One of the most striking phenomena of our time is the climate of uncertainty and confusion about fundamental norms and values. It has even been observed that the movement of modern science and technology has eroded the foundations from which norms could be derived. Meanwhile, in this time of confusion ethics is observed to be blossoming as never before in our universities. This paper addresses the question how assured we can be that a hefty dose of ethics in science and (...) the university is an appropriate medicine for the problems of the modern age. A roundabout route is taken. Our analysis begins not with the current problem of norms and values but with another characteristic feature of our century, namely the spiraling course of science and technology. Some initial critical reflections on the widespread view of the autonomy of science and technology suggest that in the technological society we face problems our theoretical toolkit is not outfitted to deal with. Traditionally, ethics has been concerned with the regulation of human action between individual human subjects. The need and possibilities for an ethics for collective human action or for an ethics on a systems level is indicated. It is concluded that today perhaps more than ever, science and the university have an important task to fulfill. (shrink)

One of the central explananda in the debate on social cognition is the interpretation of other people in terms of reasons for action. There is a growing dissatisfaction among participants in the debate concerning the descriptive adequacy of the traditional belief-desire model of action interpretation. Applying this model as an explanatory model at the subpersonal level threatens to leave the original explanandum largely unarticulated. Against this background we show how Brandom’s deontic scorekeeping model can be used as a valuable descriptive (...) tool for making folk psychology explicit. Following Brandom’s non-formalist and non-mentalistic account of reason discourse, we suggest that the process of making sense of others is best captured as proceeding from a ‘factive’ baseline. According to this picture the ascription of beliefs and desires is not the default interpretation strategy, but rather the result of prior scaffolding of the agent’s deontic score. We close by discussing Brandom’s model in the light of empirical findings on the ontogeny of reason attribution. (shrink)

It is generally acknowledged that confabulation undermines the authority of self-attribution of mental states. But why? The mainstream answer is that confabulation misrepresents the actual state of one’s mind at some relevant time prior to the confabulatory response. This construal, we argue, rests on an understanding of self-attribution as first-person mindreading. Recent developments in the literature on folk psychology, however, suggest that mental state attribution also plays an important role in regulating or shaping future behaviour in conformity with normative expectations. (...) We explore an analogue understanding of self-attribution of mental states in terms of first-person mindshaping. The main aim of this paper is to explore how this insight alters the implications of empirical confabulation studies on first-person authority. We also indicate how this sheds new light on the phenomenon of confabulation itself. (shrink)

The development of self-knowledge or self-insight is a well-recognized therapeutic factor in psychotherapy. In some way or other, all evidence-based therapies seek to reframe and enrich patients’ own understanding of themselves. In this article, we focus on self-knowledge with respect to mental states, in particular those states that cause patients to seek treatment.As an example, imagine a person who enrolls in psychotherapy because he finds himself unable to commit himself to intimate relationships. During the first session, he tells his therapist (...) about his youth, about how his father abandoned him and his mother when he was 8 years old. At one point he says, “I guess I’m... (shrink)

A distinguishing feature of today’s world is that technology has built the house in which humanity lives. More and more, our lives are lived within the confines of its walls. Yet this implies that technology entails far more than the material artifacts surrounding us. Technology is no longer simply a matter of objects in the hands of individuals; it has become a very complex system in which our everyday lives are embedded. The systemic character of modern technology confronts us with (...) relatively new questions and dimensions of human responsibility. Hence this paper points out the need for exploring systems ethics as a new field of ethics essential for managing our technological world and for transforming it into a sane and healthy habitat for human life. Special attention is devoted to the introduction of information technology, which will continue unabated into coming decades and which is already changing our whole world of technology. (shrink)

Do psychopaths suffer from impairments that undermine their capacity for moral reasoning and behavior? And, if so, does that mean they are not morally responsible for their actions? The first, empirical question might seem to be rather straightforward, whereas the second, philosophical question might seem more complex and therefore more difficult to answer. In their rich and thought-provoking paper, Jalava and Griffiths target the first question. They forcefully remind us of the fact that answering empirical questions can be just as (...) complex as answering philosophical ones. Do psychopaths suffer from responsibility-relevant moral impairments? Based on the empirical data Jalava and Griffiths discuss in their... (shrink)

