Lying is an important moral phenomenon that most people are affected by on a daily basis—be it in personal relationships, in political debates, or in the form of fake news. Nevertheless, surprisingly little is known about what actually constitutes a lie. According to the traditional definition of lying, a person lies if they explicitly express something they believe to be false. Consequently, it is often assumed that people cannot lie by more indirectly communicating believed‐false claims, for instance by merely conversationally (...) implicating them. In this paper, we subject this claim to an empirical test. In a preregistered study of 300 participants, we investigate how people judge cases of implicit deceptions that would usually be excluded by the traditional definition of lying (i.e., conversational implicatures, presuppositions, and nonverbal actions). Our results show that people do in fact consider it possible to lie by indirect means, suggesting that people have a broader concept of lying than is usually assumed. Moreover, our findings indicate that lie judgments are closely tied to the extent to which agents are perceived as having committed themselves to the believed‐false claims they have communicated. We discuss the implications of our results for the traditional definition of lying and propose a new commitment‐based definition of lying that can account for the findings of our experiment. (shrink)

The present study examines cross-cultural differences in people’s concept of lying with regard to the question of whether lying requires an agent to _say_ something they believe to be false. While prominent philosophical views maintain that lying entails that a person explicitly expresses a believed-false claim, recent research suggests that people’s concept of lying might also include certain kinds of deception that are communicated more indirectly. An important drawback of previous empirical work on this topic is that only few studies (...) have investigated people’s concept of lying in non-Western samples. In the present study, we compare people’s intuitions about lying with indirect deceptions (i.e., presuppositions, conversational implicatures, and non-verbal actions) in a sample of _N_ = 255 participants from Russia and _N_ = 300 participants from the United Kingdom. Our findings show a strong degree of similarity between lie ratings of participants from Russia and the United Kingdom, with both samples holding it possible for agents to lie with deceptive statements and actions that do not involve the agent _saying_ something they believe to be false. (shrink)

Hesitations about accepting whole-heartedly Norris et al.'s suggestion to abandon feedback in speech processing models concern (1) whether accounting for all available data justifies additional layers of complexity in the model and (2) whether characterizing Merge as non- interactive is valid. Spoken word recognition studies support the nature of Merge's lexical level and suggest that phonemes should comprise the prelexical level.

Two experiments demonstrated letter-context effects that cannot easily be accounted for by postperceptual theories based on structural redundancy, iigural goodness, or memory advantage. In Experiment 1, subjects identified the color of a letter fragment more accurately in letter than in nonletter contexts. In Experiment 2, subjects identified the feature presented in a precued color more accurately in letters than in nonletters. We argue that these effects result from topdown perceptual processing.

The authors led the development of a framework for ethical decision-making for an Academic Health Sciences Centre. They understood the existing mission, vision, and values statement (MVVs) of the centre as a foundational assertion that embodies an ethical commitment of the institution. Reflecting the Patient and Family Centred Model of Care the institution is living, the MVVs is a suitable base on which to construct an ethics framework. The resultant framework consists of a set of questions for each of the (...) MVVs. Users of the framework are expected to identify two or more possible decisions to address the issue at hand and then, by applying the provided sequence of questions to each, examine these options and determine the overall ethically preferable decision. The construction of such a framework requires the creative involvement of the institution’s staff. Thus the development of the framework can represent a training process in ethical decision-making as well as advance the ethical atmosphere of the institution. This novel approach has the advantage of placing the MVVs on active duty, at the centre of ethical decision-making, and lifts it from its otherwise relative obscurity in most institutions. (shrink)

This is the first of an ongoing series of review essays in which the authors of significant new works of philosophy engage their readers. These inaugural two readings discuss Rein Raud’s important new reassessment of contemporary ontology, Being in Flux: A Post-Anthropocentric Ontology of the Self. They consider its accomplishments, both on its own terms and with reference to its East Asian and South Asian precursors. Raud then offers a response.

Even after the demise of the influential Uno School in the 1980s, Japanese economists have been continuously engaged in the categorial reconstruction of Marx’s Critique of Political Economy, especially the theory of value and money. Writing in the 1980s–2000s, authors of the ‘post-Uno School’, such as Ebitsuka Akira, Mukai Kimitoshi, Kataoka Kōji etc., broadened the value-theoretical views of Uno School orthodoxy to include, among others, the Neue Marx-Lektüre (predominantly H.-G. Backhaus and M. Heinrich) and the French economists C. Benetti and (...) J. Cartelier. This paper will confront the ‘post-Uno School’s’ reading of Marx’s theory of value, which poses the theories of value and money as unreconcilable, leading them to discard the theory of value in favour of a ‘monetary approach’. We show that the dismissal of value theory leads to an introduction of Baileyan and neoclassical elements into Marx’s theory, which we believe to be both theoretically and practically precarious. (shrink)

If every concept ist not, in trivial terms, to have a content, then the content of a concept has to be understood as the set of all concepts that it contains , the concept itself and the tautological concept being excepted. Since a negated concept can only include, in terms of content, the negations of the special concepts, the negated individual concepts are consequently without content . The individual concept, whose content is the sufficient condition for establishing a possible individual (...) as extension, is indispensable if Leibniz's theses are to be upheld: equality of extent is also always equality of content. The intensional conceptual estimation can also be extensionally interpreted. Conceptual negations are however indispensable if a Spinozistic monism is to be avoided and a multitude of the most general elementary concepts obtained. (shrink)

Performance-contingent compensation by means of stock options may induce risk-taking in agents that is excessive from the point of view of the company or the shareholders. We test whether increasing shareholder control may be an effective checking mechanism to rein in such excessive risk-taking. We thus tell one group of experimental CEOs that they may have to justify their decision-making processes in front of their shareholders. This indeed reduces risk-taking and increases the performance of the companies they manage. Implications are (...) discussed. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:(P)rescription Narratives: Feminist Medical Fiction and the Failure of American Censorship. by Stephanie Peebles TaveraEtta M. MaddenStephanie Peebles Tavera. (P)rescription Narratives: Feminist Medical Fiction and the Failure of American Censorship. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2022. Hardback, xii + 220 pp. ISBN 978-1-4744-9319-2.Utopian Studies readers first saw Stephanie Peebles Tavera’s work in print in her 2018 essay on reproductive health in Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s Herland. More recently, in (P)rescription (...) Narratives, she gives readers a view of the much broader historical scope of her scholarship in literary and cultural studies. Tavera’s analysis of what she labels “feminist medical fiction” considers not only novels and short stories but also literary reviews, dramas, and documentary films, many of which will be unfamiliar to readers of utopian and dystopian literature. Yet the book contextualizes the ways in which these works capture the “utopian possibilities” of women writers who pushed for breaking the boundaries of the dystopian strictures of embodied life. The literary works “rescript” what had been prescribed by others as “normalized behavior,” from the latter-nineteenth century through the Progressive Era (5, 37). As Tavera illustrates through her detailed analysis, these women’s narratives provide “interventions that... interrupt the dissemination of false [End Page 612] narratives of the female body” and “alter the course of cultural development toward greater inclusivity” (5).To establish the temporal boundaries for the project, Tavera emphasizes the Comstock Law, established in 1873, and the death of its author Anthony Comstock in 1915. While Comstock’s work often has been understood as restricting pornography, she explains the Comstock Law as more than merely that. Comstock sought to control what he and others saw as sexual deviation, which included birth control in any form. Tavera also bookends the project with lawsuits associated with Victoria Woodhull and Margaret Sanger, both women who advocated for abortion and birth control as means of allowing women to avoid the strictures over their bodies. Additionally, she explains, Comstock’s racism caused him to completely overlook Black women, ironically allowing a space in which Black women’s feminist medical fiction especially rescripts “normalized behavior” (37)—a topic she pursues in two parts of the book.The book follows a roughly chronological path as it examines four topics related to women’s health, brilliantly organized into “(p)rescriptions,” indicated by Rx, rather than chapters with numbers. Rx1, “Crip Medicine,” illustrates how authors such as Charlotte Perkins Gilman pointed to the socially constructed status of “hysteria” in a patriarchal culture that saw women as deviant by nature. Instead, these authors advocated for a more holistic examination of women’s health, impacted by the environments in which they lived. Drawing from Lyman Tower Sargent’s widely accepted view of utopianism as dreaming of a place “considerably better than the society in which the author lived,” she underscores “the utopian impulse underlies much of the work of feminist medical fiction” (39). In particular, writers of feminist medical fiction were “driven by failure.”Perhaps most familiar to illustrate this point is Gilman’s work, such as “The Yellow Wallpaper,” which illustrated how the culture failed certain characters. The narrator of that story suffers postpartum depression and is made worse by Dr. S. Weir Mitchell’s rest cure. Consequently, Gilman proceeded to write other works, such as Moving the Mountain (1911) and then Herland (1915), which push readers to envision “alternative societies” without such destructive patriarchal medical practices (39). But Tavera also explains how Louisa May Alcott’s Eight Cousins, or the Aunt-Hill (1875) critiques contemporary culture by providing a “domestic utopia” in the female domain of Aunt-Hill, wherein the male Dr. Alec Campbell demonstrates “a better way... of caring for the female body” (55). And another key example is Rebecca Harding [End Page 613] Davis’s Kitty’s Choice: A Story of Berrytown (1875). Berrytown is described as “the Utopia in actual laths, orchards, and bushel-measures of the advance guard of the reform party in the United States” (qtd. in Tavera 55). Through its two physicians, Dr. Muller and Dr. McCall, who represent homeopathic and allopathic practitioners, readers see that the society... (shrink)

