Background and rationale Several factors that motivate individuals to participate in non-therapeutic studies have been identified. This study was conducted as limited data is available regarding these motivations from developing countries. Methods This was a single-centre study conducted over 4 months in which a questionnaire was administered to 102 healthy participants and 16 patient participants who had earlier taken part in non-therapeutic studies at our centre. Descriptive statistics and univariate analysis were used to analyse data. Results The most common motivation (...) among healthy participants was financial reward (65%) followed by altruism, free medical check up, curiosity and personal health benefit. Patient participants, however, most commonly said they consented to take part in the trial as they were ‘invited to participate by the treating physician’ (88%). In comparison with the patient participants, healthy participants were more likely to be satisfied with the financial reward (p=0.02), and recommend participation in studies to friends or relatives (p=0.0013). Conclusions The most common motivating factor to participate in non-therapeutic studies appears to be different for healthy participants (financial reward) and patient participants (invitation to participate by the physician). Participants also felt that adequate information and care was given to them during the trial, and that they would participate in future clinical studies, and would also recommend such studies to their friends. (shrink)

Neurosurgery for psychiatric disorders, also sometimes referred to as psychosurgery, is rapidly evolving, with new techniques and indications being investigated actively. Many within the field have suggested that some form of guidelines or regulations are needed to help ensure that a promising field develops safely. Multiple countries have enacted specific laws regulating NPD. This article reviews NPD-specific laws drawn from North and South America, Asia and Europe, in order to identify the typical form and contents of these laws and to (...) set the groundwork for the design of an optimal regulation for the field. Key challenges for this design that are revealed by the review are how to define the scope of the law, what types of regulations are required, and how to approach international harmonization given the potential migration of researchers and patients. (shrink)

Guide to conditional Relations. Part 1. PTS series IV. 3. By U Narada. with 8 charts.

Leitura que qualifica a discussão intelectual sobre o destino das utopias revolucionárias no fim do século XX. Obra de teoria política, afirma que no marxismo há uma ética que, apoiada na democracia socialista, articula-se cognitivamente com a consciência de classe do proletariado.

O objetivo deste ensaio é examinar a recente crítica de Maria Lasonen-Aarnio à solução anulabilista do paradoxo do dogmatismo. Tal paradoxo consiste no argumento de que certos princípios epistêmicos autorizam qualquer sujeito cognoscente a desconsiderar contraevidências para o que ele sabe. Porém, esta atitude dogmática é comumente julgada como injustificada e o sujeito que a toma é comumente julgado como irracional. A solução anulabilista do paradoxo do dogmatismo foi posta em circulação por Gilbert Harman e sugere que o problema é (...) resolvido assim que se abandona a suposição de que o conhecimento não pode ser derrotado por contraevidências. Lasonen-Aarnio acredita que tal solução é insatisfatória porque ainda haveria, em certas circunstâncias, justificação para ser dogmático mesmo admitindo e sofrendo derrota epistêmica. Desse modo, a solução anulabilista deixa ainda alguma medida de dogmatismo autorizada para o sujeito. Iniciaremos com uma introdução ao problema, explicando em que consiste o paradoxo do dogmatismo e expondo as diferentes versões nas quais foi apresentado. Em seguida, vamos nos voltar para uma versão do argumento pró-dogmatismo. Consideraremos, então, a solução anulabilista proposta por Harman e a crítica de Lasonen-Aarnio. Por fim, apresentaremos três objeções à eficácia da crítica de Lasonen-Aarnio. (shrink)

Quem quer que de algum modo tenha se ocupado da teoria da poesia, e particularmente da tragédia, recordar-se-á de uma passagem em Aristóteles que causou muita dificuldade aos intérpretes, sem que pudessem concordar completamente sobre o seu significado. Numa caracterização mais precisa da tragédia, o grande homem parece esperar dela que, por meio da encenação de ações e acontecimentos que suscitam compaixão e medo, purifique (reinigen) o ânimo do espectador das paixões mencionadas. Acredito poder comunicar de melhor maneira meus pensamentos (...) e minha convicção sobre a passagem mencionada por meio de uma tradução dela. (shrink)

xs1F61ς … xs22EFξειργxs22EFσατο of MSS. is generally corrected to the third person plural, but it would be more like Thucydides to xs22EFξεxs22EFργαστο write: this would then be another instance of the corruption of pluperfects, such as S000983880001956X_inline1 into xs1F20γγxs22EFλλετο and the like, of which many instances are given by Cobet in Nov. Lect. 422, Var. Lect. 253. In the old edition of Poppo, 1826, vol. ii. pt. ii. p. 297, xs22EFξxs22EFπγαστο is given as contained in Cod. Bas. ex emend., but (...) it is not noticed by Poppo-Stahl or recent editors. Ως with the pluperfect is Thucydidean: Mr. Marchant on ii. 59 refers to iii. 23, 1; 26, 4; 27, 1; 69, 2. See the remarks of Poppo in vol. i. part ii. p. 44 sq. on this MS. (shrink)