The decontextualization of technology has paved the way for an enormous dynamics of development. Modern technology, freed from restraining bonds to specific cultures, has undergone unprecedented extension and growth. The dynamics of technological development has sucked the whole of society and culture into a maelstrom of change. At the very moment during recent decades that the value of the world's varied cultures and societies was being discovered, modern technology was invading them on a global scale and assimilating them into a (...) comprehensive world system. This paper discusses the problem of development and underdevelopment in relation to the world?wide spread and inner dynamics of the technological society. It contributes to the discussion about development ethics and the need for societal transformation. (shrink)

This introduction is part of the special issue ‘ Self-knowledge in perspective’ guest edited by Fleur Jongepier and Derek Strijbos. // Papers included in the special issue: Transparency, expression, and self-knowledge Dorit Bar-On -/- Self-knowledge and communication Johannes Roessler -/- First-person privilege, judgment, and avowal Kateryna Samoilova -/- Self-knowledge about attitudes: rationalism meets interpretation Franz Knappik -/- How do you know that you settled a question? Tillmann Vierkant -/- On knowing one’s own resistant beliefs Cristina Borgoni -/- Self-knowledge and (...) imagination Peter Langland-Hassan -/- Transparent emotions? A critical analysis of Moran’s transparency claim Naomi Kloosterboer -/- Mind-making practices: the social infrastructure of self-knowing agency and responsibility Victoria McGeer -/- Pluralistic folk psychology and varieties of self-knowledge : an exploration Kristin Andrews -/-. (shrink)

Throughout the text, the reader is reminded of the contribution of the Christian faith to matters of development and ethics.

In this paper, we take issue with the belief–desire model of second- and third-person action interpretation as it is presented by both theory theories and cognitivist versions of simulation theory. These accounts take action interpretation to consist in the (tacit) attribution of proper belief–desire pairs that mirror the structure of formally valid practical inferences. We argue that the belief–desire model rests on the unwarranted assumption that the interpreter can only reach the agent's practical context of action through inference. This assumption (...) betrays a deep-seated bias toward disengaged, observational interpretation strategies. On our alternative picture, the interpreter can start off on the assumption of a shared practical context and proceed to reason discourse in those cases in which this assumption runs aground. Following Brandom's non-formalist account of reason discourse, we suggest that interpreting other people's actions in terms of reasons is not a matter of following the principles of formally valid practical syllogisms, but of endorsing practical material inferences that are correct in virtue of a shared practical world. (shrink)

Understanding lone actor grievance-fueled violence remains a challenge. We believe that the concept of grievance provides an opportunity to add an engaged, first-person perspective to the assessment of lone actor extreme violence. We propose an enactivist philosophical approach that can help to understand the why and how of the pathway from grievance to violent extremism. Enactivism sees grievance as a dynamic, interpersonal, and context-sensitive construct that indicates how offenders make sense of the world they live in and how under certain (...) circumstances it fuels violent behavior. Hence, grievance should not be understood as a given thing, but as an unfolding experience that involves sense-making through interaction with the environment. This relational and ecological understanding requires another approach than looking at demographic factors or life histories, only from an outsider’s perspective. Enactivism invites us to look at such risk factors as external indices of an ongoing process of active self-regulation and sense-making, and in some cases spiraling toward extreme violence. To understand the mindset of the offender we need to look more in depth at the processes that shape this mindset: why does this person, with this history, in this context, and at this point in time, proceed to use violence? The enactivist approach to the mind offers a complementary framework that may help us to understand the dynamics of grievance as a possible precursor to violent extremism. It also helps to appreciate why the relative unpredictability of the pathway toward lone actor extreme violence is not necessarily a sign of empirical weakness but a matter of principle due to the non-linearity of the processes involved. We end by summarizing how enactivism could contribute to the prevention of extremist violence and research and how it can help to avoid reinforcing stigmas and re-establishing a confirmation bias. (shrink)

In her commentary, Kennett helpfully reiterates Pickard’s criticism of Strawsonian theories of blame. Angry forms of blame like resentment are, according to Pickard, characterized by a sense of entitlement and are counterproductive to therapy. Some disagree that entitlement is a necessary condition for emotional blame, but also more permissive understandings of Strawsonian emotional blame have been considered inappropriate and counterproductive in a therapeutic relationship and on a psychiatric ward.We proposed to bracket definitional issues about the meaning of emotional blame and (...) instead looked at the possible therapeutic role of negative affect in clinical settings. Our paper conceptualizes... (shrink)

