Putting the Burden of Proof in Its Place: When Are Differential Allocations Legitimate?

It is widely assumed that legitimate differential allocations of the burden of proof are ubiquitous: that in all cases in which opposing views are being debated, one side has the responsibility of proving their claim and if they fail, the opposing view wins by default. We argue that the cases in which one party has the burden of proof are exceptions. In general, participants in reasoned discourse are all required to provide reasons for the claims they make. We distinguish between truth‐directed and non‐truth‐directed discourse, argue that the paradigm contexts in which there are legitimate differential allocations of the burden of proof (law and formal debate) are non‐truth‐directed, and suggest that in truth‐directed contexts, except in certain special cases, differential allocation of the burden of proof is not warranted.     

Isolating cognitive modules with the dual-task paradigm: Are speech perception and production separate processes?

A dual-task paradigm is used to investigate whether the auditory input logogen is distinct from the articulatory output logogen. In the first two experiments it is shown that the task of detecting an unspecified name in an auditory input stream can be combined with reading aloud visually presented words with relatively little single- to dual-task decrement. The stimuli for both tasks are independent streams of random words presented at rapid rates. A series of control experiments suggest that the first task places a considerable information processing load on the auditory input logogen, the second a considerable load on the phonological output logogen, and that subjects do not switch between the two tasks. The fact that the two tasks can be combined with ease is therefore interpreted as supporting the view that the systems underlying reading aloud and listening are separate. The ease of performance when the input streams are in different modalities, compared to the difficulties when they are in the same, has implications for general models of attention.     

Applying personal construct theory in occupational guidance

Personal construct theory was applied to various occupational choice problems. It became clear that there was no single best way of applying it, since the technique could easily be adapted to suit varying circumstances. Attempts to introduce it to occupational guidance officers have so far lead to only limited use, but it is hoped that modified training may increase their confidence in utilising it where appropriate.     

Kurt Gödel's Anticipation of the Turing Machine: A Vitalistic Approach

In 1935/1936 Kurt Gödel wrote three notebooks on the foundations of quantum mechanics, which have now been entirely transcribed for the first time. Whereas a lot of the material is rather technical in character, many of Gödel's remarks have a philosophical background and concentrate on Leibnizian monadology as well as on vitalism. Obviously influenced by the vitalistic writings of Hans Driesch and his ‘proofs’ for the existence of an entelechy in every living organism, Gödel briefly develops the idea of a computing machine which closely resembles Turing's groundbreaking conception. After introducing the notebooks on quantum mechanics, this article describes Gödel's vitalistic Weltbild and the ideas leading to the development of his computing machine. It investigates a notion of lawlike sequence which closely resembles Turing's concept of a computable number and which Gödel himself calls ‘problematic’, and compares it to the opposed concept of randomness, drawing upon the notion of program-size complexity. Finally, Gödel's machine is implemented in a dialect of the Lisp programing language.     

Combining total laparoscopic hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with subcutaneous mastectomy in trans men: The effect on safety outcomes

Abstract

Background: Masculinizing mastectomy is the most requested gender affirming surgery (GAS) in trans men, followed by genital GAS. Mastectomy and total laparoscopic hysterectomy, with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (TLH?±?BSO), can both be performed in one single operation session. However, data on complication rates of the combined procedure is scarce and no consensus exists on the preferred order of procedures.

Aims: To compare safety outcomes between mastectomy performed in a single procedure with those when performed in a combined procedure and assess whether the order of procedures matters when they are combined.

Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed of trans men who underwent masculinizing mastectomy with or without TLH?±?BSO in a combined session. The effects of the surgical procedure on complication and reoperation rate of the chest were assessed using logistic regression.

Results: In total, 480 trans men were included in the study. Of these, 212 patients underwent the combined procedure. The gynecological procedure was performed first in 152 (71.7%) patients. In the total sample, postoperative hematoma of the chest occurred in 11.3%; 16% in the combined versus 7.5% in the single mastectomy group (p?=?0.001). Reoperations due to hematoma of the chest were performed in 7.5% of all patients; 10.8% in the combined versus 4.9% in the single mastectomy group (p?=?0.017). The order of procedures in the combined group had no significant effect on postoperative hematoma of the chest (p?=?0.856), and reoperations (p?=?0.689).

Conclusion: Combining masculinizing mastectomy with TLH?±?BSO in one session was associated with significantly more hematoma and reoperations compared with separately performing mastectomy. This increased risk of complications after a combined procedure should be considered when deciding on surgical options. The order of procedures in a combined procedure did not have an effect on safety outcomes.