Rationing is an unavoidable mechanism for reining in healthcare costs. It entails establishing cutoff points that distinguish between what is and is not offered or available to patients. When the resource to be distributed is defined by vague and indeterminate terms such as “beneficial,” “effective,” or even “futile,” the ability to draw meaningful boundary lines that are both ethically and medically sound is problematic. In this article, I draw a parallel between the challenges posed by this problem and the ancient (...) Greek philosophical conundrum known as the “sorites paradox.” I argue, like the paradox, that the dilemma is unsolvable by conventional means of logical analysis. However, I propose another approach that may offer a practical solution that could be applicable to real-life situations in which cutoffs must be decided (such as rationing). (shrink)

When thinking of Plato’s discussions of virtue, many dialogues come to mind, but, assuredly, the Phaedrus does not. The word ἀρετή is used only six times in the dialogue. Unlike other dialogues, the Phaedrus thematizes neither the general concept of virtue nor any of the particular virtues. Given the centrality of virtue to Plato’s ethics and politics, it is surprising to see little reference to virtue in a dialogue devoted to love and to rhetoric, topics that have deep ethical and (...) political significance. -/- I argue that the Phaedrus makes important contributions to our understanding of virtue in Plato despite the infrequency of references. First, the dialogue juxtaposes competing conceptions of virtue: the “urbane” (cf. 227d) capacity to make things conform to one’s happenstance desires, championed by Lysias, and the “manic” capacity to conform oneself to reality, championed by Socrates. After clarifying that enslavement to pleasure-lust is the underlying condition of soul for Lysianic virtue, Socrates reveals that the non-lover’s “virtue” is, in truth, virtue in name only. Rather, true virtue emerges only when the soul becomes harmoniously ordered under reason’s guidance, a condition which is achieved through the soul’s encounter with beauty. Second, in the process of articulating how true virtue comes to be in the soul, Socrates gives grounds for distinguishing it from “self-restraint” (ἐγκράτεια), a condition of soul whose outward aspect may be indistinguishable from that of virtue. While a soul in which reason does not take the reins may act from self-restraint, it does not yet act from virtue. Third, the dialogue gives us resources for seeing how other people, such as artful rhetoricians, can influence one’s cultivation of virtue. At first glance, Socrates’s claim that artful rhetoricians can “hand over” virtue (270b) seems incompatible with his claim that virtue is unteachable (cf. Meno 86d-99e). However, the dialogue offers some resources for seeing that the unteachability of virtue and the capacity for rhetoricians to “hand over” virtue are not, in fact, incompatible. From these three points, we will see that the Phaedrus offers an intellectualist account of virtue reminiscent of what we see in other dialogues. The intellectualist vision here, however, is one that includes a positive role for the subrational elements of the soul rather than one that excludes them from relevance or actively seeks to suppress them. (shrink)

Im institutionalisierten Bereich interkultureller Beziehungen kommt es permanent zu Bemühungen, über gemeinsame musikalische Projekte Brücken zum Austausch von Lebensrealitäten und Erfahrungen zu erzielen. In vielen Fällen besteht jedoch nicht die Gelegenheit des gegenseitigen Austausches, weil die beteiligten Akteure entweder nebeneinander agieren, ohne aufeinander einzugehen und die Impulse ihres Gegenübers in den eigenen Beiträgen zu reflektieren, oder aber eine der beiden Bestandteile den anderen dominiert, und keine entsprechende Gelegenheit zur gleichberechtigten Artikulation einräumt. Der Grund dafür liegt häufig in der Starrheit der (...) musikalischen Systeme, die bei solchen Gelegenheiten aufeinander treffen und deren Unfähigkeit, auf Impulse außerhalb des jeweiligen Bezugsrahmens einzugehen. Die Improvisation bietet in diesem Zusammenhang einen tatsächlichen Spielplatz für unterschiedliche Zugänge und Entwürfe, der dazu einlädt, sich spielerisch einander anzunähern. Während im idiomatisch eingeschränkten Ausdrucksspektrum auch hier noch einige Barrieren existieren dürften, stellt sich im Kontext der harmonisch und rhythmisch freien Variante eine scheinbar ideale Basis zum gegenseitigen Erfahrungsaustausch dar. Diese wird nicht zuletzt aufgrund einer stark individualisierten Klangästhetik und Ausdruckspalette erzielt, deren Repräsentationsanteil an deutlich zuzuordnenden Elementen einer jeweiligen kulturellen Entität jedoch oft nicht exakt zu bestimmen ist. So widmet sich ein zentraler Aspekt der Arbeit der Frage nach der Zuweisungsebene der in diesem Zusammenhang getätigten Ausdrucksweisen, die sich im Bereich zwischen eindeutig einer bestimmten kulturellen Entität zuzuordnenden Elemente – häufig in Form von traditionellen Instrumenten als kulturelle Artefakte einer spezifischen regionalen Zugehörigkeit – und der rein technischen Herangehensweise an die musikalische Praxis der Kollektiv-Improvisation als Bestandteil einer global präsenten Subkultur der freien Improvisationsszene bewegt. Regelmäßig initiierte Projekte, die sich mit dieser Thematik auseinandersetzen werden im methodischen Teil der Arbeit zur Diskussion gestellt und als Ausgangspunkt für Erkenntnisse zur Optimierung von Projekten mit ähnlich ausgerichteten Zielsetzungen herangezogen. (shrink)

Cancer is a puzzling and frightening disease or set of diseases. Cancers have afflicted multicellular living beings for more than 200 million years, and there is evidence of cancers among ancestors of modern humans going back well over a million years. Unlike infectious diseases, parasites, and many environmental diseases, cancer is not primarily caused by some entity that is foreign to our bodies. Its agents of destruction are human cells that have, as it were, slipped their reins, and have (...) been recruited and to some extent transformed into pathological organisms or the building blocks of tumors. As Anya Plutynski puts it in Explaining Cancer : "Cancer may be viewed as akin to a car breaking down, a process... (shrink)

The paper addresses three late Hegelian philosophers from northern Europe: Norwegian M.J. Monrad (1816–97), Swede J.J. Borelius (1823–1909) and Finn Th. Rein (1838–1919). The focus is on their views on the crisis of Hegelian speculative philosophy. The popularity of G.W.F. Hegel's philosophy in Germany declined rapidly since the 1840s. The decline was influenced by e.g. new scientific discoveries. Hegelianism maintained a strong position in northern Europe (especially in Norway and in Finland) several decades longer than in Germany. Rein, Monrad and (...) Borelius, all professors of philosophy, endorsed Hegel’s philosophy and agreed that it has to be reformed in order to meet the new challenges. They disagreed with each other, however, about the extent of this reform. They had conflicting interpretations of Hegel’s method too. (shrink)

