Provisional norms by age group for Japanese females on the controlled force-exertion test using a bar-chart display

This study examined age-group and individual differences on the controlled force-exertion test by bar-chart display and proposed a provisional norm in 249 females who were right-handed and ages 15 to 84 years. The subjects matched their submaximal grip strength to changing demand values, appearing as a bar chart on the display of a personal computer. The subjects performed the controlled force-exertion test three times with 1-min. intervals (single trials were 40 sec.), after one practice trial using the dominant hand. A total of the differences (%) between the demand value and the grip-exertion value for 25 sec. was used as an evaluation parameter. The measurements showed a right-skewed distribution, normalized after logarithmic transformation. Analysis of variance identified significant differences between means of each age group; test performance decreased after 40 years of age. Norms for each age group were presented.     

Divine omniscience and knowledge de se

Patrick Grim argues that God cannot beomniscient because no one other than me canacquire knowledge de se of myself. Inparticular, according to Grim, God cannot knowwhat I know in knowing that I am making amess. I argue, however, that given twoplausible principles regarding divineattributes there is no reason to accept Grim'sconclusion that God cannot be omniscient. Inthis paper I focus on the relationship betweendivine omniscience and necessaryimpossibilities, in contrast to the generaltrend of research since Aquinas, which hasconcentrated on the relationship between divineomnipotence and necessary impossibilities.     

Subjective character of experience in medical ethics: a reply to Atkins

In a recent issue of this Journal Kim Atkins argued that Thomas Nagel's argument regarding a bat's phenomenal experience is important for understanding the value placed on patient autonomy in medical ethics. In this reply to her paper, I demonstrate that Atkin's argument (a) is based on her misinterpretations of Nagel's argument, and (b) can be established without appealing to such a controversial assumption as that which she makes.