In the netherworld of the bond market, down is up, bad is good, and every investor needs a tour guide.

In the netherworld of the bond market, down is up, bad is good, and every investor needs a tour guide.

This paper presents an attempt to integrate theories of causal processes—of the kind developed by Wesley Salmon and Phil Dowe—into a theory of causal models using Bayesian networks. We suggest that arcs in causal models must correspond to possible causal processes. Moreover, we suggest that when processes are rendered physically impossible by what occurs on distinct paths, the original model must be restricted by removing the relevant arc. These two techniques suffice to explain cases of late preëmption and other cases (...) that have proved problematic for causal models. (shrink)

Un passage biffé d’une lettre à Antoine Arnauld du 14 janvier 1688 rappelle un projet ancien chez Leibniz, celui d’augmenter l’extension de la logique démonstrative. Il écrit : « votre Art de penser contient déjà de belles méditations, qu’on peut augmenter et pousser plus avant ». Le compliment est évidemment fort ambigu, et rappelle la fonction que Leibniz donne parfois à des auteurs appartenant grosso modo au même espace intellectuel que Descartes ou Pascal, c’est-à-dire celle d’avoir comme...

Much debate has surrounded "switching" scenarios in which a subject's reasoning is said to exhibit the fallacy of equivocation ( Burge 1988 ; Boghossian 1992, 1994 ). Peter Ludlow has argued that such scenarios are "epistemically prevalent" and, therefore, epistemically relevant alternatives ( Ludlow 1995a ). Since a distinctive feature of the cases in question is that the subject blamelessly engages in conceptual equivocation, we may label them 'equivocational switching cases'. Ludlow's influential argument occurs in a discussion about compatibilism with (...) regards to anti-individualism (or content externalism) and self-knowledge. However, the issue has wide-reaching consequences for many areas of epistemology. Arguably, the claim that equivocational switching cases are epistemically relevant may bear on the epistemology of inference, testimony, memory, group rationality and belief revision. Ludlow's argument proceeds from a now well-known "down to Earth" switching-case of a subject, Biff, who travels between the US and the UK. I argue that Ludlow's case-based argument fails to support the general claim that conceptual equivocational switching cases are prevalent and epistemically relevant. Thus, the discussion addresses the basis of some poorly understood issues regarding the epistemological consequences of anti-individualism. Simultaneously, the discussion is broadened from the narrow focus on self-knowledge. Finally, the critical discussion serves as the basis for some general reflections on epistemic relevance and the epistemic risks associated with conceptual equivocation. Specifically, I suggest that philosophy is an area where the risk of conceptual equivocation is extraordinarily high. (shrink)

Le premier volume d'inédits de Levinas comprend un hommage à Bergson rédigé en 1946. Levinas voit en Bergson celui qui s'est opposé au temps de la science et des machines au nom du temps vécu ; ceci a rendu possible la conception heideggérienne du temps comme être. Levinas souscrit à la grande découverte de Bergson. Il souligne l'intérêt de la critique bergsonienne du néant comme être biffé, mais rejette la critique du désordre qui ne serait qu'un ordre différent ; pour (...) lui, le désordre est le chaos préalable à tout ordre. Surtout, il voit dans la durée un temps fondamental, une diachronie première, qui rend possibles les trois dimensions du temps. Et il note que la durée est une vie que la mort ne limite pas ; le temps n'est pas la marque de notre finitude. Pour Bergson, seule la matière meurt, par manque d'énergie. Bien qu'il n'ait pas suivi la méthode bergsonienne, Levinas reconnaît la supériorité de l'analyse de la durée et la prolonge dans le sens d'un immémorial subjectif. The first volume of Levinas' unpublished texts includes a tribute paid to Bergson in 1946. Levinas considers Bergson as the philosopher who opposed the time of science and machines in the name of time experienced, and this in turn paved the way to Heidegger's concept of time as being. Levinas subscribes to that major insight of Bergson. He underlines the interest of Bergson's criticism of nothingness as « being scratched out », but rejects his criticism of disorder as but a different kind of order. For Levinas, disorder is the chaos preliminary to any kind of order. Above all, he sees in duration a fundamental time, a primary diachrony which makes possible the three dimensions of time. He remarks that duration is life not limited by death: time is not the mark of our finitude. For Bergson, matter alone dies, for lack of energy. While he does not follow Bergson's method, Levinas acknowledges the superiority of his analysis of duration and takes it further in the direction of immemorial subjectivity. (shrink)