In a 1994 paper entitled "Ist eine reine Inhaltslogik moglich?" M. Liske attempted to show that Leibniz's theory of intensional concepts suffers from a serious inadequacy. Liske begins by defining the intension of a concept in two slightly different ways. Broadly conceived, Int is the set of all concepts B which are contained in A, while in a narrow sense, Int* consists of all such B other than A itself. These definitions entail that the tautological concept 0 has an empty (...) intension in the narrow sense, i. e. Int*= Ø, while Int={0}. Furthermore it follows that the intension* of a negated individual-concept also is empty. And from this Liske concludes that the intensions* of all negative concepts must be empty. This, however, is a fallacy which rests upon conflating the empty set, Ø, with the non-empty set {Ø}, which contains Ø as its only element. (shrink)

Given the increasing complexity of living in a global village, countries and regions that are parts of larger political entities frequently have considered the option of separating or seceding an ideal solution to their problems with a larger center of power. Isolation, a form of “freedom from,” has the potential of offering them free rein or “freedom to” manage their affairs for their own sake. Francophone playwrights and filmmakers have found the dialectical interplay between “freedom from” and “freedom to” fertile (...) dramatic soil for plays and films. Some of them work in both of these and other genres. These works seem to ask the same question: Is it desirable or possible to achieve both, even in ideal isolation, without suffering cultural stagnation or repeating the abuse of power on the part of the political center that led to the separation? This article explores the answers to this question given in the plays of Aimée Césaire, Anne Hébert, and Wajdi Mouawad within the greater context for this issue found in J. M. Coetzee’s Waiting for the Barbarians and Azouz Begag’s Un Mouton dans la baignoire and in francophone films by Raoul Peck, Bertrand Tavernier, Claire Denis, Rachid Bouchareb, Ousmane Sembène, Michael Haneke, and Mathieu Kasovitz. (shrink)

Was ist vom Begriff der "Souver?nit?t" geblieben, mit anderen Worten: ist es nach der Schaffung einer Vielzahl kleiner souver?ner Staaten in Osteuropa noch m?glich,?ber die Figur des Souver?ns zu sprechen? Was ist ein Staat sofern er kein Souver?n ist bzw. sofern er nur teilweise ein Souver?n ist? Wieviel Souver?nit?t bedarf es damit ein Staat wirklich souver?n ist? Verhandelt der Internationale Gerichtshof f?r Kriegsverbrechen, die innerhalb des ehemaligen Jugoslawien begangen wurden, de facto die Folgen jener Verbrechen, die die Grundlage der Souver?nit?t (...) und der Unabh?ngigkeit aller dieser neuen kleinen Staaten liegen, w?hrend er de iure auf einer rein pers?nlichen Verantwortlichkeit insistiert? Die Ausf?hrungen versuchen, eine der grundlegenden Aporien der internationalen Rechts zu problematisieren, die - von Kant bis heute - die Unverletzlichkeit der Souver?nit?t eines Staates und, im selben Moment, das Recht auf humanit?re Intervention und auf pr?ventive Gewalt betrifft. Sta je preostalo od pojma "suverenosti", drugim recima, da li je moguce i dalje govoriti o figuri "suverena" posle stvaranja mnostva malih "suverenih" "drzava" istocne Evrope? Sta je to drzava ukoliko nije suverena, ukoliko je samo delimicno suverena? Kolika je to nuzna kolicina suverenosti, da bi jedna drzava zaista bila suverena? Da li Medjunarodni sud za ratne zlocine, za zlocine pocinjene na teritorijama bivse Jugoslavije, de jure insistirajuci samo na pojedinacnoj odgovornosti, de facto prihvata posledice istih tih zlocina koji se nalaze u osnovama suverenosti i nezavisnosti svih tih novih malih drzava? Nase izlaganje pokusava da problematizuje jednu od osnovnih aporija medjunarodnog prava koja se tice nepovredivosti suverenosti jedne drzave i, u isti mah, prava na humanitarnu intervenciju i preventivno nasilje od Kanta do danas. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Leibniz and Bayle: Manicheism and Dialectic DAVID NORTON LEIBNIZ' CLAIM that this is the "best of all possible worlds" has seemed so prima facie absurd that his critics have often considered the assertion adequately refuted by their pointing to things which are clearly "bad" and which might conceivably be "better." The paradigm case is Voltaire's Candide, which is certainly an effective refutation of Leibniz' claim at this level. We (...) can, however, by taking another point of view find what appear to be other absurdities in Leibniz' metaphysics. The point of view I wish to take, or attempt to take, is that of Pierre Bayle. I wish to suggest some objections to Leibniz which Bayle may have felt, but which he did not make explicit. Such an undertaking will, hopefully, add to our understanding of both Leibniz and Bayle. I What I propose to do is unorthodox, or at least unusual, and for that reason it is extremely important that the reader have from the very outset a clear idea of what is being undertaken. I can best clarify my aims, I think, by first attending briefly to some historical matters. Between 1695 and 1699 Bayle and Leibniz carried on a lively controversy over the latter's metaphysical views, though the debate was limited almost entirely to the notion of pre-established harmony. This controversy is well enough known that we need not stop over its details; in summary, Bayle first admits delight at what appears to be a new metaphysical explanation of the union of mind and body, but then goes on to argue that, after all, Leibniz' system is either no more than a reformulation of occasionalism, or impossible, since it violates clear and accepted metaphysical canons? Now, so far as we know, Bayle did not comment further on Leibniz' metaphysics, though the latter was * I wish to thank Prof. Harry M. Bracken, Arizona State University, and Prof. Richard H. Popkin, University of California, San Diego, for the suggestions and criticisms which they made of an earlier form of this paper. Their suggestions were all enlightening, if not all adopted-meaning, of course, that they would probably not agree with all that I here suggest. x Pierre Bayle, Dictionaire historique et critique, 5=. 6dition, revue, corrig6e, et augment6e, avec la vie de l'auteur, par Mr. Des Maizeaux, 4 tomes (Amsterdam, Leide. La Haye, Utrecht: 1740), article "Rorarius," reins. H. and L. For a fuller account of the Bayle-Leibniz controversy, see Austin Farrer, "Editor's Introduction," in G. W. Leibniz, Theodicy, ed. Austin Farrer, trans. E. M. Huggard (London: 1951), pp. 7-47, esp. pp. 33-47. 24 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY eager to continue the controversy, and did so, his final effort being a gigantic one, the Essais de Thdodicde. Unfortunately, Bayle died before the Thdodicde was published and was deprived accordingly of any opportunity to reply to it. Bayle did, however, leave in the Dictionaire historique et critique a number of arguments against various metaphysical positions. The point of my paper is to show that certain of these arguments are applicable to Leibniz' system, and that applied to that system they reveal features of it which we might otherwise have overlooked. Bayle adduces arguments which seem with only slight modification to point directly at Leibniz--though without indicating that he has Leibniz in mind. I hope first of all to show what these arguments are and in what sense they refute Leibniz. I have said that Bayle gives no indication that these arguments of his apply to Leibniz; strictly speaking, this is correct. This does not mean, however, that I am understaking an unjustified wild goose chase through the Dictionaire : Bayle himself offers the motivation which has led to this study when he says in "Rorarius" (rem. L) that he has withheld some objections to Leibniz' opinions on the ground that these are no more objections to Leibniz than to certain other philosophers: "Je m'abstiens aussi de toutes les Objections qui ne sont pas plus contraires ~t son sentiment qu'~t celui de quelques autres Philosophes." In one sense then this paper can be thought of as my speculations of what these waived objections are... (shrink)

