre préoccupé par le fait religieux dans l’ensemble de son œuvre. Il ne se contente pas d’observer le rapport de la religion au politique, il cherche ce qu’elle doit être pour s’ouvrir un avenir, et cela justifie une étude théologique de son concept de religion.Dans la 1ère partie de la Démocratie en Amérique , il souligne l’influence des croyances religieuses sur les mœurs politiques des Américains et la particulière inclination du christianisme aux institutions démocratiques. Sa pensée s’élève toutefois (...) à la conception d’un rapport générique entre la religion et la société politique, conception qu’il développera dans la 2e partie du même ouvrage , puis dans l’Ancien Régime et la Révolution . Il croit remarquer une évolution continue du xvie au xviiie siècle, qui tend à établir l’égalité et la ressemblance des citoyens et à substituer le libre examen des croyances dogmatiques au principe d’autorité. Il en conclut que l’opinion commune est appelée à jouer un rôle prépondérant dans les sociétés égalitaires, et il y voit un danger pour l’avenir de la religion, si elle se referme sur son dogmatisme, mais aussi pour l’avenir des sociétés démocratiques, qui ont plus qu’aucune autre besoin de la religion. Mais il juge que la religion chrétienne est mieux armée que les autres pour relever ce défi, pourvu que les chrétiens ne s’érigent pas en adversaires de la liberté.La religion occupe donc une place centrale dans la réflexion politique de Tocqueville, lui-même tourmenté depuis son adolescence par les questions religieuses. Son penchant croissant au doute le prédisposait à recueillir l’héritage des Lumières, mais n’a jamais entamé son espérance dans l’avenir du christianisme.Throughout his writings, Tocqueville shows that he was preoccupied by the religious phenomenon. He not only observed the relation to politics, but he looked for what religion should be in order to open itself to the future. This justifies a theological study of his concept of religion.In the first part of la Démocratie en Amérique , he pointed out the influence of religious beliefs on the political morals of Americans and the particular inclination of Christianity to democratic institutions. His thought, nevertheless, developed towards a conception of the generic rapport between religion and political society, an idea that he develops in the second part of the same work , and then in l’Ancien Régime et la Révolution . He thought that he saw a continual evolution from the 16th to the 18th century, which tended to establish equality and a similarity of citizens and to substitute the free examine of dogmatic beliefs for the principle of authority. He concluded from this that common opinion is called to play a preponderant role in egalitarian societies. He saw there a danger for the future of religion, if it closed itself on its dogmatism, but also for the future of democratic societies, which would need for religion more than any other type of society. But he judged that the Christian religion was better armed than others to take up the challenge, as long as Christians did not set themselves up as adversaries of freedom.Religion, then, occupies a central place in the political reflection of Tocqueville, who was tormented by religious questions from the time of his adolescence. His growing inclination to doubt predisposed him to welcome the heritage of the Enlightenment, but not so far as to weaken his hope in the future of Christianity. (shrink)

This dialogue on thought and language is a sequel to my dialogue ‘Thought and Thinking’, but can be read independently of it. The five disputants are the same as in the previous dialogue, namely Socrates; an imaginary neuroscientist from California ; an Oxford don from the 1950s ; a Scottish post-doctoral student; and John Locke. The discussion takes place in Elysium in the early evening after dinner. They discuss the relationship between what one thinks and what one says, examine the (...) reasons for supposing that there must be a language of thought and show why there cannot be one, investigate the supposition that thought must have a medium – that one must think in something – and demonstrate that it cannot have one. They investigate whether there can be non-linguistic thinking and whether non language-using animals can be said to think, and determine the limits of thought and thinking. (shrink)