John Buridan on the Possibility of Defining Definition

The study of the medieval reception of Aristotle’s Topics has largely been oriented toward debates on dialectical argumentation. And this is surely right. Nonetheless, I wish to approach John Buridan’s commentary on the Topics from another perspective, which highlights some semantic features of the set of predicates around which the work is organized. Thus, in my paper I will first reconstruct Buridan’s account of the identification of the predicates discussed in the Topics. I will argue that, for him, they are different in that they reflect one or more features of the way in which definiens and definiendum relate. By doing this, I will shed light on the role the notion of definition plays in Buridan’s commentary, so that an interpretation of it as a work on definition becomes promising. In the second part of the paper, I will offer an analysis of Buridan’s first move in his commentary toward a theory of definition. It concerns the problem of whether there is a definition of definition. In examining Buridan’s answer, I will argue for the close connection between his treatment of definitions and his theory of supposition, so that distinctions among the different modes of supposition help him to disambiguate statements in their possible meanings, and thus to clarify the difficulty related to the definability of definition.     

Ockham and Buridan on the Ampliation of Modal Propositions

This paper explores a currently unnoticed argument used by John Buridan to defend his analysis of modal propositions and to reject the analysis of modal propositions of necessity put forward by William of Ockham. First, I explore this argument and, by considering possible responses of Ockham to Buridan, show some of the ways in which Ockham seems to be keeping closer to Aristotle's remarks about modal propositions in Prior Analytics, 18.     

奎因、怀曼与布里丹:本体论约定的三种方法

本文对本体论约定(ontological commitment)问题的三种根本不同方法进行了比较。认为尽管它们具有表面上的相似性,但中世纪晚期的唯名论哲学家布里丹(约1300-1361)的方法,是比以迈农和奎因为代表的其他两种被普遍认同的现代方法更具吸引力的第三种选择。本文同时指出,只有基于其关于真与逻辑有效性的语义观念的截然不同的前现代方法,布里丹的方法才是可能的。     

Prior distributions on symmetric groups

Fully and partially ranked data arise in a variety of contexts. From a Bayesian perspective, attention has focused on distance-based models; in particular, the Mallows model and extensions thereof. In this paper, a class of prior distributions, the Binary Tree, is developed on the symmetric group. The attractive features of the class are: it provides a closed-form solution to the posterior distribution; and a simple way to interpret the parameters of the prior distribution. The advantages of the proposed method are illustrated by comparing it to metric-based models using data analyzed by other researchers in this context.This revised article was published online in August 2005 with the PDF paginated correctly.     

Case presentation: Jean

This symposium was devoted to the consideration of Dr. Mary Libbey's treatment of a 22-year-old woman. The unfolding of the analysand's symbiotic attachment to her mother, the devastating sequelae of her having been the stable center of a pathological family that devoted itself to the care of a severely handicapped sibling, and her immersion in unresolved mourning form the center of this richly detailed and carefully reported case study. In addition, four verbatim sessions are reported, one from each year of the first two years of treatment, and two from the third year of treatment. Dr. Epstein's discussion, praising Dr. Libbey's therapeutic skill, makes note of the issues in the patient's family of origin that served to prepare her to feel endangered in the treatment. Dr. Epstein's view is that the analyst has created an analytic situation that, because it is minimally impinging, allows the patient to become increasingly aware of her unmet needs in a way that is tolerable and minimally "destabilizing to the symbiotically based organization of her internal self and object world." In the climate of safety created in the treatment, the patient can begin to complete the work of mourning for her sister, friend, and aunt, a process of mourning that would be impossible in the context of her nuclear family, centered as it is on a mother who cannot tolerate separation. Limit-setting in the treatment is seen to be reassuring to the patient, facilitating as it does the analyst's commitment to maintaining the integrity of the analytic situation. Dr. Schafer's discussion, while in agreement with Dr. Epstein in recognizing the excellence of the presentation and the sensitivity and hard work that had gone into both the treatment and the clinical presentation, included some specific and focused observations about the transference and countertransference situations prevailing in this treatment and also some suggestions for creating a more consistently safe analytic atmosphere for this particular patient and others like her. Dr. Schafer proposes that the therapist acknowledge to herself and accept as well as possible the inevitable feeling of helplessness such patients provoke. In a more concrete vein, he advocates talking in the first person declarative as much as possible, preferring "I don't understand" to the more standard "What do you mean?" or "Why?" The therapist is encouraged to eschew interpreting what the patient says about the therapeutic relationship for a long time, and, further, he suggests not quickly connecting or easily reducing the therapeutic relationship to childhood prototypes.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

Prior probabilities

The theoretical construction and practical use of prior probabilities, in particular for systems having many degrees of freedom, are investigated. It becomes clear that it is operationally unsound to use mutually consistent priors if one wishes to draw sensible conclusions from practical experiments. The prior cannot usefully be identified with a state of knowledge, and indeed it is not so identified in common scientific practice. Rather, it can be identified with the question one asks. Accordingly, priors are free constructions. Their informal, ill-defined and subjective characteristics must carry over into the conclusions one chooses to draw from experiments or observations.     

Prior knowledge on the illumination position

Visual perception is fundamentally ambiguous because an infinite number of three-dimensional scenes are consistent with our retinal images. To circumvent these ambiguities, the visual system uses prior knowledge such as the assumption that light is coming from above our head. The use of such assumptions is rational when these assumptions are related to statistical regularities of our environment. In confirmation of previous visual search experiments, we demonstrate here that the assumption on the illumination position is in fact biased to the above-left rather than directly above. This bias to the left reaches 26 degrees on average in a more direct shape discrimination task. Both right-handed and left-handed observers have a similar leftward bias. We discuss the possible origins of this singular bias on the illumination position.     

Jean Hampton on Immorality,Self-Hatred,and Self-Forgiveness

Philosophical Studies -