The Rationality of Dissensus: A Reply to Goodin

Robert Goodin claims that he has undermined my ``proof of theinevitability of rational consensus among all patient people of goodwill.' I did not intend my position as a proof of the inevitabilityof rational consensus, however, and, in fact, I insist on thereasonableness of dissensus in some cases. I welcome the opportunity,provoked by Goodin's interesting reflections, to clarify my position. Iproved with Carl Wagner that iterated weighted averaging converges towardconsensus under conditions of connectedness and constancy resulting fromthe positive weight that individuals give to each other. I allow, nevertheless,that individuals may rationally assign zero weight to each other in a waythat blocks convergence and yields dissensus. The assignment of zeroweight to others will be rational, for example, when the interests ormoral concerns of the individual would be co-opted as a result of givingpositive weight to others. The assignment of positive weight to othersrequires modification of one's position, however, for the refusal to modifyone's position is mathematically equivalent to assigning zero weight toothers. Dissent is rational to avoid being co-opted, but the cost ofdisensus may be the assignment of zero weight to others and theirrational reciprocation.     

God and Freedom: A Discussion

'If there is no logical impossibility in a man's freely choosing the good on one, or on several occasions, there cannot be a logical impossibility in his freely choosing the good on every occasion. God was not, then, faced with a choice between making innocent automata and making beings who, in acting freely, would sometimes go wrong: there was open to him the obviously better possibility of making beings who would act freely but always go right. Clearly, his failure to avail himself of this possibility is inconsistent with his being both omnipotent and wholly good'.     

Hanly on Coase: A Comment

ABSTRACT Ken Hanly's recent article in this Journal (Vol. 9, No. 1, 1992) takes issue with Ronald Coase's approach to resolving problems of externalities, as set forth in his classic paper 'The Problem of Social Cost'. I argue that Hanly's discussion of Coase misinterprets or inappropriately rejects certain aspects of Coase's analysis, specifically, with regard to the reciprocal nature of externalities and the economic role of government. The resolution of externality problems is presented as an issue of selective normative choice as to whose interests are to count; neither efficiency nor morality claims are uniquely dispositive of the issue.     

A Reflection on Our Freedom

Imagine a deterministic world with plane-symmetry. Beings near this plane might well mistake it for a mirror. When they realize their error, they might be apt to relinquish even stronglyheld commitments to views about the compatibility of freedom and determinism. The following account reports such reflections.     

Knowledge and Justice: A Comment

ABSTRACT

Epistemic justice projects are now one of the most important sites of science studies scholarship and engagement. The papers in this collection make clear that we divorce science and technology from questions of power at our peril, if we are to understand what generates and remediates the inequalities that past and extant knowledge creation and distribution systems have wrought. Expertise and experts are the conceptual anchors for these articles, and they offer quite different perspectives on whether expertise and counter-expertise are the terrain on which epistemic justice struggles ought to be fought. Some challenge older conceptualizations of expertise as narrow and specific, providing new evidence and frameworks for treating epistemes that are heterogeneous and boundary-crossing as means to justice; others demonstrate that acting on concerns as purely technical matters can provide strategic advantages; and others make clear that formally trained experts are neither welcome nor visible in technopolitical justice struggles. Reflected in the innovative approaches that the papers take, a second major contribution of the collection is to show why inclusion is itself a just goal, and a means to uncovering stories of injustice, technical innovations, and visions of the future that can offer new pathways to justice. The collection inspires new directions in sts, including which stories, and by whom, matter and why, and how attention to innovation can be balanced with attention to the extant, and to history.     

A Note on Comparative Probability

A possible event always seems to be more probable than an impossible event. Although this constraint, usually alluded to as regularity, is prima facie very attractive, it cannot hold for standard probabilities. Moreover, in a recent paper Timothy Williamson has challenged even the idea that regularity can be integrated into a comparative conception of probability by showing that the standard comparative axioms conflict with certain cases if regularity is assumed. In this note, we suggest that there is a natural weakening of the standard comparative axioms. It is shown that these axioms are consistent both with the regularity condition and with the essential feature of Williamson’s example.     

Probability: A new logico-semantical approach

This approach does not define a probability measure by syntactical structures. It reveals a link between modal logic and mathematical probability theory. This is shown (1) by adding an operator (and two further connectives and constants) to a system of lower predicate calculus and (2) regarding the models of that extended system. These models are models of the modal systemS ₅ (without the Barcan formula), where a usual probability measure is defined on their set of possible worlds. Mathematical probability models can be seen as models ofS ₅.     

Freedom and Happiness in Nations: A Research Synthesis

Freedom is highly valued, but there are limits to the amount of freedom a society can allow its members. This begs the question of how much freedom is too much. The answers to that question differ across political cultures and are typically based on ideological argumentation. In this paper, we consider the compatibility of freedom and happiness in nations by taking stock of the research findings on that matter, gathered in the World Database of Happiness. We find that freedom and happiness are positively correlated in contemporary nations. The pattern of correlation differs somewhat across cultures and aspects of freedom. We found no pattern of declining happiness returns, which suggests that freedom has not passed its maximum in the freest countries.     

A Comment on Graphology

Both classical anthropological evidence and recent psychological research suggest the possibility that obscene language is both a linguistic universal and one of man's most frequent types of linguistic expression. The report here is of the initial results of what will be a comprehensive research project concerned with the use, function, and personal-cultural-linguistic significance of obscene language within English and in a variety of other languages. In the present study of a college student sample, an empirically derived set of linguistic obscenities was obtained, the effects of sex and production mode upon the quantity of production were assessed, and the obtained obscenities were categorized with respect to the denotative domains of experience to which they referred. In addition, a questionnaire survey of attitudes toward and use of obscenity was taken among the producing Ss. It was found that while production mode (oral vs. written) did not affect the quantity of obscenity produced, males significantly outproduced females. Furthermore, the obtained obscenities were meaningly classifiable into a rather limited number of categories of social-psychological experience. Those categories containing the most exemplars seemed to reflect certain cultural attitudes toward the domains of experience represented by these categories. Finally, general analyses of questionnaire responses revealed that Ss (a) generally used obscenity freely, although they would limit usage around children and their own parents; (b) indicated restrictive reactions—particularly punishment—on the part of their parents when Ss used obscenity during their upbringing; and (c) gave the reason of emotional release as their primary motivation for using obscene language. Implications of the present research for future investigation—particularly across languages—were discussed.