In this article we analyze the strengths and weaknesses of mindreading versus embodied cognition approaches to emotion understanding. In the first part of the article we argue that mindreading explanations of how we understand the emotions of others (TT, ST or hybrid) face a version of the frame problem, i.e. the problem of how to limit the scope of the information that is relevant to mindreading. Also, we show that embodied cognition explanations are able to by-pass this problem because they (...) provide a characterization of social understanding as being essentially situated. However, embodied cognition explanations seem to be limited in scope insofar as they do not target the more sophisticated forms of emotion understanding that have traditionally been the main focus of mindreading explanations. In the second part of the article we discuss Goldie’s account of emotion understanding as a possible way to complement embodied cognition approaches without re-introducing the frame problem. We offer two suggestions that might further the integration of Goldie’s account of emotion understanding within the framework of embodied cognition. (shrink)

The article proposes a novel approach to mental agency that is inspired by Victoria McGeer’s work on self-regulation. The basic idea is that certain mental acts leave further work to be done for an agent to be considered an authoritative self-ascriber of corresponding dispositional mental states. First, we discuss Richard Moran’s account of avowals, which grounds first-person authority in deliberative, self-directed agency. Although this view is promising, we argue that it ultimately fails to confront the empirical gap between occurrent judgments (...) and dispositional beliefs. Second, we show how Victoria McGeer's account of self-regulation allows us to bridge this gap by emphasizing that avowals are only reliable and authoritative insofar as we take certain steps to live up to the commitments inherent in our self-ascriptions. Third, we address the question whether and to what extent self-regulation can be seen as a form of mental agency. Unlike the ‘pure’ deliberative form of mental agency advocated by Moran, which is direct, conscious and intra-personal, we follow McGeer and argue for a notion of mental agency as an indirect, unconscious and inter-personal process of self-regulation. (shrink)

Strijbos and Slors argue against what they call the “naïve common-sense” view of self-management as taking direct control over one’s mental health conditions. Their argument consists of two steps. First, they claim that self-management is often better understood as a form of facilitation, like a drover steering the herd. The drover is not in the position to directly intervene on the course the herd is taking, but instead manipulates it by exploiting her knowledge of the context-dependency of the herd’s (...) behavior. Second, even though Strijbos and Slors are critical of the “naïve common-sense” view of self-management, they do not want to throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. Despite the fact that... (shrink)

The philosophical debate over psychopaths’ moral and criminal responsibility is increasingly evidence based. However, as we noted, such arguments are misleading if philosophers only consider evidence that supports their own positions. In his response, Glannon counters our argument by introducing new evidence—neuroimaging data—and so demonstrates the exact problem we outlined; Strijbos, in contrast, offers a workable solution.Glannon’s response is a succinct summation of the strengths and weaknesses that philosophers bring to the debate. Although Glannon accurately portrays the potential role (...) of neuroimaging data in determining responsibility as merely supplementary to behavior, he simultaneously mistakes the... (shrink)

