Réflexions critiques sur les notions d’abolition et d’altération de la faculté à discerner

Inasmuch as the constitution of the mens rea of any offence remains suspended to its integrity, the capacity for discernment represents a condition of accountability whose definition responds to issues that are as much technical – with respect to psychiatric and psychological penal expertise – as they are theoretical – with respect to our conception of criminal responsibility and the psychological prerequisites that underlie it. Now, the fact is that since its introduction in 1992 with article 122–1 of the Penal Code, this notion of discernment is characterized by a certain conceptual inconsistency, giving rise to a damaging plurality of meanings making the verb discern the condensed version of a heterogeneous network of distinct psychological functions. The polysemic term of discernment thus gives rise to a fundamental indetermination as to the nature of the faculty that must be examined in order to decide on its abolition or its preservation at the moment of the act. This is not without favouring the appearance and persistence of arbitrary interpretations, and consequently discordant expert conclusions. Even more problematic, however, is the idea of an alteration of discernment, given the irreducible discrepancy between the continuous nature of an alteration and the discontinuous nature of the conclusion to which the agent is subject, in that the legal demand requires a decision – in a discretization of what is continuous – between the presence and absence of something that is lacking. We will in fact show in what way this concept of alteration as it applies to discernment tends to be either meaningless, or redundant – and therefore useless – in relation to that of abolition. So much so that the only conceivable solution to maintain a certain gradation of degrees of non-accountability seems to consist in having to specify the different types of abolition of discernment potentially observed, and then to propose a hierarchization according to their greater or lesser compatibility with the conservation of a criminal responsibility. .     

Effects of containment and closure policies on controlling the COVID‐19 pandemic in East Asia

Growing efforts have been made to pool coronavirus data and control measures from countries and regions to compare the effectiveness of government policies. We examine whether these strategies can explain East Asia’s effective control of the COVID‐19 pandemic based on time‐series data with cross‐correlations between the Stringency Index and number of confirmed cases during the early period of outbreaks. We suggest that multidisciplinary empirical research in healthcare and social sciences, personality, and social psychology is needed for a clear understanding of how cultural values, social norms, and individual predispositions interact with policy to affect life‐saving behavioural changes in different societies.     

Development of rules and strategies: balancing the old and the new

The experiments described in the lead articles replicate findings from previous studies of development of knowledge about balance scales, add several new findings, and raise four key questions: (a) How can rule use best be assessed? (b) How can we reconcile systematic use of rules with variable use of strategies? (c) When do children begin to use rules? and (d) How do children generate new rules? In this Reflection, we summarize current understanding of development of knowledge about balance scales and consider each of the four questions.     

Beyond conflict of interest: the responsible conduct of research

This paper reports data and scholarly opinion that support the perception of systemic flaws in the management of scientific professions and the research enterprise; explores the responsibility that professional status places on the scientific professions, and elaborates the concept of the responsible conduct of research (RCR). Data are presented on research misconduct, availability of research guidelines, and perceived research quality. An earlier version of this paper was presented at an International Conference on “Conflict of Interest and its Significance in Science and Medicine” held in Warsaw, Poland, 5–6 April, 2002. The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of Research Integrity, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or any other federal agency.     

Causal Responsibility and Rationing in Medicine

The article addresses the issue of rationing health care services, a topic currently being hotly debated in many countries. The author argues that the aspect of causal responsibility ought to play a decisive role in the allocation of limited medical resources. Starting out from Ronald Dworkin's distinction between option luck and brute luck, the appropriate and meaningful uses of the term causal responsibility are clarified first. A discussion of the conditions which might justify giving lower priority to patients whose illnesses are the result of unhealthy behavior, like e.g. alcohol abuse, follows. Causal responsibility is then viewed in the context of private health insurance and the club model of organ donation. It is argued that individuals themselves are basically responsible for their decisions regarding insurance coverage and membership in organ donors' clubs. Causal responsibility is shown to be a more suitable criterion for rationing scarce medical resources than other criteria which might alternatively be considered, such as patients' age.     

