In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:THE MUNUS OF TRANSMITTING HUMAN LIFE: A NEW APPROACH TO I-IUMANAE VITAE JANET E. SMITH University of Dallas Irving, Texas 'TIRE ONLY ACQUAINTANCE 1bhat most rea;ders have with the Latin of Humanae Vitae is the tit1le. It is likey that fow laymen and perhaps eV'en fow schofars make ire:ferenoe to the Latin text; indeed, it is ireported that I-Iumanae Vitae was originally composed in ltalian, and it seems (...) that aH available translations of the text al'e based primarily on the Italian V'ersion. But since the official text of Humanae Vitae is in Latin and since translations are necessa11ily deficient, we shouild not be surprised that the ava:ilahle translations fail to convey a:M the nuances of the official text. (Latin, of course, is tihe langua:ge in which all official documents of the Church are written.) This study seeks to show that attenti¥eness to certain words fa the Latin text, most particularly the word munus, uncovers important eonnections between Humanae Vitae and pe['spect[ves of the Church, perspectives particularly highlighted in the documents of Vatican II. It also seeks to show that the La.tin provides greater philosophical precision for certain key teaohings of the text, most particularly section 11: "each and every maritail act must remain open to proc11eation." It is ii.mportant to note that some of the crucial Latin words of the document cal'ry connotations tihat cannot possibly be captured ihy 1any one English word. Indeed, some of the words convey concepts and attitudes that are quite foreign to speak:iers of modern English; to convey the meaning of some terms requires a. fairly lengthy expl,ication of notions not immed :iate1ly and directly graspaible hy ail readers. Even to the reade[' of Latin, the text does not 'easily ~eld its secrets. The 385 386 JANET E. SMITH Latin of the document has no identifiahle souTee of reliabJe deoipherment; it is a kind of " modern " 0 1 r " Church " Latin, which is an odd comhinat~on of elassical Latin and the lang1uage the Ohurch ha:s deve1oped oveil.' the centuries. The method of translation employed here has invo1 lved consultation of classical and medieval dictionaries, reference to arguably rep-!l1esentative classical and medieval 1 authors, tracing of the word 'being ioonsidered through t1he documents of Vatican II, con- 'sideration of 1appearance of the word in other Church documents, cross-reference to other uses of the word within Huma,nae Vitae itself, and reference to the Italian" 1 original." 1 l In preparation for this article reference was made to six English translations : (a) the translation done by the NC News Service, made widely available by the Daughters of Saint Paul, Of Human Life (Boston, Mass.: Daughters of St. Paul, 1968), hereafter referred to as the "usual translation" and designated by HY; (b) the translation by the Catholic Truth Society printed in John Horgan, Humanae Vitae and the Bishops (Shannon, Ireland: Irish University Press, 1972), 33-53; this translation was modified and reprinted in (c) The Pope Speaks 13 (1969): 329-346, and in (d) the Vatican Press Office translation, " Encyclical Letter on the Regulation of Births " in Vatican II: More Post-Conciliar Doauments, ed. Austin Flannery, O.P. (Northport, N. Y.: Costello Publishing Company, 1982), 397-416; (e) the translation by Rev. Marc Calegari, S.J., Humanae Vitae (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1978), which has undergone a further, as of yet unpublished, revision. 'There is one translation (f) that was made entirely from the Latin, by Rev. A. J. Durand, Humanae Vitae: A New Translation (Bethlehem, Pa.: Catechetical Communications; no date given); it is, though, not widely available. Rev. Calegari, in private communication with this author, noted that the document was originally written in Italian, though the Latin text is the official text. He also stated that the modern language versions were made from the Italian text. My comparisons of the translations of Humanae Vitae with the Italian and the Latin versions indicate that Rev. Calegari is correct in saying that most modern versions are based on the Italian, though a few, most notably that by the Catholic Truth Society, have clearly made reference to the... (shrink)

In their highly topical paper, Grahamet alargued that Trusted Research Environments (TREs) are not actually about trust because they reduce or remove ‘…the need for trust in the use and sharing of patient health data’. We believe this is fundamentally mistaken. TREs mitigate or remove some risks, but they do not address all public concerns. In this regard, TREs provide evidence for people to decide whether the bodies holding and using their data can be trusted. TREs may make it easier (...) for people to trust but there is still a need for that trust. (shrink)

Its critics to the contrary, the “gift of life” metaphor is not to be blamed for the indebtedness and guilt that organ recipients often experience. It is certainly misused, however, both by post‐transplant caregivers, who exploit it to manipulate recipients' behavior, and by the organ procurement system, which has failed to understand that the decision to give the gift of life must be approached communally.