In the study reported in their rich article, Brandenburg and Strijbos investigate the attitudes of clinicians, in a facility for adults with autism, to norm transgressions by service users. In doing so they interrogate Hanna Pickard’s responsibility without blame approach to therapy and ask whether it applies across different clinical settings.Pickard draws a distinction between responsibility for an action in the sense of being the agent of the action and so, by definition, having some control over it, and moral (...) responsibility for an action which includes being blameworthy for it. For Pickard, you can be responsible for a harmful action without being morally responsible and therefore blameworthy. You might... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Tribute to an Altruistic EditorWerdie van Staden, MD, PhDThis editorial celebrates the altruistic work of Professor John Sadler during his tenure as editor of Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology. Since its founding about 31 years ago, he has done this behind-the-scenes work, principally to the benefit of our scholarly community, creating a space and opportunity for excellence in advancing the common interests of philosophers, psychiatrists, psychologists and the people they (...) serve professionally. Much of this dedication and efforts never reach the limelight whilst the journal enjoys increasing visibility and impact, ranking currently seventh among 328 philosophy journals and featuring on the 94th percentile. We may attribute this achievement to the authors of PPP, but behind this success story, John has been the vital oxygen in the breathing and energy production of PPP.Our senior editors who have been working under John's leadership for some time, attest as follows in reversed alphabetical order: Michael Wong writes,I once wondered how a psychiatric ethicist like John operates as a journal chief editor? Does he always ask three questions for every submission? Could I publish it? Would I publish it? Should I publish it? I found out very soon after I joined PPP as a Senior Editor that John is actually an editor of empathy and compassion, if there is indeed such an entity in academic publishing, who also has an objective and critical mind. He impresses me that he feels the vulnerability of those who submit a manuscript for peer scrutiny and sees the imbalance of the power relationship between the author and the reviewers. This perceptiveness however never distracts him from spotting the inconvenient truth that a submission still has a lot more to work on before it is ready for publication. I am truly grateful to John for the privilege to have worked with him and to learn from the maestro how to appreciate the effort every author puts into his or her work and how to convey unambiguous yet constructive critique in a collegial manner that does nothing but to further research and scholarship. John, your generosity and leadership will always be missed.Tim Thornton writesMy most striking experience of John's editorship of PPP came at the start of my connection with the journal. In 2014, I inherited from Bill Fulford – the founding editor – the role of UK editor of what was, at the time, a dual UK-USA edited journal. 2014 was a bad year for me – my parents both died and I spent a term living in a dark cell in a castle in the University of Durham – and I leant very heavily on John's help, assisted by the very capable Linda Muncy. Editing an interdisciplinary journal seemed to me at the time an almost [End Page 93] impossible task. Balancing clinical, philosophical and relevant other reviews was difficult and time consuming. One paper – a very fine submission taking a theologically informed look at depression – had been in the review process seemingly forever though its author was very understanding of the delays. But John (and Linda) graciously and practically accommodated my apprenticeship. John wisely pressed for both the move to a modern electronic submission system and the recruitment of more senior editors. Both of these seem necessary for the smooth running of a modern journal and are a marked contrast with the time when even using a spreadsheet and a Psion Organiser seemed the height of technology.But the mark of a good editor is not just practical and technological but rather making difficult decisions balancing widening access to publication with high academic standards. This is a particular challenge for philosophy and mental healthcare but one that John has managed with aplomb.Derek Strijbos writesHe was a central figure in the international academic field of philosophy and psychiatry ever since I was introduced to the topic by my supervisors here in the Netherlands, about 20 years ago. I met John at several conferences during the past decade, one of which was in Amsterdam in 2015, about scientism in psychiatry. I clearly remember the interesting conversation we had during dinner, in which explained his view on values in psychiatry... (shrink)

While discovery of error provides personal gain for the entrepreneur, does this process automatically allocate value equitably among all stakeholders? We argue that the entrepreneurial process can be used to generate or maintain an entrepreneur’s personal wealth through the exploitation of a stakeholder group. Thus entrepreneurship can be both an equilibrating and a disequilibrating process and that both the visible hand of government and the decisions of an entrepreneur can speed or slow our movement toward value equilibrium. Speed toward value (...) equilibrium is likely to be important to a victimized stakeholder group and deserves further scholarly attention. (shrink)

Our study presents an overview of the issues that were brought forward by participants of a moral case deliberation (MCD) project in two elderly care organizations. The overview was inductively derived from all case descriptions (N = 202) provided by participants of seven mixed MCD groups, consisting of care providers from various professional backgrounds, from nursing assistant to physician. The MCD groups were part of a larger MCD project within two care institutions (residential homes and nursing homes). Care providers are (...) confronted with a wide variety of largely everyday ethical issues. We distinguished three main categories: ‘resident’s behavior’, ‘divergent perspectives on good care’ and ‘organizational context’. The overview can be used for agendasetting when institutions wish to stimulate reflection and deliberation. It is important that an agenda is constructed from the bottom-up and open to a variety of issues. In addition, organizing reflection and deliberation requires effort to identify moral questions in practice whilst at the same time maintaining the connection with the organizational context and existing communication structures. Once care providers are used to dealing with divergent perspectives, inviting different perspectives (e.g. family members) to take part in the deliberation, might help to identify and address ethical ‘blind spots’. (shrink)

Contemporary philosophical discourse has deeply problematized the possibility of absolute existence. Hegel’s Foundation Free Metaphysics demonstrates that by reading Hegel’s Doctrine of the Concept in his Science of Logic as a form of Absolute Dialetheism, Hegel’s logic of the concept can account for the possibility of absolute existence. Through a close examination of Hegel’s concept of self-referential universality in his Science of Logic, Moss demonstrates how Hegel’s concept of singularity is designed to solve a host of metaphysical and epistemic paradoxes (...) central to this problematic. He illustrates how Hegel’s revolutionary account of universality, particularity, and singularity offers solutions to six problems that have plagued the history of Western philosophy: the problem of nihilism, the problem of instantiation, the problem of the missing difference, the problem of absolute empiricism, the problem of onto-theology, and the third man regress. Moss shows that Hegel’s affirmation and development of a revised ontological argument for God’s existence is designed to establish the necessity of absolute existence. By adopting a metaphysical reading of Richard Dien Winfield’s foundation free epistemology, Moss critically engages dominant readings and contemporary debates in Hegel scholarship. Hegel’s Foundation Free Metaphysics will appeal to scholars interested in Hegel, German Idealism, 19th- and 20th-century European philosophy, metaphysics, epistemology, and contemporary European thought. (shrink)