Nicht willkürlich oder gar mutwillig wurde für die vorliegende Studie über die Philosophie Husserls ein Thema gewählt, das mit dem Titel von Heideggers Hauptwerk zu formulieren ist : Sein und Zeit. Verbreitet ist die Meinung, Husserl habe jederlei « Seinsfrage » durch sein Verfahren der « phänomenologischen Reduktion » eigens methodisch « ausgeschaltet » — und wenn es ein Beispiel für seine rein analytische Denk-und Arbeitsweise gebe, so seine deskriptive Phänomenologie des inneren Zeitbewußtseins. In Wirklichkeit ist die « Phänomenologische Fundamentalbetrachtung (...) » des Hauptwerkes unzweifelhaft eine « Seinsbetrachtung » und ist es ihre ausgesprochene Absicht, durch die phänomenologische Reduktion das « absolute Sein » zu « gewinnen » ; und ferner spricht Husserl es schon in den Ideen aus, daß das « letzte und wahrhaft Absolute » im transzendentalen Sinne über das Bewußtsein hinaus die « phänomenologische Zeit » sei, daß das transzendentale Bewußtsein seinerseits seine Absolutheit gleichsam in sich selbst aus einem ursprünglicheren « Urquell » schöpfe : dem der « lebendig strömenden Gegenwart », wie er später das « Urphänomen » der Zeit nennen wird. Übrigens hat Husserl nicht eigentlich Heideggers fundamentale Thesen in Sein und Zeit bestritten, ihnen vielmehr teilweise ausdrücklich zugestimmt, sondern vor allem ihm vorgeworfen, die Methode der phänomenologischen Reduktion zu ihrem Erweis und damit die Wissenschaftlichkeit überahupt preisgegeben zu haben. Allerdings läßt sich dann auch die eigentümliche Bedeutung von Husserls Lehre über Sein und Zeit nicht fassen, wenn seine Gedankengänge nicht dem eigenartigen Sinne ihrer Methode gemäß nach vollzogen werden. Husserls methodischer Grundgedanke ist geprägt durch das « originale Cartesianische Motiv : durch die Hölle einer nicht mehr zu übersteigernden quasi-skeptischen Epoché hindurch zum Eingangstor in den Himmel einer absolut rationalen Philosophie vorzudringen und diese selbst systematisch aufzubauen », m.a.w. : « den radikalen Subjektivismus der skeptischen Tradition in einem höheren Sinn wahrzumachen ». So führt der radikale cartesianische Zweifel — oder dessen Möglichkeit — zur Wahrheit der absoluten Gegebenheit des reinen Bewußtseins, die dessen absolutes Sein bedeutet. Damit ist ein ordo ad meam perceptionem als grundsätzlich gesicherter Bereich für eine strenge Wissenschaft gewonnen : die eidetische Phänomenologie des Bewußtseins. Auf analoge Weise und in demgemäß analogem Sinne ergibt sich Husserl sodann die grundsätzliche Relativität jeder möglichen Welt auf solches absolute Bewußtsein. Damit erweist sich, daß ein ordo ad ipsam rei veritatem sich, wenn überhaupt, einzig und allein in jenem ordo ad meam perceptionem zu konstituieren vermag : die reine Bewußtseinswissenschaft ist in sich schon transzendentale Phänomenologie. Und konstituiert sich nun wirklich im reinen Bewußtsein als dem transzendentalen ein solcher ordo ad ipsam rei veritatem ? Um dies zu erweisen, rekurrierte Descartes auf die veracitas Dei, die die Wahrheit des Evidenten verbürgen sollte. Husserl aber will unter « Evidenz » von vornherein nichts anders verstehen als die Selbstgegebenheit des Seienden selbst, das da evident ist. So fragt er, statt nach einer Garantie für die Wahrheit der Evidenz, vielmehr nach einer wahrhaft vollkommenen transzendentalen Evidenz. Sie muß gleichsam die Evidenz der Evidenz selbst sein. Sie erblickt er im Urphänomen der Zeit als der lebendig strömenden Gegenwart. (shrink)

This article proposes a neurobiologically motivated theory of meaning as internal representation that holds on to the principle of compositionality, but negates the principle of semantic constituency. The approach builds on neurobiological findings regarding topologically structured cortical feature maps and the mechanism of object-related binding by neuronal synchronization. It incorporates the Gestalt principles of psychology and is implemented by recurrent neural networks. The semantics to be developed is structurally analogous to some variant of model-theoretical semantics. The semantics to be developed (...) is a neuro-emulative model-theoretical semantics of a first-order language. The model-theoretical semantics is merely denotational and does not imply anything about the structures of the mind or the underlying neural mechanisms that enable producing and comprehend meaningful expressions. The relation between a mental representation and its content is some form of causal-informational covariation. (shrink)

A unifying theory of general anesthetic-induced unconsciousness must explain the common mechanism through which various anesthetic agents produce unconsciousness. Functional-brain-imaging data obtained from 11 volunteers during general anesthesia showed specific suppression of regional thalamic and midbrain reticular formation activity across two different commonly used volatile agents. These findings are discussed in relation to findings from sleep neurophysiology and the implications of this work for consciousness research. It is hypothesized that the essential common neurophysiologic mechanism underlying anesthetic-induced unconsciousness is, as with (...) sleep-induced unconsciousness, a hyperpolarization block of thalamocortical neurons. A model of anesthetic-induced unconsciousness is introduced to explain how the plethora of effects anesthetics have on cellular functioning ultimately all converge on a single neuroanatomic/neurophysiologic system, thus providing for a unitary physiologic theory of narcosis related to consciousness. (shrink)

There is general acknowledgement that both the anterior cingulate and orbitofrontal cortex are implicated in reinforcement-guided decision making, and emotion and social behaviour. Despite the interest that these areas generate in both the cognitive neuroscience laboratory and the psychiatric clinic, ideas about the distinctive contributions made by each have only recently begun to emerge. This reflects an increasing understanding of the component processes that underlie reinforcement- guided decision making, such as the representation of reinforcement expectations, the exploration, updating and representation (...) of action values, and the appreciation that choices are guided not just by the prospect of reward but also by the costs that action entails. Evidence is emerging to suggest that the anterior cingulate and orbitofrontal cortex make distinct contributions to each of these aspects of decision making. (shrink)