Du sommaire: Ambiguite et comprehension du langage (Paul Bogaards, Johan Rooryck). - Why pluralities don't mean a thing (Crit Cremers). - Aspects of interlingual ambiguity: polyglot punning (Dirk Delabastita). - Les feux de Saint-Antoine (Sjef Houppermans). - The semantics of Dutch moeten 'must, should, have to' from a typological and a relevance-theoretical perspective (Theo Janssen). - L'ambiguite en langue et en discours (Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni).".

Pada 11 Oktober 2012 Gereja Katolik merayakan 50 tahun dibukanya Konsili Vatikan II. Namun demikian, 16 dokumen yang dihasilkan selama Konsili itu berlangsung (11 Oktober 1962-7 Desember 1965) belum dikenal oleh semua umat Katolik. Bahkan ada tidak sedikit umat Katolik yang belum pernah melihat dokumen-dokumen tersebut. Ada pula yang mengatakan bahwa kendati sudah membacanya, namun merasakan sangat sulit untuk memahaminya. Ada pula yang ketika melihat buku tebal yang memuat dokumen-dokumen tersebut langsung merasa terintimidasi dan ketakutan (intimadated), lalu tidak berani membukanya. (...) Sudah ada berbagai macam upaya untuk menyampaikan isi dan semangat dari Konsili Vatikan II kepada seluruh anggota Gereja Katolik. Salah satu cara adalah menerbitkan buku untuk mengulas isi dokumen-dokumen tersebut. Salah satu dari sekian banyak buku yang pantas dibaca adalah karya Maureen Sulivan, seorang assistant professor ilmu Teologi di Saint Anselm College, Manchester, New Hapshire, Amerika Serikat. Buku yang ditulis dalam bentuk tanya jawab ini dibagi menjadi 9 bab. Bab 1 berbicara mengenai “Pengumuman” diadakannya Konsili yang menggemparkan para pemimpin Gereja, khususnya anggota Dewan Kardinal dan Kuria di Vatikan, yang merasa bahwa Konsili tidak diperlukan. Dalam bab ini dibicarakan tentang arti dari Konsili yang disebut sebagai ekumenis dan pastoral, alasan perlu diadakannya Konsili, persiapan yang dibutuhkan, serta tujuan yang ingin dicapai dengan diadakannya Konsili Vatikan II. Secara khusus disebutkan peran almarhum Paus Johanes XXIII, yang ketika mengumumkan untuk mengadakan Konsili, beliau baru tiga bulan diangkat menjadi Paus. Lewat Konsili ini beliau menginginkan agar Gereja mampu menemukan cara agar iman Kristiani dapat disampaikan kepada dunia dan dimengerti oleh dunia. Demi tujuan itu Gereja perlu “membuka jendela” agar “angin segar memasuki dirinya (hlm. 29).” Gereja perlu melakukan aggiornemento, pembaruan diri. Bab 2 mengulas mengenai orang-orang yang berperan dalam KonsiliVatikan II, ketegangan-ketegangan yang muncul antara mereka yang ingin mengadakan pembaruan dengan mereka yang ingin mempertahankan status quo Gereja, serta peran media massa. Selain sekitar 2200 peserta (Kardinal, Uskup, dan Abas), juga terdapat ratusan teolog yang berperan sebagai penasihat bagi para peserta Konsili (periti), antara lain dengan memberikan seminar-seminar mengenai topik-topik teologis kepada para peserta Konsili (hlm. 35-36). Selain itu juga terdapat para pengamat dari Gereja Ortodoks, Gereja-gereja Protestan main streams (Lutheran, Episkopalian, Anglikan, Metodis, Presbyteran, dan Quakers), dan Yudaisme. Hadirnya para pengamat dari kalangan khusus ini merupakan sesuatu yang baru dan revolusioner dalam Konsili. Secara khusus ditampilkan seorang tokoh pembaru: Kardinal Bea, ketua Sekretariat untuk Kesatuan Umat Kristiani. Ia begitu dikenal dengan ucapannya yang sangat menggemparkan di depan para wartawan: “Members of the other Christian Churches who are living