Socrates wrote nothing; Plato's accounts of Socrates helped to establish western politics, ethics, and metaphysics. Both have played crucial and dramatically changing roles in western culture. In the last two centuries, the triumph of democracy has led many to side with the Athenians against a Socrates whom they were right to kill. Meanwhile the Cold War gave us polar images of Plato as both a dangerous totalitarian and an escapist intellectual. And visions of Plato have proliferated at the heart of (...) postmodern critiques of the very idea of metaphysics and politics. Plato's Progeny begins with an account of modern responses to the trial of Socrates and the controversial question of Socrates' relation to Plato. At its centre are two chapters exploring the idea of Platonic origins in and for philosophy, and of Platonic foundations for philosophical politics. Exploring unfamiliar as well as familiar invocations of Plato, Melissa Lane argues that twentieth-century ideological battles have obscured the importance of Socratic individualism, the nature of Platonic ethics, and the value of Platonic politics. Succinct and clearly written, this is an ideal guide for everyone interested in the way philosophers are still writing footnotes to Plato. (shrink)

No part ot Plato's writings has been more debated than the three similes in Books VI.-VII. of the Republic, and still there is a diversity of opinion about their meaning. I believe that most of these difficulties arise from certain assumptions about their purpose which need revision. The current view applies the Cave to the Line, as Plato seems to direct, and this application, which is itself attended by considerable difficulties, leads to an assimilation of the two figures till they (...) seem to have much the same content and purpose. Again, as this makes the lower line appear to be the phenomenal world, it is thought that the simile of the sun foreshadows the theme of the Line by hinting at a connexion between the intelligible and the sensible which is made more explicit in the Line. Thus the group of similes seem mainly intended to show the dependence of Becoming upon Being. This paper will argue that such a view depends upon the misrepresentation of the symbolism adopted by Plato, that two antithetical groups of symbols are confused with one another, and that symbols are even identified with antitypes. Owing to these misinterpretations the Form of the Good has been mistaken for a material cause; both the Line and the Cave have been thought to reveal Plato as embarrassed by a dualism between sense and intellect, and the purpose of the Cave in particular, since the error is cumulative, has been completely obscured. This paper will attempt to substitute for current accounts another interpretation which will relate the three similes closely with the political arguments of Book VI., and with the Platonic education which is set forth in close connexion with them. (shrink)

Study of Brahmavidāśiravāda of Mādhava, work on Advaita philosophy.

Commentary on Tarkasaṅgraha of Annambhaṭṭa, active 17th century, treatise on the fundamentals of Nyaya philosophy.

Guiden til Søren Kierkegaards værk Frygt og Bæven er vigtig, fordi det er et værk, som mange finder det svært eller direkte usympatisk at læse, så her skulle være lidt tilgængelige tilgange til forståelsen heraf. Det er troens paradoks, der behandles i værket, og det undersøges via historien om Abraham og Isak. Det er et etisk dilemma af dimensioner, for ikke blot er det et mord, der bliver planlagt, men det er også et mord på Abrahams egen søn, hvis det (...) altså gennemføres, som Gud har befalet. Det, der interesserer pseudonymet Johannes, er det modsætningsforhold, der findes mellem religion og etik, for der er en etisk pligt, som vi alle kender i henhold til, hvad man må og ikke må, eller hvad der er redeligt eller uredeligt. Der er imidlertid også en pligt for Gud, når man er troende, og den pligt kan vise sig at gå imod ordentlighed og lovlighed. (shrink)

Study of Suddhadvaita philosophy with reference to other system of Hindu philosophy.

Collection of 15 works of Śaṅkarācārya; includes commentary in Malayalam.

Supercommentary on Praśastapādabhāṣya of Praśastapādācārya, commemtary on Vaiśeṣikasūtra of Kaṇāda, compendium of Vaiśeṣika philosophy.