Poisoning the Well

In this paper it is shown is that although poisoning the well has generally been treated as a species of ad hominem fallacy, when you try to analyze the fallacy using ad hominem schemes, even by supplementing with related schemes like argument from position to know, the analysis ultimately fails. The main argument of the paper is taken up with proving this negative claim by applying these schemes to examples of arguments associated with the fallacy of poisoning the well. Although there is a positive finding in this quest, in that poisoning the well is shown to be based on and associated with these forms of argument in interesting ways, the paper in the end is led to the conclusion that the fallacy is irreducibly dialectical. Poisoning the well is thus analyzed as a tactic to silence an opponent violating her right to put forward arguments on an issue both parties have agreed to discuss at the confrontation stage of a critical discussion. It is concluded that it is a special form of strategic attack used by one party in the argumentation stage of a critical discussion to improperly shut down the capability of the other party for putting forward arguments of the kind needed to properly move the discussion forward.     

Behavioral changes over several successful agonistic encounters between male mice: Effects of type of “standard opponent”

This study assessed whether two types of non-aggressive “standard opponents” (“intact” and “anosmic” group-housed males) produced similar behavioral changes in isolated OF1 male mice given several experiences of victory. Experimental groups confronted either intact or anosmic opponents every two days until they had completed four encounters. The behavioral changes were recorded using a detailed ethologically inspired analysis. These changes were clearly different depending on the opponent type. When intact opponents were used, experimental subjects increased the time spent in digging, non-social exploration, explore from a distance, and attack over encounters, but showed decreased time spent in threat and a decreased latency to the first attack. In encounters with anosmic opponents, only declines in the latencies to threat and attack were noted. Moreover, the experimental groups differed in their behaviors over encounters. Those confronting intact opponents spent less time in social investigation, more time in explore from a distance and threat, and showed a shorter latencies to threat and attack than counterparts confronting anosmics. These results suggest that, although both types of “standard opponents” are similar in their non-aggressiveness, they elicit rather different behavioral responses in their adversaries. These findings provide additional support for the view that the type of opponent used in studies on intermale aggression is of paramount importance. Indeed, the use of different types of “standardized non-aggressive opponents” appears to be an important source of variability between studies. © 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

教学改革与健全人格养成

教学改革包括教学观念、教学内容、教学方式、学习方式、教学评价等方面的改革。教学改革的最终目的在于实现学生学习方式的转变,促进学生健全人格的养成。20世纪以来世界范围内的课程教学改革整体趋势是儿童本位→知识、智力本位→人本位→以学生发展为本位。本文分别就教学观念、教学内容、教学方式、学习方式、教学评价体系的革新与个体健全人格养成的关系进行了评论性的综述。     

“SCIENCE,” “RELIGION,” AND “SCIENCE‐AND‐RELIGION” IN THE LATE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

Many intellectuals wrote texts on the relations between Islam and science in the nineteenth‐century Ottoman Empire. These texts not only addressed the massive social and cultural changes the Empire was going through, but responded to European authors’ claims about the extent to which Islam was compatible with the modern world. Focusing on several texts written in the second half of the nineteenth century by the influential Muslim Ottoman authors Namik Kemal, Ahmed Midhat, and ?emseddin Sami, this article shows the influence of these exigencies on arguments on Islam and science. In order to represent Islam as a respectable religion in harmony with science, these intellectuals defined a “pure Islam” that was a set of basic principles that could be found in the Qur'an. Rather than an embedded way of life, Islam in these texts was an objectified, delimitable entity that could be imagined as having relations with other entities, such as science.     

How to Release Oneself from an Obligation: Good News for Duties to Oneself

In some cases, you may release someone from some obligation they have to you. For instance, you may release them from a promise they made to you, or an obligation to repay money they have borrowed from you. But most take it as clear that, if you have an obligation to someone else, you cannot in any way release yourself from that obligation. I shall argue the contrary. The issue is important because one standard problem for the idea of having duties to oneself relies on the impossibility of self-release. The argument (the ‘Release Argument’) is that a duty to oneself would be a duty from which one could release oneself, but that this is an absurdity, and so there can be no duties to oneself. This argument is to be rejected because a duty from which one can release oneself is perfectly possible, and such release occurs quite properly from time to time.