From case management to prevention of scientific dishonesty in Denmark

In 1992, The Danish Medical Research Council established a national committee on scientific dishonesty with the twofold task of handling cases of scientific misconduct and taking preventive initiatives. Scientific dishonesty was proven in only five cases, but in another nine cases lesser degrees of deviations from good scientific practice were found. The experiences from a total of 24 treated cases indicated that three key areas were at the basis of most of the accusations and the deviations from good practice: uncertainty about 1) authorship, about 2) rights and duties to use scientific data and about 3) agreements at the initiation of joint studies. As a consequence guidelines on good practice have been issued on these key subjects. An earlier version of this paper was presented at a symposium, Scientific Misconduct. An International Perspective, organised by The Medical University of Warsaw, 16 November, 1998.     

The American experience: Lessons learned

This paper discusses ten lessons learned since 1989 about handling allegations of scientific misconduct involving biomedical and behavioral research supported by the U. S. Public Health Service. An earlier version of this paper was presented at a symposium, Scientific Misconduct: An International Perspective, organised by The Medical University of Warsaw, 16 November, 1998. The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of Research Integrity, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or any other federal agency.     

Auguste Comte on Positivism and Happiness

Auguste Comte (1798–1857) is the founder of a French school of thought that became famous for its encyclopaedic account of the sciences as well as for its exposition of what was designed as a way out of a state of intellectual and moral crisis. This essay demonstrates that there is a linkage between the diagnosis of crisis and the pursuit of happiness in Comte's foundation of positivism. It begins by distinguishing Comte's notion of positivism from that of a value-free science. In analysing Comte's peculiar usage of the term happiness, the essay shows that happiness is understood as the result of the convergence (consensus) of three components: a scientific conception of the world, the feelings of love and veneration, and a wisely ordered activity. The essay then demonstrates that the first of these components is of primary importance inasmuch as it is to frame a new horizon within which man is expected to return to a healthy state of mind, to reshape both his hopes and activities, and to discover his own participation in a supreme order acting through the laws of nature as well as through those of the civilization in which he lives. Conveying this new horizon to citizens of a lasting Republic is the sacred mission of sociology. The essay concludes by pointing out that Comte's conception of happiness can be assessed as unifying some main qualities of life as they are classified in Ruut Veenhoven's fourfold matrix.     

Contemporary Psychotherapy: Promoting Personal Responsibility for Therapeutic Change

An assortment of factors in modern society can be involved in the etiology and treatment of mental illness. Theories about etiology usually underlie, and therefore guide, most strategies for treatment. Although a comprehensive bio-psycho-social approach to mental illness can help to foster the collaboration of an interdisciplinary treatment team, a heavy emphasis on biological factors or cultural deprivation may reduce the client's feelings of personal responsibility for change. Contemporary psychotherapy can help clients reduce their tendency to attribute blame to biological predispositions or external societal factors. Instead, it is more helpful to cultivate attributions for personal responsibility for change, growth, and maturation.     

Confirmation of Scientific Hypotheses as Relations

Summary  In spite of several attempts to explicate the relationship between a scientific hypothesis and evidence, the issue still cries for a satisfactory solution. Logical approaches to confirmation, such as the hypothetico-deductive method and the positive instance account of confirmation, are problematic because of their neglect of the semantic dimension of hypothesis confirmation. Probabilistic accounts of confirmation are no better than logical approaches in this regard. An outstanding probabilistic account of confirmation, the Bayesian approach, for instance, is found to be defective in that it treats evidence as a formal entity and this creates the problem of relevance of evidence to the hypothesis at issue, in addition to the difficulties arising from the subjective interpretation of probabilities. This essay purports to satisfy the need for a successful account of hypothesis confirmation by offering an original formulation based on the notion of instantiation of the relation urged by an hypothesis.