today never ’left’ the Church. So they cannot ‘return,’ can they? We are talking about going together, hand in hand, toward a new future” (hlm. 33). Tokoh pembaru lain adalah Kardinal Achile Liénart, seorang Kardinal senior dari Prancis, yang pada hari ketiga Konsili menolak untuk memilih dari daftar nama yang sudah disiapkan (kebanyakan adalah anggota Kuria) untuk menjadi ketua dari 10 komisi yang akan mengendalikan agenda Konsili. Ia mengusulkan supaya para peserta Konsili memilih orang-orangnya sendiri. Usulan ini didukung oleh Kardinal Josef Fring dari Jerman, dan kemudian diterima oleh semua perserta Konsili. Tokoh pembaru lain adalah Kardinal Jan Alfrink dari Belanda, dan Kardinal Leo Josef Suenens dari Belgia (hlm. 38-38). Di pihak lain, ada tokoh sangat konservatif yang mencoba menghambat jalannya Konsili: Kardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, seorang anggota Kuria dan ketua The Holy Office (sekarang dikenal sebagi Kogregasi untuk Ajaran Iman), yang terkenal dengan ucapannya “Semper idem” (Selalu sama). Ia antara lain melawan hadirnya para pengamat dalam Konsili (hlm. 33), mencoba melarang kuliah-kuliah yang diberikan kepada para peserta Konsili oleh para Yesuit dari Institut Biblis di Roma, bahkan meminta Paus Yohanes XXIII untuk mengusir teolog Yesuit, Karl Rahner dari Roma, yang tentu saja ditolak oleh Paus (hlm. 35). Ia menolak penggunaan bahasa-bahasa lokal untuk Misa, yang intinya adalah pemindahan kekuasaan dari hierarki kepada Umat (hlm. 43), menghambat disahkannya kolegialitas para Uskup dan menandaskan bahwa Komisi Teologi yang ia pimpin memiliki otoritas di atas Konsili (hlm. 55). Dalam bab ini juga disebutkan hal yang baru dalam Konsili ini adalah hadirnya para wartawan dari pelbagai media massa dari seluruh dunia........................................... Sebagai penutup, dalam bab 9, Sullivan menegaskan bahwa ada dua hal yang benar-benar perlu diperhatikan untuk zaman ini sebagai agenda yang belum selesai dari Konsili Vatikan II: kolegialitas (relasi atara Paus dan Uskup) dan peran kaum perempuan dalam Gereja. Akhirnya, pada awal abad ke-21 ini Sullivan mengajak kita semua untuk bertanya: Apakah Gereja kita sungguh-sungguh dapat menjawab tantangan-tantangan pada zaman ini?; Apakah Gereja kita dapat membuat pesan Injil relevan untuk zaman ini?; Apakah Gereja kita dapat membangkitkan entusisme baru yang dapat membangun sebuah generasi baru?; Apakah Gereja dapat meredakan berbagai macam ketegangan yang akhir-akhir ini menggoncang “bahtera Petrus?” Dengan bijak Sullivan mengatakan bahwa kita perlu terus berharap, dan harapan itu akan menjadi semakin produktif kalau kita selalu berpegang pada nasihat almarhum Yohanes XXIII: “Untuk hal-hal yang mendasar, kesatuan; untuk hal-hal yang meragukan, kebebasan; dan untuk segala sesuatu, cinta kasih” (hlm. 124). Buku ini sangat komprehensif mengulas Konsili Vatikan II dan disampaikan dengan bahasa yang sederhana. Buku ini sangat membantu para pembaca karena dilengkapi dengan daftar isi yang mendetil, daftar semua dokumen yang dihasilkan oleh Konsili Vatikan II beserta dengan waktu promulgasinya, daftar istilah-istilah yang penting berkaitan dengan Konsili Vatikan II, serta indeks subjek. Semoga dengan membaca buku ini para pembaca terdorong untuk membuka dan menemukan pesan-pesan penting dari dokumen-dokumen Konsili Vatikan II. (Ignatius Madya Utama, Program Studi Ilmu Teologi, Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Driyarkara, Jakarta). (shrink)

