HACKER'S COMPLAINT

My goal in writing 'Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century' was to identify and explain the most important achievements of analytic philosophy which every student of the subject should be aware of, as well as those of its failures from which we have the most to learn. I attempted to do this by constructing a history that was itself apiece of analytic philosophy in its emphasis on analysis, reconstruction and criticism of arguments. In rebutting Hacker's critique of it, I explain how my goal shaped my selection of topics, with special reference to the ordinary language period. I correct his misrepresentations of my treatment of the philosophers of this period, I demonstrate his failure to grasp, or understand the significance of, the Kripkean necessary a posteriori, and I reveal the misconceptions in his criticism of my interpretation of the 'Tractatus'.     

The effects of uncontrollable, unpredictable aversive and appetitive events: Similar effects warrant similar, but not identical, explanations?

Exposure to uncontrollable, unpredictable appetitive events produces a variety of cognitive debilitations and vegetative changes as does exposure to uncontrollable, unpredictable aversive events. Similarities include impaired escape from aversive events, impaired discrimination, finicky consumption, analgesia, and body weight loss. However, in stark contrast, uncontrollable aversive stress causes reduced motor activity where as similar appetitive treatment does not; aversively induced debilitation is causally related to energy regulation, whereas the appetitively induced effects are not. Parallel mechanisms are suggested to explain these effects in terms of a revised anxiety account of the aversive effects, and a frustration account of the appetitive effects. Finally, factors likely to limit important research to resolve the many remaining issues are identified: negative presentation of animal research, political decision making, and ignorance and fear in committees which review the ethics of research. The research reported here was supported by a Sydney University Special Project Grant and Australian Research Council Grants to R.F.S. Job. The paper was completed while the author was supported by a Special Study Leave Grant from the University of Sydney.     

Precis: the world philosophy made

Philosophical Studies -     

Better the Devil You Know? High-Risk Individuals’ Anticipated Psychological Responses to Genetic Testing for Melanoma Susceptibility

Purpose: The psychological consequences of genetic testing for mutations among individuals at increased risk of developing melanoma remain unexamined. The present study aimed to explore anticipated emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and familial responses to hypothetical genetic testing for melanoma susceptibility. Methods: Forty semi-structured interviews were undertaken with affected (n=20) and unaffected (n=20) individuals at either high or average risk of developing melanoma due to family history. Results: In-depth thematic analysis revealed that, in response to being identified as a mutation carrier, most participants with a family history anticipated calmly accepting their increased risk; either increasing precaution adoption or maintaining already vigilant behavioral practices; perceiving such information as important and valuable; and communicating genetic test results to family members, despite the acknowledgement of potential difficulties. In response to being identified as a non-carrier, the majority of participants expected to feel relieved; to maintain current precautionary health practices; to still perceive themselves at some risk of developing melanoma; and to be wary of the potential negative behavioral consequences of disclosing such information to family members. Women appeared more likely than men to acknowledge the potential for depression and worry following genetic testing. In contrast, more males than females expected to carry a gene mutation, and viewed their current preventive practices as optimum. Conclusion: Genetic testing for melanoma risk is likely to elicit a complex array of emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and familial responses for both testees and their family members, and these responses are likely to bear subtle differences for males and females.     

The analytic tradition in philosophy: volume 2—a new vision

Philosophical Studies -     

Why Propositions Cannot be Sets of Truth-supporting Circumstances

No semantic theory satisfying certain natural constraints can identify the semantic contents of sentences (the propositions they express), with sets of circumstances in which the sentences are true–no matter how fine-grained the circumstances are taken to be. An objection to the proof is shown to fail by virtue of conflating model-theoretic consequence between sentences with truth-conditional consequence between the semantic contents of sentences. The error underlines the impotence of distinguishing semantics, in the sense of a truth-based theory of logical consequence, and semantics, in the sense of a theory of meaning.