Much debate has surrounded “switching” scenarios in which a subject's reasoning is said to exhibit the fallacy of equivocation. Peter Ludlow has argued that such scenarios are “epistemically prevalent” and, therefore, epistemically relevant alternatives. Since a distinctive feature of the cases in question is that the subject blamelessly engages in conceptual equivocation, we may label them ‘equivocational switching cases’.Ludlow's influential argument occurs in a discussion about compatibilism with regards to anti‐individualism and self‐knowledge. However, the issue has wide‐reaching consequences for many (...) areas of epistemology. Arguably, the claim that equivocational switching cases are epistemically relevant may bear on the epistemology of inference, testimony, memory, group rationality and belief revision.Ludlow's argument proceeds from a now well‐known “down to Earth” switching‐case of a subject, Biff, who travels between the US and the UK. I argue that Ludlow's case‐based argument fails to support the general claim that conceptual equivocational switching cases are prevalent and epistemically relevant. Thus, the discussion addresses the basis of some poorly understood issues regarding the epistemological consequences of anti‐individualism. Simultaneously, the discussion is broadened from the narrow focus on self‐knowledge. Finally, the critical discussion serves as the basis for some general reflections on epistemic relevance and the epistemic risks associated with conceptual equivocation. Specifically, I suggest that philosophy is an area where the risk of conceptual equivocation is extraordinarily high. (shrink)

L’alliance est la grammaire principale du monde. Phénomène commun, local et universel, le plus pauvre et le plus noble. Elle se trouve cependant aujourd’hui plus que jamais contrariée. Le monde est en dés-alliance sur le plan social, politique, anthropologique, écologique, techno-scientifique, métaphysique. Les demandes répétées de « recréer du lien » en corroborent le fait plus qu’elles n’en dessinent une alternative : affranchies de tout « principe », elles échouent à leur tour sur les rives du nihilisme. C’est que le (...) principe est tombé dans l’oubli. Ses titres ont été, dès la fin du xixe siècle et tout au long du xxe siècle, durement contestés et ses droits confisqués. Nombre de succédanés se sont imposés, avec leurs antinomies et leurs tragédies humaines : Raison suffisante, Progrès, Destin, Cause, État. Le principe ainsi reclassé, déclassé, fut biffé derechef au titre de ce qui lui fut imputé : voracité de l’Un, maîtrise formelle de l’universalité, logique de sécurisation historique. Reconsidérer le principe autrement, i.e. comme alliance, tel est l’enjeu phénoménologique du présent ouvrage : loin de tout Deus ex machina, elle est le jeu de la différence initiatrice, de la pluralité unitaire, de la donation herméneutique. Ainsi, au principe, l’alliance fait être et fait temps. Elle est notre première promesse. (shrink)

This paper criticizes an influential argument from Thomas Nagel’s THE POSSIBILTIY OF ALTRUISM, an argument that plays a foundational role in the philosophies of (at least) Philippa Foot, John McDowell and Jonathan Dancy. Nagel purports to prove that a person can be can be motivated to perform X by the belief that X is likely to bring about Y, without a causally active or biffy desire for Y. If Cullity and Gaut are to be believed (ETHICS AND PRACTICAL REASONING) this (...) is widely regarded within the practical reasoning industry as an established fact. My thesis is a simple one. Nagel’s argument is an abject failure and the philosophies that are founded on it are built upon sand. There is a little bit of rather amateurish X-Phi at the end, but I don’t want readers to get too excited about this as it is essentially icing on the cake. This paper is not primarily an exercise in Experimental Philosophy but in Baby Logic, and it’s central thesis is a logical one, namely that Nagel (to put the point politely) fails to prove his thesis. (shrink)