In seinem Werk „Totalität und Unendlichkeit” ist Levinas darauf bedacht, eine radikale Philosophie der Transzendenz zu konzipieren. Seine Kritik der abendländischen philosophischen Tradition gipfelt in dem Vorwurf, dasz sie die Momente der Reflexion, der Immanenz und der Totalität übermäszig betont hat, und zwar auf Kosten der echten Transzendenz. Sie opfert die Andersheit des Anderen auf, um ihn systematisch auf Denselben zurückzuführen. Das wirklich Transzendente kann wesensmäszig nicht innerhalb des Horizontes einer Vorvertrautheit erscheinen, da es „totaliter aliter” und das von mir (...) vollkommen Getrennte ist. Es tritt mir im Antlitz des Anderen entgegen. Das Antlitz empfängt seinen Sinn nicht von etwas anderem, es ist selbst sinnverleihend. Infolge des Antlitzes existiere ich für den Anderen, habe ich die Möglichkeit, mich ihm gegenüber sittlich zu verhalten. Transzendenz wird daher ursprünglich im sittlichen Bewusztsein erfahren. Sittlichkeit offenbart sich als Widerstand gegen die immer anwesende Versuchung, den Anderen zu negieren. Das Gebot „Du sollst nicht töten !” ist die erste, nicht die letzte Sinngebung. Dadurch - und nicht durch blosze Erkenntnis — wird das Seiende als Seiendes bestätigt. Das Tötungsverbot ist jedoch der Kristallisationspunkt für alle anderen ethischen Normen. Die Person, die ich nicht beseitigen darf, musz ich auch achten, ihrer Schamhaftigkeit darf ich keine Gewalt antun, für sie bin ich verantwortlich. Auf der sittlichen Anerkennung des Anderen beruht die intersubjektive Verständigung, die Sprache, der vernünftige Umgang und dessen Institutionalisierung. Daher das Primat der praktischen Vernunft, das Levinas auf eine neue Weise zu begründen sucht. Die soeben skizzierte „Philosophie des Antlitzes” bildet den Inhalt der drei ersten Kapitel des Werkes „Totalität und Unendlichkeit”. Das vierte und letzte Kapitel trägt jedoch den bezeichnenden Titel „Jenseits des Antlitzes”. Hierin entwirft Levinas auf überraschende Weise eine Philosophie der Erotik und der Fruchtbarkeit. Was motiviert ihn zu dieser Wendung ? Ausgangspunkt der gesamten Problematik ist zweifellos die Frage nach dem Urteil Gottes, durch das meine Existenz gerechtfertigt oder verworfen wird. Ohne solch ein Urteil wäre Sittlichkeit lediglich subjektive Illusion oder Wahnsinn. Wie kann es aber gefällt werden ? Levinas weist alle theologischen und philosophischen Lösungsversuche ab. Das Urteil Gottes ist kein übernatürlicher Eingriff in das mundane Geschehen ; es tritt nicht, wie Hegel geglaubt hat, im Laufe der Weltgeschichte zutage ; es offenbart sich nicht in der Innerlichkeit einer der Mystik beflissenen Seele. Levinas zufolge bedarf das göttliche Urteil, um als Wahrheit hervortreten zu können, einer unendlichen Zeit. Diese ist ihrerseits nur denkbar infolge der menschlichen Generativität. Warum vertieft sich Levinas jedoch in eine Phänomenologie der Erotik ? Die Erotik ist das Gebiet des Zweideutigen. In ihr verschmelzen Immanenz und Transzendenz, sinnliches Bedürfnis und metaphysisches Verlangen. Das Weibliche erscheint einerseits als das Verletzliche, andererseits als das schamlos Herausfordernde. Die erotische Liebkosung möchte etwas ausdrücken, es gelingt ihr aber nicht, es zur Sprache zu bringen. Während die Philosophie des Antlitzes die Tagesansicht der menschlichen Existenz zeigt — Sittlichkeit, Verantwortung, Sprache, Vernunft — offenbart die Phänomenologie der Erotik deren Nachtseite. Levinas weist alle Versuche vorschneller Rationalisierung des erotischen Geschehens — die psychoanalytische, die Sartre'sche, die sozialpsychologische — zurück. Die sinnliche Liebe ist und bleibt, anthropologisch betrachtet, zweideutig. Ihre Ambiguität wird ausschlieszlich durch die Fruchtbarkeit überstiegen. Das Kind ist der geheime Sinn der Erotik, ohne dasz die Liebenden dies ahnen. — Levinas distanziert sich hier bewuszt von den „existenziellen” Phänomenologen, von Sartre und Merleau-Ponty. Ihnen zufolge ist der Mensch das „lumen naturale” ; d.h. dasz das Sinnvolle ausschlieszlich auf Grund von menschlicher Intentionalität geschieht. Levinas dagegen beweist, dasz das eminent Sinnvolle sich hinter dem Rücken des ego abspielt, dasz es durch kein cogito erkannt, erstrebt, entworfen wird. — Ueberdies wird durch die Einführung des Begriffes „Fruchtbarkeit” der Zauberkreis der phänomenologischen Immanenz gesprengt. Das erotische Abenteuer hat zwar seinen Ursprung in Mir, sein Endpunkt befindet sich jedoch auszer Mir. Die Subjektivität ist zwar unendliche Intersubjektivität, wie Husserl bereits erkannt hat, sie ist es aber lediglich infolge ihrer Generati vi tat. Sie ist m.a.W. dadurch unendlich, dasz sie sich immer aufs neue verjüngt. Die alte Generation stirbt ab und macht einer Jugend Platz, die radikal von neuem zu beginnen imstande ist. Levinas konzipiert nicht nur eine Philosophie der Jugend, er meditiert auch über das Wesen der Vaterschaft. Die Vaterschaft befreit das Ich von der Bürde seiner Selbstheit, denn das Ich ist der Sohn. Der Sohn bedeutet in Bezug auf den Vater einerseits einen „ Bruch" — und somit Diskontinuität — andererseits „Hilfsbedürftigkeit” — und daher Kontinuität. Die Intersubjektivität erhält sich somit als eine Kontinuität, die immer wieder unterbrochen wird. — Ein anderes wichtiges ethischreligiöses Denkmotiv ist das folgende : Jeder Sohn ist einziger Sohn. Er verdankt seine Unizität jedoch nicht irgendwelchen leiblich-seelischen Eigenschaften. Er ist einzig, weil der Vater ihn auf einzigartige Weise liebt. Infolgedessen ist jeder Sohn auch auserwählter Sohn. Er ist aber dazu bestimmt, zusammen mit anderen Auserwählten zu existieren. Hieraus entspringt die Idee der menschlichen Bruderschaft und der menschlichen Solidarität. Sie bilden die Grundlage jeglicher Gemeinschaftsbildung und jedweder sozialen Normierung. Die menschliche Sozialität ist, Levinas betont dies, kein tête-à-tête eines Ich mit einem Du ; sie schlieszt notwendigerweise die Möglichkeit eines Dritten in sich. Die menschlichen Gruppen und Gemeinschaften — auch die der Familie — sind von hier aus aufs neue philosophisch zu deuten. Ein Schlüssel zum Verständniss der Levinas'schen Metaphysik ist sein Begriff der „Infinitisierung” („infinition”), dessen Inhalt vielleicht mit der Wendung „dem Unendlichen entgegen wachsen” angedeutet werden kann. Mit welchem Recht spricht jedoch unser Philosoph von solch einem Wachsen, da er doch überzeugt ist, dasz der Mensch gänzlich — nach Leib und Seele — sterblich ist ? Im Geiste Levinas' musz man jedoch sagen, dasz gerade jene Sterblichkeit die „Infinitisierung” ermöglicht. Der Vater musz vollständig sterben, damit das Intervall zwischen den Generationen entsteht, das für die Erneuerung und Verjüngung der Intersubjektivität erforderlich ist. Auf diese Weise kann eine gänzlich neue Zeit anbrechen : die Zeit des Sohnes. Levinas' höchst originelle Philosophie der Zeitlichkeit kann am besten im Ausgang von Martin Heidegger — der hier ausschlieszlich als der Verfasser von „Sein und Zeit” zur Sprache kommt — belichtet werden. Beiden Denkern ist die Ueberzeugung eigen, dasz Temporalität unlöslich verbunden ist mit der — wie immer aufgefaszten — menschlichen