I. Eth. Nic. III. c. I, § 16. In spite of what Bernays and others have done to clear up this chapter, many perplexities remain. To some of these I propose later to return, but here I confine myself to one. Among the possible circumstances of an act, ignorance of which is excusable and may excuse, is enumerated τò ο νεκα. Nothing but desperation could have led the commentators to suggest that here τò ο νεκα means the actual effect or (...) result of the act . It may be sufficient to quote the notes ad loc. of these two scholars: 1. Stewart: ‘The o νεκα here is not, as usual, the intention of the doer, for he cannot be ignorant of what he intends to do; but the outcome or result of what he actually does, which is the opposite of the intention.’. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Hume's Reading of Bayle: An Inquiry into the Source and Role of the Memoranda J. P. PITTION MY PURPOSE IN THIS PAPER is to discuss an aspect of Hume's reading of Pierre Bayle, the French "Philosopher of Rotterdam. ''1 I am not concerned here with the identification of Hume's direct borrowings from Bayle in the Treatise, nor with the much wider problem of a probable influence of Bayle on (...) Hume. It is indeed possible to identify in the Treatise a number of specific points taken from Bayle. Kemp Smith listed four at least: the account of skepticism, the discussion of Spinoza, the discussion of animal intelligence, and the criticism of the argument from design. 2 All of these come from Bayle's Dictionnaire. External evidence confirms that in 1732 Hume had a work of Bayle, presumably a copy of the Dictionnaire. Other borrowings from Bayle have been identified in the Treatise and in Hume's other works. This is no surprise, for in the eighteenth century Bayle's Dictionnaire was used as it was intended in the first instance, that is, as a reference work. In detailing the borrowings from Bayle, Kemp Smith also touched upon the broader question of influence when he stated that Hume's Pyrrhonism, particularly in relation to his treatment of religion, may also come from Bayle. Many recent scholars have followed suit. A problem of influence however is always a difficult one, and particularly so in this case. There was, as R. H. Popkin has pointed out, a broad awareness of continental skepticism among British philosophers of the eighteenth century. 3 However, apropos Berkeley, A. A. Luce has remarked that the trouble with eighteenth-century continental skepticism was that it had various objectives and took various forms. 4 This is true of Bayle himself. Within skepticism Bayle's position was known for its extremism, and it was this extremism that brought him notoriety. During the eighteenth century Bayle was the philosopher who promoted a systematic use of the Pyrrhonic mode of argument. He was acknowledged above all for having set up a double paradox: that any attempt at a rational theodicy must lead to Manicheism and that to argue for a rationalist Christian ethics is to argue the case of an atheistic one as well. In other words, in the early eighteenth century Bayle played the part of a contemporary Pyrrho and Zeno of Elea: he was known for this double stance, and it is for ' This is a slightly revised version of a paper read at the McGill Bicentennial Hume Conference, held at McGiUUniversity, Montreal, in September, 1976. I wishto offer my thanks to Professors H. M. Bracken and D. F. Norton for their assistanceon this version, and I am particularly grateful to Professor James Moore of Concordia University for his comments on the interpretation put forward here in relation to section III of the Memoranda (seen. 8). 2N. KempSmith, The Philosophy of David Hume (NewYork, 1964),pt. III, chap. XIV, app. C. 3 "David Hume and the Pyrrhonian Controversy," Review of Metaphysics VI (September, 1952):65-81. 4 The Dialectic of Immaterialisrn (London, 1963),p. 67. [373] 374 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY this stance that he was mentioned. It is doubtful whether many of those who do refer to Bayle during this period understood him beyond these terms, whether they sought to understand, or whether they even bothered to read Bayle's lengthy arguments. It is clear that few really grasped his complex, often ambiguous objectives. Mention of a Baylian position by an eighteenth-century writer is therefore no guarantee that the writer has actually read Bayle's works: Bayle is a sort of figurehead for Pyrrhonism, Manicheism, or often even atheism, but one can doubt that there is behind the mention of these basic positions any serious reflection on his thought. There are exceptions of course. Luce and H. M. Bracken have shown that Bayle played a seminal role in the formation of Berkeley's thought? But as a rule, knowledge of Bayle among writers of the Enlightenment was vague; references to him, nonspecific. In most cases it is scarcely possible to speak of an influence. My aim in this... (shrink)

Conheci Raduan num sábado entre junho ou julho de 1996. Estimo os meses e garanto o dia e o ano em razão de Menina a caminho. Amizades comuns nos levaram então a participar de festa familiar no paulistano bairro do Pacaembu. Situado em rua tranquila, o restaurado sobrado compunha-se das variadas dependências requeridas em outros tempos por famílias de classes em fase de ascensão. No piso térreo, destacava-se o espaço destinado aos convidados: a ampla sala, integrada à copa e a (...) um ajardinado terraço. Sobretudo ali as crianças da casa e de vários convidados comiam, corriam e algazarreavam. (shrink)

A tese é de que a concepção de Duhem da ciência antecipa, entre outros elementos, o modelo de escolha de teorias científicas associado com as concepções de Popper, Lakatos e Kuhn. No contexto do seu debate com Poincaré, Duhem propõe um modelo metodológico de escolha racional de teorias formado, também, de componentes extralógicos. O modelo substitui a metodologia bipartida, teoria e natureza, por uma tripartida, confrontação entre duas teorias e natureza. Tal metodologia verifica-se adequada para descrever o processo de escolha (...) de teoria formado das etapas da refutação e rejeição. Ambas as propostas revelam seu enfoque histórico-crítico cuja tese é a interdependência entre história e teoria da ciência. A interdependência configura-se num laboratório para a elaboração, a avaliação e teste das propostas metafísicas e metodológicas para a construção de uma teoria da ciência. (shrink)