Is Default Logic a Reinvention of Inductive-Statistical Reasoning?

Currently there is hardly any connection between philosophy of science and Artificial Intelligence research. We argue that both fields can benefit from each other. As an example of this mutual benefit we discuss the relation between Inductive-Statistical Reasoning and Default Logic. One of the main topics in AI research is the study of common-sense reasoning with incomplete information. Default logic is especially developed to formalise this type of reasoning. We show that there is a striking resemblance between inductive-statistical reasoning and default logic. A central theme in the logical positivist study of inductive-statistical reasoning such as Hempels Criterion of Maximal Specificity turns out to be equally important in default logic. We also discuss to what extent the relevance of the results of Logical Positivism to AI research could contribute to a reevaluation of Logical Positivism in general.     

Is It Still a Movement?

In this address from 1971, the second general secretary of the World Council of Churches (WCC), Eugene Carson Blake, sets out the challenges facing the WCC at the beginning of the 1970s, identifying three key changes within the ecumenical movement: a shift in power and decision making away from the Protestant churches of North America and Western Europe; an organization more representative of churches in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, and of Orthodox churches; and the ecumenical involvement of the Roman Catholic Church. It goes on to set out how the WCC, particularly since its conference on Church and Society held in Geneva in 1966, has been attempting to make Christian faith and morals relevant to a world experiencing rapid social, economic, and political change.     

Skolem's Discovery of Gödel-Dummett Logic

Attention is drawn to the fact that what is alternatively known as Dummett logic, Gödel logic, or Gödel-Dummett logic, was actually introduced by Skolem already in 1913. A related work of 1919 introduces implicative lattices, or Heyting algebras in today's terminology.     

Political Ideologies and Support for Censorship: Is It a Question of Whose Ox Is Being Gored?

Two studies are described. one of 381 university students and the other a statewide survey of 295 adults, both of which examine the relationship between attitudinal support for censorship and political ideologies. The results of these studies are interpreted as challenging the view of Suedfeld, Steel, and Schmidt (1994) that support for censorship is a function of both the works in question and the political ideologies of the respondents. In both studies we find that support for censorship is somewhat consistent across messages and images of differing political content. and that support for censorship is generally greater among those with conservative political attitudes, regardless of the content of the works in question. A model of political attitudes (Maddox & Lilie. 1986) that conceptualizes American political idcologies as consisting of two relatively independent dimensions, rather than a single left-right dimension. is proposed as a more effective means of conceptualizing this issue.     

Is It Possible to Prepare the Second Component of a Movement Before the First One?

Experiment 1 utilized a choice reaction time paradigm to examine whether advance information about the second component of a movement has similar effects upon movement initiation and execution as advance information about the first component. Four stimuli were assigned to four goal keys. Subjects responded with the index finger of their preferred hand. They had to press one of two intermediate keys before pressing the assigned stimulus goal key. Advance information signaled one pair of goal keys in such a way that either the first or the second movement component was unequivocally specified before the response signal appeared. Shorter reaction times resulted when the first component was precued. Further control conditions showed that advance information about the second movement component could not be utilized for movement preparation. Experiment 2 ruled out a perceptual interpretation of this effect. Experiment 3 showed that preparation time for two-component movements are longer than for one-component movements. The study permits the conclusions that speeded two-component movements are controlled by motor programs and that advance information about the first movement component is required before the second movement component can be programmed.     

Is Hintikka's Logic First-Order?

Jaakko Hintikka has argued that ordinary first-order logic should be replaced byindependence-friendly first-order logic, where essentially branching quantificationcan be represented. One recurring criticism of Hintikka has been that Hintikka'ssupposedly new logic is equivalent to a system of second-order logic, and henceis neither novel nor first-order. A standard reply to this criticism by Hintikka andhis defenders has been to show that given game-theoretic semantics, Hintikka'sbranching quantifiers receive the exact same treatment as the regular first-orderones. We develop a different reply, based around considerations concerning thenature of logic. In particular, we argue that Hintikka's logic is the logic that bestrepresents the language fragment standard first-order logic is meantto represent. Therefore it earns its keep, and is also properly regarded as first-order.     

Antidepressant Medication: Is It a Viable and Valuable Adjunct to Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for School Refusal?

Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is an evidence-based treatment for school refusal. However, some youth do not respond to CBT. The serious risks associated with school nonattendance call for novel approaches to help those who do not respond to CBT. Because school refusal is commonly associated with anxiety disorders, and the combination of CBT and antidepressant medication enhances outcomes in the treatment of anxiety disorders, combined treatment may be effective for school refusal. This narrative review evaluates the current evidence base for adding antidepressant treatment to CBT for school refusal. Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs), two open trials, six case studies/series, and one observational study were identified and reviewed. There is support for combined CBT and imipramine, but this medication is not typically used due to the risk of concerning side effects. Two recent RCTs failed to provide evidence for the superiority of combined CBT and fluoxetine. Further research in this area is required because the extant studies have a number of methodological limitations. Recommendations are provided for clinicians who consider prescribing antidepressant medication or referring for adjunctive antidepressant treatment for school refusal.     