Subjektivität. Levinas lehnt jedoch die Lehre von den temporalen Ekstasen, der endlichen Zukunft und dem Sein zum Tode leidenschaftlich ab. Das jemeinige Dasein stirbt zwar notwendigerweise und vollständig. Der Begriff der Subjektivität deckt sich jedoch nicht mit dem des individuellen Daseins. Subjektivität ist vielmehr generative Intersubjektivität. Als solche hat sie eine unendliche Zukunft vor sich. Der Gegensatz Heidegger-Levinas geht letztlich auf eine Verschiedenheit der ethischen Sicht zurück. (Levinas glaubt die Philosophie von „Sein und Zeit” als Ausdruck eines bestimmten Ethos verstehen zu müssen.) Heidegger zufolge ist das Dasein je seine Möglichkeit. Existierend kann es die Möglichkeit, die es ist, verwirklichen oder auch verfehlen : beides ist definitiv. Die Geschichte des individuellen Daseins nimmt auf diese Weise den Charakter eines unwiderruflichen Schicksals an. Dies gibt Levinas Anlasz zu grundsätzlichen Bedenken. Die Transzendenz, die Heidegger dem Dasein zuschreibt, ist keine echte Transzendenz, da sie auf die Gewinnung der je eigenen Möglichkeit gerichtet ist. Dies führt zu einer egozentrischen Selbstvergötterung und Vereinsamung. Das Ethos, das jene Philosophie des Daseins beseelt, ist das eines tragischen Heldentums. Dem stellt Levinas sein eigenes Ideal der spontanen Verantwortlichkeit, Dienstbarkeit und Geduld gegenüber. — Aber auch die Vorstellung einer endlichen Existenz, deren Verfehlungen und Versäumnisse schicksalhafte Endgültigkeit besitzen, ist unvereinbar mit der religiösen Sicht unseres Philosophen. Seiner Ansicht nach enthält der Begriff des endlichen Daseins einen impliziten Hinweis, dem nachzugehen ist. Levinas tut dies mit Hilfe der Begriffe „Jugend”, „radikale Erneuerung” und „Diskontinuität der Zeit”. Es ist völlig wahr, was Heidegger behauptet : Sein erscheint als Zeit, aber wohlgemerkt, als unendliche Zeit. Sie erstreckt sich durch die verschiedenen Zeiten und durch die Intervalle, die die Zeit des Vaters von der des Sohnes scheiden. Darum ist es undenkbar, dasz der eine Augenblick bruchlos aus der Ekstase des anderen hervorgeht. „Der Augenblick findet, während er fortdauert, den Tod und ersteht wieder. Tod und Auferstehung konstituieren die Zeit. Aber eine derartige formale Struktur setzt die Beziehung von Mir zum Anderen voraus und als deren Boden die Fruchtbarkeit.” Levinas' Philosophie ist nicht „optimistisch”. Von Anfang an betont er, dasz der Realist eigentlich anerkennen müszte, dasz das Wesen der Wirklichkeit der Krieg ist. Vom Frieden könne nur in der Sprache einer Eschatologie geredet werden. — Die Frage drängt sich nun auf, ob jenes Eschaton im Geiste von Levinas im Zusammenhang mit dem „Urteil Gottes” steht. Sie kann unter dem Vorbehalt bejaht werden, dasz dabei alle Vorstellungen, die dem Glauben — auch dem jüdischen Glauben — entstammen, ausgeklammert werden. Es handelt sich bei Levinas um eine Religiosität „innerhalb der Grenzen der reinen Vernunft.” Das Eschaton ist unserem Philosophen zufolge nicht ein welterschütterndes Ereignis ; es unterbricht nicht den Verlauf der kosmischen und sozialen Prozesse ; es ist auch nicht „das Ende der Zeiten”. Das Eschaton ist nichts anderes als das Offenbar-werden des göttlichen Urteils oder, was dasselbe besagt ein Sprechen, durch das die Wahrheit und die Güte in Erscheinung tritt. Voraussetzung dafür ist eine „Konvergenz der Moralität und der Realität” ; d.h. dasz im Laufe einer unendlichen Zukunft das innerliche Leben der Menschheit vertieft, ihr Gewissen empfindlicher und ihre Geduld gröszer geworden sein wird. Denn jenes Sprechen erfolgt nicht mit Posaunenschall am „Jüngsten Tag”, es ereignet sich vielmehr alle Tage in den Beziehungen von Person zu Person. M.a.W. das Urteil Gottes wird immerwährend gefällt, wenn auch hinter den Kulissen der offiziellen Geschichte. Es wird gefällt, wenn der Erniedrigte und Beleidigte mich beschuldigt — beschuldigt einfach dadurch, dasz er mir in die Augen schaut. Das Antlitz des Anderen lädt mich vor Gericht, vor Ihm musz ich mich verantworten, Ich, in meiner persönlichen Einzigkeit und Unersetzlichkeit. Meinerseits unterwerfe Ich mich dem Gerichte Gottes in dem Masze, als Ich bereit bin, jene Anklage gegen mich zu vernehmen und mich zu verantworten. Wohlgemerkt : Levinas hält daran fest, dasz das eschatologische Urteil das Werk Gottes ist ; es wird jedoch ausschlieszlich in Menschen und durch Menschen zu einer Erfahrung. Levinas’ Ueberzeugung hinsichtlich der zunehmenden Empfindlichkeit des menschheitlichen Gewissens beruht nicht auf einem oberflächlichen Fortschrittsglauben. Ihr liegt vielmehr eine metaphysische Sicht zugrunde. Den Schlüssel zu ihrem Verständnis bietet wiederum der Begriff der „Infinitisierung”. Sie macht sich in analoger Weise auf drei verschiedenen Ebenen geltend. -Die erste ist die der Fruchtbarkeit. Rein empirisch kann man feststellen, dasz das fruchtbare Wesen andere Wesen hervorbringt, die ihrerseits fruchtbar sind, und dasz auf diese Weise die Fruchtbarkeit in der Natur zunimmt. Hinter dieser empirischen Aussage verbirgt sich jedoch eine ethisch-metaphysische Wahrheit. Im Geiste Levinas' müszte man sagen : Kreative Güte bringt nicht nur Güte hervor, sondern überdies noch mehr Güte. Hier liegt eine Analogie mit dem vor, was soeben als das göttliche Urteil bezeichnet wurde. Durch das Urteil, das der Verfolgte und Unterdrückte über mich fällt, wird mein schlummerndes Gewissen geweckt. Diese Weckung wird ihrerseits eine bleibende gewissensvollere Haltung zur Folge haben. Ich werde jetzt andere Anklagen eher vernehmen und mich ihnen bereitwilliger stellen. Es ist hier wieder die Rede von einer „Infinitisierung”, d.h. von einem unendlichen Wachstum in der Richtung auf das Gute zu. Das dritte und höchste Niveau ist das des metaphysischer Verlangens („ Désir"). Dieses unterscheidet sich wesentlich von dem egozentrischen Bedürfnis („ besoin"). Was letzteres betrifft, gilt das Folgende : Hat sich das Ich seines Objektes bemächtigt — hat es dieses theoretisch erkannt oder praktisch in Besitz genommen —, dann ist das Bedürfnis gestillt. Es ist erloschen, wenn das Andere, das Objekt, Mir, Demselben, einverleibt wurde. Daraus wird die grundsätzliche Endlichkeit jenes egozentrischen Lebens ersichtlich. Das metaphysische Verlangen dagegen ist unersättlich, „nicht, weil es einem unendlichen Hunger entspricht, sondern weil es keine Speise begehrt”. Es ist ja auf kein Objekt gerichtet. Dem Unendlichen gegenüber ist kein intentionales Verhalten möglich. Wohl aber ist es denkbar, dasz das endliche Wesen von dem überwältigenden Charakter des Unendlichen getroffen wird. Je mehr mein Verständnis für jenes alles Uebertreffende zunimmt, desto gröszer wird auch mein metaphysisches Verlangen. Es liegt also wieder eine „Infinitisierung” vor. Das Eschaton ereignet sich demnach jetzt und hier, wenn auch die offizielle Geschichte von ihm nichts weisz. Es besteht in einem unmerklichen Reifen der Menschheit, die sich in einer unendlichen Zukunft einem gänzlich neuen ethischsozialen Zustand nähert. Der eschatalogische Endzustand kann vielleicht als die vollkommene Harmonie zwischen Sozialität und Personalität charakterisiert werden. (shrink)