The following interview of Mark William Westmoreland with Anthony Paul Smith–well-known scholar and translator of François Laruelle –considers both implications and extensions of Laruelle's non-philosophy for contemporary thought. Smith has helped bring about a surge of interest in Laruelle due to his many translations of his texts as well as being the author or co-editor of several books on Laruelle. Discussed are in particular the difficulties and joys of translating and the usefulness of Laruelle's thought for (...) class='Hi'>Smith's own work, especially in environmental and animal studies. Also considered are some themes of non-philosophy, the adaptability of Laruelle's thought for various disciplines, as well as new paths for Laruelle studies –new, unforeseen landscapes and uses of non-philosophy –that explore social phenomena such as race, racism, sexism, victim a.o. (shrink)

In this paper we discuss three different kinds of disagreement that have been, or could reasonably be, characterized as deep disagreements. Principle level disagreements are disagreements over the truth of epistemic principles. Sub-principle level deep disagreements are disagreements over how to assign content to schematic norms. Finally, framework-level disagreements are holistic disagreements over meaning not truth, that is over how to understand networks of epistemic concepts and the beliefs those concepts compose. Within the context of each of these kinds of (...) disagreement it is not possible for the parties to the dispute to rationally persuade one another through only offering epistemic reasons for their conflicting points of view. However, in spite of the inability to rationally persuade, we explore how it may nevertheless be possible to rationally navigate each of these varieties of deep disagreement. (shrink)

In their article ’Is Pregnancy a Disease? A Normative Approach’, Anna Smajdor and Joona Räsänen contend that, on several of the most prominent accounts of disease, pregnancy should be considered a disease. More specifically, of the five accounts they discuss, each renders pregnancy a disease or suffers serious conceptual problems otherwise. They take issue specifically with the dysfunction account of disease and argue that it suffers several theoretical difficulties. In this response, we focus on defending the dysfunction account against their (...) main objections and show why a version of the dysfunction account is viable on account of the indispensability of normativity in biology and medicine. After disarming their main objections to the dysfunction account, we briefly respond to their treatment of the normality of pregnancy and then draw a distinction between adverse symptoms and underlying causes to show why even though pregnancy may have ’disease-like’ features, it is not a disease. (shrink)

This collection was prepared in the belief that the most useful and revealing of anyone's writings are often those shorter essays penned in conflict with...

Scientific authorship serves to identify and acknowledge individuals who “contribute significantly” to published research. However, specific authorship norms and practices often differ within and across disciplines, labs, and cultures. As a consequence, authorship disagreements are commonplace in team research. This study aims to better understand the prevalence of authorship disagreements, those factors that may lead to disagreements, as well as the extent and nature of resulting misbehavior. Methods include an international online survey of researchers who had published from 2011 to (...) 2015. Of the 6673 who completed the main questions pertaining to authorship disagreement and misbehavior, nearly half reported disagreements regarding authorship naming; and discipline, rank, and gender had significant effects on disagreement rates. Paradoxically, researchers in multidisciplinary teams that typically reflect a range of norms and values, were less likely to have faced disagreements regarding authorship. Respondents reported having witnessed a wide range of misbehavior including: instances of hostility, undermining of a colleague’s work during meetings/talks, cutting corners on research, sabotaging a colleague’s research, or producing fraudulent work to be more competitive. These findings suggest that authorship disputes may contribute to an unhealthy competitive dynamic that can undermine researchers’ wellbeing, team cohesion, and scientific integrity. (shrink)

This volume brings together mostly previously unpublished studies by prominent historians, classicists, and philosophers on the roles and effects of religion in Socratic philosophy and on the trial of Socrates. Among the contributors are Thomas C. Brickhouse, Asli Gocer, Richard Kraut, Mark L. McPherran, Robert C. T. Parker, C. D. C. Reeve, Nicholas D. Smith, Gregory Vlastos, Stephen A. White, and Paul B. Woodruff.

In recent discussions concerning the definition of argument, it has been maintained that the word ‘argument’ exhibits the process-product ambiguity, or an act/object ambi-guity. Drawing on literature on lexical ambiguity we argue that ‘argument’ is not ambiguous. The term ‘argument’ refers to an object, not to a speech act. We also examine some of the important implications of our argument by considering the question: what sort of abstract objects are arguments?

Authorship is commonly used as the basis for the measurement of research productivity. It influences career progression and rewards, making it a valued commodity in a competitive scientific environment. To better understand authorship practices amongst collaborative teams, this study surveyed authors on collaborative journal articles published between 2011 and 2015. Of the 8364 respondents, 1408 responded to the final open-ended question, which solicited additional comments or remarks regarding the fair distribution of authorship in research teams. This paper presents the analysis (...) of these comments, categorized into four main themes: (1) disagreements, (2) questionable behavior, (3) external influences regarding authorship, and (4) values promoted by researchers. Results suggest that some respondents find ways to effectively manage disagreements in a collegial fashion. Conversely, others explain how distribution of authorship can become a “blood sport” or a “horror story” which can negatively affect researchers’ wellbeing, scientific productivity and integrity. Researchers fear authorship discussions and often try to avoid openly discussing the situation which can strain team interactions. Unethical conduct is more likely to result from deceit, favoritism, and questionable mentorship and may become more egregious when there is constant bullying and discrimination. Although values of collegiality, transparency and fairness were promoted by researchers, rank and need for success often overpowered ethical decision-making. This research provides new insight into contextual specificities related to fair authorship distribution that can be instrumental in developing applicable training tools to identify, prevent, and mitigate authorship disagreement. (shrink)

