Case-Based Planning: A Framework for Planning from Experience

This article presents a view of planning as a task supported by a dynamic memory. This view attempts to ingegrate models of memory, learning, and planning into a single system that learns about planning by creating new plans and analyzing how they interact with the world. We call this view of planning case-based planning. A case-based planner makes use of its own past experience in developing new plans. It relies on its memory of observed effects, rather than a set of causal rules, to create and modify new plans. Memories of past successes are accessed and modified to create new plans. Memories of past failures are used to warn the planner of impending problems, and memories of past repairs are called upon to tell the planner how to deal with them. This view of planning from experience supports and is supported by a learning system that incorporates new experiences into the planner's episodic memory. This learning algorithm gains from the planner's failures as well as its successes. Successful plans are stored in memory, indexed by the goals they satisfy and the problems they avoid. Failures are also stored and indexed by the features in the world that predict them. By storing failures as well as successes, the planner is able to anticipate and avoid future plan failures. Case-based planning is aimed at improving planning behavior in three areas: failure avoidance, plan repair, and plan reuse. It also attempts gains over current learning systems, in that the learning is driven by the functional needs of a planner.     

Subjective Rightness and Minimizing Expected Objective Wrongness

It has become increasingly common for philosophers to distinguish between objective and subjective rightness, and there has been much discussion recently about what an adequate theory of subjective rightness looks like. In this article, I propose a new theory of subjective rightness. According to it, an action is subjectively right if and only if it minimizes expected objective wrongness. I explain this theory in detail and argue that it avoids many of the problems that other theories of subjective rightness face. I end by responding to some objections.     

Put yourself in my wheelchair: Perspective-taking can reduce prejudice toward people with disabilities and other stigmatized groups

This study aimed to compare perspective-taking with a hypothetical target and perspective-taking occurring during a real interaction with an outgroup member in reducing prejudice toward people with disabilities and other groups (e.g., immigrants, homosexual people), via increased empathy. We adopted an experimental design with two treatment groups (Hypothetical target vs. Real target) and one control group (no intervention), one pretest and two posttest measures. Participants, who were 437 students aged 11–17 years (M = 14.28; SD = 1.17), were randomly assigned to the various conditions on a classroom basis. Perspective-taking was facilitated asking participants to travel in a wheelchair on a path that simulated a real pavement in the presence (or not) of an individual with a motor disability. Findings showed that perspective-taking in the presence of a real target was more effective in reducing prejudice toward people with disabilities than perspective-taking task without encountering an outgroup member. Perspective-taking with a hypothetical target was not sufficient to increase participants' empathy toward people with disabilities, which instead was enhanced when the task was performed at the presence of a real member of that group. Positive effects produced by perspective-taking (with both a hypothetical and a real target) were transferred to immigrants and homosexuals. These findings suggest that, when possible, perspective-taking in the presence of the target, which can improve empathy by favoring a two-way exchange process, is highly recommended to improve attitudes toward different stigmatized groups, not necessarily targeted by the intervention.     

Including or excluding religion and worldviews in schools? Finnish teachers’ and teacher students’ perceptions

ABSTRACT

How schools navigate between the demands presented by secularisation, and the increasing plurality of religious traditions has become a very topical issue in many European countries, including Finland, in recent decades. The question is both practical and philosophical by nature because the ways in which various beliefs and values are represented in school practices and teaching content profoundly concern the educational mission of the schools. However, despite the topicality of the issue, little attention has been given to teachers’ perceptions on whether public schools should, or should not, provide space for various religions and worldviews to become visible within the school life, and how schools should respond in practice to the perceived needs. In order to gain new knowledge on the topic, this study investigated Finnish teachers’ and university students’ (N = 181) perceptions of the representations of religions and worldviews, based on the perspectives of inclusion and exclusion. The statistical analysis revealed three factors titled as ‘Religiously responsive approach’, ‘Secularist approach’ and ‘Equal visibility approach’. According to the main findings, current and future educators show various degrees of inter-religious sensitivity but principally supported the equal visibility of various traditions, rather than favouring strongly inclusivist or exclusivist practices.