We consider the desirability, or otherwise, of various forms of induction in the light of certain principles and inductive methods within predicate uncertain reasoning. Our general conclusion is that there remain conflicts within the area whose resolution will require a deeper understanding of the fundamental relationship between individuals and properties.

Dieses Buch ist bis heute eine der populärsten Darstellungen der Relativitätstheorie geblieben. In der vorliegenden Version haben J. Ehlers und M. Pössel vom Max-Planck-Institut für Gravitationsphysik (Albert-Einstein-Institut) in Golm/Potsdam den Bornschen Text kommentiert und einen den anschaulichen, aber präzisen Stil Borns wahrendes, umfangreiches Ergänzungskapitel hinzugefügt, das die stürmische Entwicklung der Relativiatätstheorie bis hin zu unseren Tagen nachzeichnet. Eingegangen wird auf Gravitationswellen und Schwarze Löcher, auf neuere Entwicklungen der Kosmologie, auf Ansätze zu einer Theorie der Quantengravitation und auf die zahlreichen raffinierten (...) Experimente, welche die Gültigkeit der Einsteinschen Theorie mit immer größerer Genauigkeit bestätigt haben. Damit bleibt dieses Buch nach wie vor einer der unmittelbarsten Zugänge zur Relativitätstheorie für alle die sich für eine über das rein populärwissenschaftliche hinausgehende Einführung interessieren. (shrink)

The following is excerpted from Sean Gurd’s translation of Euripides’ Hippolytus published with Uitgeverij this year. Though he was judged “most tragic” in the generation after his death, though more copies and fragments of his plays have survived than of any other tragedian, and though his Orestes became the most widely performed tragedy in Greco-Roman Antiquity, during his lifetime his success was only moderate, and to him his career may have felt more like a failure. He was regularly selected to (...) have his plays performed in the annual festival of Dionysus at Athens. But the plays were performed in a competition, and in the competitions he lost and lost, winning first place only five times in a career that spanned more than forty years. His corpus reads like the remains of a life spent trying to get a few things right and never being quite satisfied: scenes and schematized combinations of elements recur again and again, each time slightly changed. Hippolytus itself is an example: it contains two scenes in which a sick or dying character lies on a couch or a stretcher and is surrounded by silence and grief; he had experimented with such scenes in Alcestis, and would work with them again in Herakles and Orestes. Nor, judging from appearances, was he immune to the desire to score a hit, or to satisfy the audiences and the judges at the competition. Hippolytus is a rewrite of another Hippolytus, performed several years earlier, which scandalized the audience and certainly did not take first place. In that earlier Hippolytus (called by later writers Hippolytus Veiled), Euripides fashioned a Phaedra who was neither ashamed of loving her stepson nor incapable of taking steps to satisfy her desire. The forwardness of her approach to Hippolytus so outraged him that he covered his head with a robe (hence the play’s later title). Euripides liked to write energetic and self-confident women like this. He staged his Medea in 431, just three years before he revised Hippolytus, and in it the jilted title character murders her children in revenge for Jason’s new marriage to a more politically advantageous wife. Another flop: the play came in third of three. Evidently the judges did not like their women showing agency, especially when the consequences were transgressive. “The ornament of women,” wrote another great Athenian a little earlier, “is silence.”i Euripides’ Medea and his first Phaedra had other decorations. So three years after Medea crashed and burned and some time after the first Hippolytus suffered the same fate, he produced another Hippolytus play with a different setting and story. How could this one not have been a reaction to the failure of the first? “Second thoughts are always better,” he has one of his characters say, as though he were offering an apology for his first thoughts on the same story. In this new version, Phaedra is suicidally ashamed of her love, choosing to die rather than have it discovered, and willing to bring down her beloved Hippolytus in the service of the same end. Now it is Phaedra herself who covers her head in shock and horror at her desire. Only an intermediary, a slave of the house and an old crone with her fingers in all sorts of illicit pots, communicates Phaedra’s secret – against orders – and in consequence brings about the demise of two resolutely moral figures. It worked. For his tale of two well-born nobles with an unswerving commitment to moral action, destroyed by the meddling of a slave (and by the hostility of some particularly uncaring divinities), the judges crowned Euripides winner. It was the first time he had won, after almost thirty years of work. *** What Hippolytus wants more than anything else, as he protests with outrage just before leaving Trozen for the last time, is the benefit of due process – oaths, witnesses, an investigation that would reveal who really lusted after whom. Ironic, given that in the first Hippolytus, as far as we can make out, he did get a trial – but too late, and Theseus’ successful processing of Hippolytus failed to prevent his death. I cannot help hearing in the second Hippolytus’ complaints the anger of his authorial semblable who lost year after year by a process of judging that might have seemed brutal to him. Judges took no cognizance of how he worked, how long or hard or why; they just voted, and Euripides lost. But then I hear, in the fate of the first Hippolytus, an even grimmer commentary. Processed or not, we lose. We run aground. At the very least, this might cast a darker shadow on the business of watching or reading a play: in that twilight, things move too fast to make a fair assessment and, in any case, the reasonably high definition of what you see and hear belies the truth of indistinction, the multiplicities just below the surface. Watching is a constrained activity, a form of captivity, but reading is plastic. This translation was begun to supply the script for an audio version of the play, recorded in the spring of 2012, and here and there it sacrifices literalness for sayability and the voices and passions of the actors on that occasion. But it was finished to be read, and engineered to create a reading caught between the poles of specificity and non-specificity that the play itself conjures and relies on at its generative core. Thus two texts: the one clear, perhaps overprecise, respectably modern in its presentation, and the other ancient, a reasonable approximation of the classical reading process, and indistinct in vital ways. Like early modern dramatic texts, the exact provenance and original function of the scripts that have made it down to us are unknown. We do know that the ultimate survival of Hippolytus was thanks to its wide-spread use as a school text. But its relation to the first performance in 428 BCE is a matter only of speculation. Euripides presumably had a fair copy before production began; it was probably modified during rehearsals. The actors may have had copies, too (probably the young men who served in the chorus did not). The chor?gos, a wealthy Athenian who paid for the production, might have been presented with or just made sure to get his hands on a high-quality text, to commemorate the play’s success. Fans might have been able to buy copies. Any one of these sources might have provided the ultimate progenitor of our text. Several of them might have, in fact, if later editors compared and conflated traditions. The plays toured extensively in the Greek-speaking world, and were restaged as repertoire for centuries afterwards. In the process they were subjected to enough modifications by producers and actors that in the later fourth century the Athenian statesman Lycurgus had a law passed prohibiting performances at Athens from deviating from the official “city” text of the tragedies (which he had commissioned). It is unlikely that the city text was the last word; but it marks an important moment in Athens’ role in their dissemination, since after this the major sites of textual curatorship moved overseas, to Alexandria, Pergamum, Rome, Antioch, Constantinople. Any single text of any single play is thus no more than a moment of clarity and stability, crossed and subtended by multiple vectors of change, including that of textual flux (from Euripides’ first drafts to the latest printed text) and that of Euripides’ life work as a writer, in the light of which the Hippolytus is just one attempt to produce something exactly right, to win the prize or finally satisfy himself or prove to himself that all this longing for perfection was a waste of time. I am intrigued by the possibility that a single text might somehow serve as a lens onto this wider zone of indistinction, representing a small region clearly but nonetheless containing a blurred image of the whole, like a Leibnizian monad. After all, no text is a witness: it is, rather, a perception and a performance, and what every Hippolytus must perform is the awkward overlay of singular and plural, social practise and subliminal drive, that structures the tragedy. Modern critical editions can do this by juxtaposing a (relatively) clean and simple text with a textual apparatus reporting variants and theorizing the relationship between textual instantiations. A translation lacks the resolution to catch the fine variations which feed into the construction of an apparatus. But there are other means to hand. Guessing at the exact words of the original text is always just that – guessing – though Hippolytus is less problematic than plays like Iphigenia at Aulis. But we can make a pretty secure guess at what such a text looked like. Texts read by fifth-century readers were fundamentally different from what is presented in the best medieval MSS and printed in modern publications. The texts of Euripides’ time and for many centuries afterwards did not indicate word division with spaces (or by any other means) and were extremely sparing in punctuation, often avoiding it altogether. There was only one “case” of letters – what we call “capitals.” Musical sections were inscribed as though they were prose, without line endings to reflect their rhythm or their rhetorical structure. There was no indication of the speakers within a dramatic text, either. The earliest surviving dramatic texts, which come from over a century after Euripides’ death and a time which was much more elaborate and precise in its textual culture, indicated speaker-change with a little line or paragraphos below the line and a double-point [:] at its end. This convention almost certainly does not date back to Euripides’ own time; it may not even date to Lycurgus. In any case, such indications were understood to be readers’ marks: they did not have the same authority as the text and they were subject to readers’ revisions. At least ideationally, if not in concrete and distinguishable fact, a dramatic text was understood as containing no indication of speaker-change (and certainly none of who was saying what). The reader had to figure that out for him-/herself. The clear, legible, easy texts we are accustomed to reading are the fabrications of medieval and modern reading cultures. The first text, then, presents the translation as the text would have been in the mid-fourth century, perhaps decades after Euripides’ death. The second text processes Hippolytus, makes sense of it and makes it “readable.” That is: too distinct, dangerously so. It gets in your way, conjures fantoms, tries to make you see. Fragments of the Hippolytus Veiled, otherwise almost entirely lost, are juxtaposed with similar passages in the text – not to suggest a reconstruction, but a dialogue and a complex set of reassessments. I have not tried to represent the full variety of textual variants, but I have signalled where, for one reason or another, the text is soft and different editions propose excisions or changes. The two texts must be read together: you, reader, form the bridge between the distinctly seen and the indistinct invisible. You, in the end, will be its mask. *** illsandhateddiseaseswhatcanidoforyouwhatshouldinotdohereisthelightandthebrightairyoursickbedisnowout s idethehouseyoureverywordwastocomeherebutyouwillrushbacktoyourbedroomagainyoufadequicklyyoudelig htinnothingyoudislikewhatyouhaveyoulovewhatyoudontitsbettertobesickthantendthesickthefirstissimpleto the secondattachesheartspainandhandsworkeveryhumanlifeispainfulthereisnoendtotoildarknesshidesbehindclo udswhateverisdearerthanlifeweproveunhappyloversofwhatshineshereforlackofknowledgeofanotherlifethere isnoproofforthingsbeneaththeearthonlystoriessustainus liftmybodystraightenmyheadthebondsofmylimbsareloosenedtakemyhandsandmypalearmsthishatistooheavy formyheadtoweartakeitoffspreadmyhairovermyshoulders couragechilddonttossandturnsoviolentlyyouwillbearyoursicknessmoreeasilywithpeaceandanoblemindallmort alssuffer aiaiiwanttodrinkpurewaterfromadewyspringiwanttoliebackandrestunderthetreesinsomegrassymeadowchildw hycrydontsaythesethingsnearthecrowdhurlingwordsmountedonmadness sendmetothemountainiwillgototheforestwherebeastkillingdogspressthespotteddeergodsilongtoshouttothedo gstoshootthethessalianjavelinpastmyblondhairtoholdthebarbeddartinmyhandwhythisanxietychildwhatdoyouc areabouthuntingwhydoyoulustforflowingspringstheresahillwithwaterjustnexttothetowerwecangetyouadrinkt h ereartemismistressofthesaltlakeandthecoursethunderingwithhorseshoovesiwishiwereonyourplainsbreakings t uds whythrowthesefrenziedwordsaboutjustnowyouweresettingoutforthemountaintohuntandnowyoulongforhorses onthewavelesssand thesethingsneedanoracletotellwhichgodreinsyouinanddrivesyoufromyoursenseschild whathaveidonehowfarhaveibeendrivenfromgoodthoughtsiwascrazyiwascursedbysomepowerpheupheualasn ursecovermyheadagainimashamedofwhativesaidcovermeatearmovesdownfrommyeyeanditembarrassesm eithurtstostraightenourmindanditisterribletobeinsanebesttodiebeforeyoubecomelucidagain illcoveryoubutwhenwilldeathcovermeimoldivelearnedalotmortalsshoulddrinkoffriendshipmoderatelynotfrom th edeepestmarrowofthesoulamindslovecharmsshouldbeeasytoundoorthrustawayortiemoretightlyitisaverydiffic ultweightforonesoultolaborovertwopeopleasiamwrackedbypainforhertoomuchdisciplinecausesmoreharmthan pleasureandwarswithhealthipraisetoomuchlessthannothinginexcessandthewiseagreewithme *** Scene 1 Enter Phaedra and the Nurse; the former is recumbent on a couch while the latter bustles about her with gestures that might be those of a caregiver or a guard. NURSE Ills and hated diseases! What can I do for you? What should I not do? Here is the light, and the bright air; your sick bed is now outside the house. Your every word was to come here, but you will rush back to your bedroom again. You fade quickly. You delight in nothing. You dislike what you have. You love what you don’t. It’s better to be sick than tend the sick – the first is simple. To the second attaches heart’s pain and hand’s work. Every human life is painful. There is no end to toil. Darkness hides behind clouds whatever is dearer than life. We prove unhappy lovers of what shines here for lack of knowledge of another life. There is no proof for things beneath the earth. Only stories sustain us. PHAEDRA Lift my body, straighten my head: the bonds of my limbs are loosened. Take my hands and my pale arms. This hat is too heavy for my head to wear. Take it off, spread my hair over my shoulders. NURSE Courage, child; don’t toss and turn so violently. You will bear your sickness more easily with peace and a noble mind. All mortals suffer. PHAEDRA Aiai. I want to drink pure water from a dewy spring. I want to lie back and rest under the trees in some grassy meadow. NURSE Child, why cry? Don’t say these things near the crowd, hurling words mounted on madness. PHAEDRA Send me to the mountain. I will go to the forest where beast-killing dogs press the spotted deer. Gods! I long to shout to the dogs, to shoot the Thessalian javelin past my blond hair, to hold the barbed dart in my hand. NURSE Why this anxiety, child? What do you care about hunting? Why do you lust for flowing springs? There’s a hill with water just next to the tower; we can get you a drink there. PHAEDRA Artemis, mistress of the salt lake and the course thundering with horse’s hooves: I wish I were on your plains breaking studs! NURSE Why throw these frenzied words about? Just now you were setting out for the mountain to hunt – and now you long for horses on the waveless sand. These things need an oracle to tell which god reins you in and drives you from your senses, child. PHAEDRA What have I done? How far have I been driven from good thoughts? I was crazy, I was cursed by some power. Pheu pheu. Alas. Nurse, cover my head again. I’m ashamed of what I’ve said. Cover me – a tear moves down from my eye and it embarrasses me. It hurts to straighten your mind and it is terrible to be insane. Best to die before you become lucid again. NURSE I’ll cover you. But when will death cover me? I’m old; I’ve learned a lot. Mortals should drink of friendship moderately, not from the deepest marrow of the soul. A mind’s love-charms should be easy to undo, or thrust away, or tie more tightly. It is a very difficult weight for one soul to labor over two people, as I am wracked by pain for her. Too much discipline causes more harm than pleasure and wars with health. I praise “too much” less than “nothing in excess,” and the wise agree with me. ***. (shrink)