In their article ‘Is Pregnancy a Disease? A Normative Approach’, Anna Smajdor and Joona Räsänen contend that, on several of the most prominent accounts of disease, pregnancy should be considered a disease. More specifically, of the five accounts they discuss, each renders pregnancy a disease or suffers serious conceptual problems otherwise. They take issue specifically with the dysfunction account of disease and argue that it suffers several theoretical difficulties. In this response, we focus on defending the dysfunction account against their (...) main objections and show why a version of the dysfunction account is viable on account of the indispensability of normativity in biology and medicine. After disarming their main objections to the dysfunction account, we briefly respond to their treatment of the normality of pregnancy and then draw a distinction between adverse symptoms and underlying causes to show why even though pregnancy may have ‘disease-like’ features, it is not a disease. (shrink)

Continental philosophy of religion has been dominated for two decades by "postsecular" and "postmodern" thought. This volume brings together a vanguard of scholars to ask what comes after the postsecular and the postmodern that is, what is Continental philosophy of religion now? Against the subjugation of philosophy to theology, After the Postsecular and the Postmodern: New Essays in Continental Philosophy of Religion argues that philosophy of religion must either liberate itself from theological norms or mutate into a new practice of (...) thinking in order to confront the challenges religion presents for our time. The essays do not propose a new orthodoxy but set the stage for new debates by reclaiming a practice of philosophy of religion that recovers and draws on the insights of a distinctly modern tradition of Continental philosophy, confronts the challenge of rethinking the secular in the light of the postsecular event, and calls for a move from strictly critical to speculative thought in order to experiment with what philosophy can do. This collection of essays is indispensable for anyone interested in the relationship between philosophy and theology, political questions regarding religion and in what contemporary speculative Continental philosophy has to add to philosophy of religion. (shrink)

In recent discussions concerning the definition of argument, it has been maintained that the word ‘argument’ exhibits the process-product ambiguity, or an act/object ambigu-ity. Drawing on literature on lexical ambiguity we argue that ‘argument’ is not ambiguous. The term ‘argu-ment’ refers to an object, not to a speech act. We also examine some of the important implications of our argument by considering the question: what sort of abstract objects are arguments?

Paul Standish:Some people might expect us to start by explaining why we have written this chapter as a dialogue. Leaving aside the fact that Plato – to whom all philosophy, it has been said, is a series of footnotes – wrote in dialogue form, and never seems to have felt the need to tell us why, we might say that we have written it in this way because it is a dialogue. We push ideas to and fro, question each (...) other, disagree with each other, and so on.Reader:You say that it is a dialogue. Do you mean that this chapter is a transcription of an actual conversation between you?Richard Smith:There have been so many conversations among us that these pages are pretty well bound to be true to our spoken words at some time or another. And of course these conversations have involved Paul Smeyers too, and – for many years – Nigel Blake, whose presence can also be detected in these pages.Reader:So you are saying that there has been something essentially dialogic in your relationship with Paul Smeyers, and you felt that only a dialogue could do justice to that.Paul:Pretty much so. And while there is something worryingly self-confirming in justifying the dialogue form with a dialogic explanation, it would be odd to cast the justification in some other prose form, as if that were superior to dialogue in respect of clarity or persuasive power or in some other way.Richard:Then too dialogue is a fine medium for reminiscence, allowing for uncertainty, different perspectives, and debate rather than assuming that veridical record is what is at issue here.Paul:In any case, reminiscence is largely a way of revisiting philosophical projects and arguments from the past in order to subject their soundness to fresh critique.Reader:So, if I understand you, this dialogue is both true and fictive, and reminiscence looks forward, as much as back.Richard:Splendid. I only hope that what follows isn’t a disappointment to you. (shrink)

An egalitarian interpretation and defence of Rawls's principles of justice and their institutional and policy implications in response to G. A. Cohen's criticisms of Rawls's alleged justification of unequalizing incentives.

A critical survey of arguments for and against the morality and the legality of recreational drug use, deploying Feinberg's analysis of liberty-limiting principles.

In Principles of Non-Philosophy, Laruelle develops the concepts and method of a more democratic form of thought where neither science nor philosophy is subjected to one another, but brought together in a more productive theoretical and practical relationship. While the potential importance of this project is clear, Laruelle remains famously difficult. Anthony Paul Smith provides an introduction and guide to the text that situates you amongst the figures and concepts Laruelle engaged with, provides a foothold for your own (...) understanding and, more importantly, potential use of the project of non-philosophy. (shrink)