The Frege-Geach Problem and Blackburn’s Expressivism

Philosophia - Blackburn has outlined a formal account for moral expressivism, and we argued that the moral Frege-Geach problem can be solved formally by appending two rules for the boo-operator...     

Knowledge’s Boundary Problem

Where is the justificatory boundary between a true belief’s not being knowledge and its being knowledge? Even if we put to one side the Gettier problem, this remains a fundamental epistemological question, concerning as it does the matter of whether we can provide some significant defence of the usual epistemological assumption that a belief is knowledge only if it is well justified. But can that question be answered non-arbitrarily? BonJour believes that it cannot be – and that epistemology should therefore abandon the concept of knowledge. More optimistically, this paper does attempt to answer that question, by applying – and thereby refining – a non-absolutist theory of knowledge.     

On Birkhoff’s Common Abstraction Problem

In his milestone textbook Lattice Theory, Garrett Birkhoff challenged his readers to develop a ??common abstraction?? that includes Boolean algebras and latticeordered groups as special cases. In this paper, after reviewing the past attempts to solve the problem, we provide our own answer by selecting as common generalization of ${\mathcal{B} \mathcal{A}}$ and ${\mathcal{L} \mathcal{G}}$ their join ${\mathcal{B} \mathcal{A} \vee \mathcal{L} \mathcal{G}}$ in the lattice of subvarieties of ${\mathcal{F} \mathcal{L}}$ (the variety of FL-algebras); we argue that such a solution is optimal under several respects and we give an explicit equational basis for ${\mathcal{B} \mathcal{A} \vee \mathcal{L} \mathcal{G}}$ relative to ${\mathcal{F} \mathcal{L}}$ . Finally, we prove a Holland-type representation theorem for a variety of FL-algebras containing ${\mathcal{B} \mathcal{A} \vee \mathcal{L} \mathcal{G}}$ .     

Benjamin’s Children’s Theater and the Problem of Pure Means

Studies in Philosophy and Education -     

The Real Reason Why the Prisoner’s Dilemma is Not a Newcomb Problem

It is commonly thought, in line with the position defended in an influential paper by David Lewis, that the decision problems faced in the prisoner’s dilemma and the Newcomb situation are essentially the same problem. José Luis Bermúdez has recently attacked the case Lewis makes for this claim. While I think the claim is false, I contend that Bermúdez’s reason for rejecting Lewis’s argument is inadequate, and then outline what I take to be a better reason for doing so.     

The Presentist’s Dilemma

This paper defends three theses: (i) that presentism is either trivial or untenable; (ii) that the debate between tensed and tenseless theories of time is not about the status of presentism; and (iii) that there is no temporal analogue of the modal thesis of actualism.     

The Priest’s Husband

Clergy self-concepts provide an important resource for research into the psychosocial pressures that often breed domestic tension and marital discord in ministerial families. More than 30 years ago the Journal of Religion and Health published (15:3, 1976) Platt and Moss’s initial study of clergy families, research focused on the self-perceptions of the wives of Episcopal priests. That investigation explored some of the intrapsychic ingredients and interpersonal concerns of these women. Oden now concentrates on clergy spouses from a different vantage—the historically recent phenomenon of the Episcopal priest’s husband. This article grows out of the first formal study of such a growing parochial reality. Husbands of priests present novel issues because there has never been anyone like them before. They are men who will inevitably find themselves confronted by congregational expectations that can modify their self-concepts and retailer their marriages, “for better or for worse”.     

Motivating Empathy: The Problem of Bodily Similarity in Husserl’s Theory of Empathy

Husserl’s theory of empathy plays a crucial role in his transcendental phenomenology and has ever since been critically examined. Among various critiques leveled at Husserl, the issue of bodily similarity between oneself and the other lies at the core, not only because Husserl conceives of it as the motivating factor of empathy but also because his account of it has been taken to be problematic. In this article, I review a main interpretation of the issue of bodily similarity in Husserl, which takes the bodily similarity in question to be a visual resemblance between oneself and the other. By contrast, I give a new interpretation of bodily similarity by taking into account Husserl’s emphasis on tactual experience with regard to the constitution of one’s own lived body and the foreign body. I argue that the bodily similarity in question amounts to a similar manner of twofold bodily manifestation in oneself and the other, and I also suggest that this interpretation further enables a new understanding of interpersonal relation in Husserl.     

The ‘Conditional Position Problem’ for epistemic externalism

Synthese - In this paper, I develop a problem I call the “Conditional Position Problem” that arises for Ernest Sosa’s externalist epistemology. The problem is that, due to a...     

The Moral Oracle’s Test

When presented with a situation involving an agent’s choice between alternative actions, a moral oracle says what the agent is allowed to do. The oracle bases her advice on some moral theory, but the nature of that theory is not known by us. The moral oracle’s test consists in determining whether a series of questions to the oracle can be so constructed that her answers will reveal which of two given types of theories she adheres to. The test can be applied to moral theories in order to determine if they differ in their recommendations for action. Based on this test, a terminology is developed to specify different forms and degrees of distinguishability between moral theories, or types of theories, in terms of their recommendations for action. In conclusion, the test is applied to consequentialism and utilitarianism.     

The imprecise impermissivist’s dilemma

Synthese - Impermissivists hold that an agent with a given body of evidence has at most one rationally permitted attitude that she should adopt towards any particular proposition. Permissivists...     

The Devil’s Lying Wonders

That demonic agents can work wonders is a staple of much Judeo-Christian theology. Believers have proposed various means by which the Devil's work can be distinguished from the miracles wrought by God, primarily so that no one is led astray by the Devil's ‘lying wonders.’ I consider the likelihood of our using the suggested criteria with any success. Given certain claims about the demonic nature and certain facts about the way theists often handle the problem of inscrutable evil, it seems unlikely that any of the criteria I examine can be relied upon.

The Political Egalitarian’s Dilemma

Political egalitarianism is at the core of most normative conceptions of democratic legitimacy. It finds its minimal expression in the “one person one vote” formula. In the literature on deliberative democracy, political equality is typically interpreted in a more demanding sense, but different interpretations of what political equality requires can be identified. In this paper I shall argue that the attempt to specify political equality in deliberative democracy is affected by a dilemma. I shall illustrate the political egalitarian’s dilemma by a hypothetical choice between two informational bases for political equality: Rawlsian primary goods and Amartya Sen’s capability approach. The political egalitarian’s dilemma reveals a clash between the requirement of ensuring equal possibilities to participate in the democratic process and the requirement of subjecting substantive judgments to deliberative evaluation. As such, the dilemma is a variant of the procedure vs. substance dilemma that is well-known in democratic theory. While it has sometimes been argued that deliberative democracy solves the tension between procedure and substance, the political egalitarian’s dilemma shows that this tension continues within deliberative democracy.