A critical property of the perception of spoken words is the transient ambiguity of the speech signal. In localist models of speech perception this ambiguity is captured by allowing the parallel activation of multiple lexical representations. This paper examines how a distributed model of speech perception can accommodate this property. Statistical analyses of vector spaces show that coactivation of multiple distributed representations is inherently noisy, and depends on parameters such as sparseness and dimensionality. Furthermore, the characteristics of coactivation vary considerably, (...) depending on the organization of distributed representations within the mental lexicon. This view of lexical access is supported by analyses of phonological and semantic word representations, which provide an explanation of a recent set of experiments on coactivation in speech perception (Gaskell & Marslen–Wilson, 1999). (shrink)

Mental disorders in university students are very frequent, therefore higher education institutions have established in-campus mental healthcare centres. These clinics have particular characteristics that differ from other mental health centres, as they report to and represent an educational institution, while at the same time looking after the interests and well-being of patients requesting assistance, thus generating unique bioethical conflicts. Ethics Committees are useful tools to offer support to mental health professionals in making ethical decisions. In order to respond to these (...) issues, it was decided that an Ethics Committee would be created in the mental health clinic of a private university in Mexico City. This article describes the implementation process for this Committee, its duties and scope, as well as the case work and review methodology. A list of the most frequent ethical conflicts is attached, jointly with the ethical analysis of the cases treated throughout the year and a half or work by the Committee. (shrink)

The notion of a Sasaki projectionon an orthomodular lattice is generalized to a mapping Φ: E × E → E, where E is an effect algebra. If E is lattice ordered and Φ is symmetric, then E is called a Φ-symmetric effect algebra.This paper launches a study of such effect algebras. In particular, it is shown that every interval effect algebra with a lattice-ordered ambient group is Φ-symmetric, and its group is the one constructed by Ravindran in his proof that (...) every effect algebra that has the Riesz decomposition property is an interval algebra. It is shown that the doubling construction introduced in the paper is connected to the conditional event algebrasof Goodman, Nguyen, and Walker. (shrink)

Falsafat wa-ḥayāt Abī Hāshim al-Jubbāʼī wa-madrasatuh -- al-Tawallud ʻinda al-Muʻtazilah.