Introduction to the essays on Kurt H. Wolff

Introduction to the essays on Kurt H. Wolff     

Vindication of the Humpty Dumpty attitude towards language

Effective objective (sachlich) verbal communication is dependent upon the use of linguistic locutions which are: a) suitable for some special purposes, b) clear (i.e., having a satsifactorily high degree of subsumability), and c) in accordance with some ordinary (i.e., frequently occurring) language usages. Only in so far as point c is concerned is a study of actual language usage of (indirect) value to philosophers. And this holds true regardless of whether one's underlying assumption tends towards the view: 1) that ordinary language is perfect (Oxford), or: 2) that ordinary language is a mess (Oslo). In any case, one needs to know about the most ordinary usages to prevent unnecessarily drastic deviations from them. Drastic deviations may mislead the sender, as well as the receiver, create communicational disturbances, misunderstandings, and confusion (vide: Strawson's use of “presupposition"). However, considerations of a) suitability for special purposes, and b) clarity (subsumability) will most often, if not always, prevent a communicator from flatly adopting any one of the existing language usages of a given important linguistic locution. He would feel the need for: “explications,”; “rational reconstructions”; or conceptual alterations of one kind or another. In fact, there are instances where the sender finds it most advantageous to disregard completely ordinary language (vide: Einstein's use of “simultaneity"): He “makes words mean what he wants them to mean.”; This is the Humpty Dumpty sender attitude towards language. The corresponding receiver attitude manifests itself as awareness of and tolerance for language ambiguities.     

On Ignorance: A Vindication of the Standard View

Rik Peels has once again forcefully argued that ignorance is not equivalent to the lack or absence of knowledge. In doing so, he endeavors to refute the Standard View of Ignorance according to which they are equivalent, and to advance what he calls the “New View” according to which ignorance is equivalent (merely) to the lack or absence of true belief. I defend the Standard View against his new attempted refutation.     

The Psychiatrist and the Dying Patient by Kurt R. Eissler

Abstract

In this study behavioral processes in the individual and group therapies of aggressive boys were compared and the relationship between these variables and treatment outcome was examined. Level of aggression was the outcome variable, measured by both self-report and teacher-report instruments. Hill’s Client Behavior System (CBS; Hill, 1986) with our own ad hoc categories of Reference to Literary Figures and Response to Another, and therapist Helping Skills System (HSS; Hill &; O’Brien, 1999) were the behavioral process measures. In terms of the boys’ behaviors, discriminant function analyses revealed that Reference to Literary Figures and Response to Another differentiated the treatment formats; with regard to therapists’ behaviors, Questions and Challenge differentiated the modalities. Results offered partial support for the greater effectiveness of group, compared to individual, therapy in reducing aggression. Outcome, however, as measured by teacher reports of aggression, was adversely affected in group therapy by the presence of specific behaviors in the boys. Implications of the findings for modifying the group therapy program as well as for the search for process variables appropriate to the treatment of aggressive children are discussed.     

Science, Values and the Human Dimensions

The presented paper substantiates the principle that values are an immanent component of science and any rational cognitive activity. This principle belongs to the European cultural tradition starting from the book of Genesis of the Old Testament, the values of certainty in the antique Greek philosophy and Francis Bacon's coincidence of knowledge and power. Values in science form complicated structures inconnection with different types of knowledge including “the knowledge that”, empirical evidence, various types of generalizations or rules, methods, directions, algorithms, “the knowledge how”, “the knowledge why” or other types of knowledge. Since the assignments of different types of values are the products of a decision-making, it is useful to distinguish many types of decision-making, especially semantic decision-making, information decision-making and decision-making with distinctly pragmatic dimensions. The values assignable to scientific activities and their results also include their social recognition, respect and prestige granted to knowledge and bearers of knowledge by society and social groups or communities. Knowledge generation and the rational and justified application of the achieved and acceptable impacts are also connected with decision-making procedures, values and criteria of social acceptance. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.