The Logic of the Development of Feminism; or,Is MacKinnon to Feminism as Parmenides Is to Greek Philosophy?

Catharine MacKinnon's investigation of the role of sexuality in the subordination of women is a logical culmination of radical feminist thought. If this is correct, the position of her work relative to radical feminism is analogous to the place Parmenides's work occupied in ancient Greek philosophy. Critics of MacKinnon's work have missed their target completely and must engage her work in a different way if feminist theory is to progress past its current stalemated malaise.     

Substance Abuse Counselor Certification Requirements: Is It Time for a Change?

The minimum professional training requirements of 32 state certifying bodies for substance abuse counselors were analyzed. Only 14 of the certifying boards included any of the Council for the Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs core knowledge areas in their training components for Certified Addictions Counselors. Specific training in counseling and drug and alcohol treatment issues also appeared to be minimal. The lack of specific drug and alcohol training brings the quality of preparation for substance abuse counselors into question.     

Is Mathematics a Domain for Philosophers of Explanation?

In this paper we discuss three interrelated questions. First: is explanation in mathematics a topic that philosophers of mathematics can legitimately investigate? Second: are the specific aims that philosophers of mathematical explanation set themselves legitimate? Finally: are the models of explanation developed by philosophers of science useful tools for philosophers of mathematical explanation? We argue that the answer to all these questions is positive. Our views are completely opposite to the views that Mark Zelcer has put forward recently. Throughout this paper, we show why Zelcer’s arguments fail.     

It’s All in your Head: a Solution to the Problem of Object Coincidence

Philosophia - It is uncontroversial that artifacts like statues and tables are mind-dependent. What is controversial is whether and how this mind-dependence has implications for the ontology of...     

Emotional Responses to Changing Feedback: Is It Better to Have Won and Lost Than Never to Have Won At All?

Two experiments investigated how self-esteem guides people's emotional responses to changing evaluative feedback. In both experiments, participants received an initial evaluation (either positive or negative) followed by a second evaluation (either positive or negative). Emotional reactions to the second evaluation were then assessed. High self-esteem participants found feedback that was consistently negative to be most distressing, whereas low self-esteem participants were most disturbed by feedback that changed from positive to negative. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.     

What Is It Like to Be an Alien?

This brief article is concerned with an aspect of Jonathan Glover's book, Alien Landscapes?. After reflecting a little on the book as a whole, the question that is taken up is, ‘Why might a book that seeks to help those without mental disorders understand what they are like “from the inside” be of interest to laymen and practitioners in the criminal law?’. One answer lies in part in the way that ‘what it is like from the inside’ might interact with judgements of criminal responsibility. Taking its cue from examples used by Glover the article considers, and puts pressure on, the ‘dual view’ he proposes: that when dealing with those with mental disorders we should treat them as responsible agents in the sense of not withholding from them Strawson's ‘reactive attitudes’, while nevertheless accepting that their personalities and behaviours are the results of large doses of ‘bad luck’.     

Is It Possible to “Incorporate” a Scar? Revisiting a Basic Concept in Phenomenology

Although scars never disappear completely, in time most people will basically get used to them. In this paper I explore what it means to habituate to scars against the background of the phenomenological concept of incorporation. In phenomenology (Husserl, Merleau-Ponty) the body as Leib or corps vécu (lived body) functions as a transcendental condition for world disclosure. Because of this transcendental reasoning, phenomenology prioritizes a form of embodied subjectivity that is virtually dis-embodied. Endowing meaning to one’s world through getting engaged in actions and projects is most successful indeed when one’s body is “absent,” “transparent,” or, at least, if it is not in the center of one’s attention. This taken-for-granted nature can be disturbed by discomfort, disability, and disfigurement. Incorporation, so I explain, aims at maintaining or restoring the body’s taken-for-grantedness. My analysis of the case of a woman who successfully habituated to her mastectomy scar demonstrates, however, that habituation to a perceptible scar can only be understood partly in terms of incorporation. Next to a decrease of explicit attention for the scar and the discomfort it produces (i.e., incorporation), the scar should also stop being a sign that refers to something else than itself. This is only possible, I argue, by taking the body’s materiality seriously, rather than it being wiped out as a result of transcendental reasoning.     

When Is It Ethical for Physician-Investigators to Seek Consent From Their Own Patients?

Classic statements of research ethics advise against permitting physician-investigators to obtain consent for research participation from patients with whom they have preexisting treatment relationships. Reluctance about “dual-role” consent reflects the view that distinct normative commitments govern physician–patient and investigator–participant relationships, and that blurring the research–care boundary could lead to ethical transgressions. However, several features of contemporary research demand reconsideration of the ethics of dual-role consent. Here, we examine three arguments advanced against dual-role consent: that it creates role conflict for the physician-investigator; that it can compromise the voluntariness of the patient-participant’s consent; and that it promotes therapeutic misconceptions. Although these concerns have merit in some circumstances, they are not dispositive in all cases. Rather, their force—and the ethical acceptability of dual-role consent—varies with features of the particular study. As research participation more closely approximates usual care, it becomes increasingly acceptable, or even preferable, for physicians to seek consent for research from their own patients. It is time for a more nuanced approach to dual-role consent.