Cancer viewed as a programmed, evolutionarily conserved life‐form, rather than just a random series of disease‐causing mutations, answers the rarely asked question of what the cancer cell is for, provides meaning for its otherwise mysterious suite of attributes, and encourages a different type of thinking about treatment. The broad but consistent spectrum of traits, well‐recognized in all aggressive cancers, group naturally into three categories: taxonomy (“phylogenation”), atavism (“re‐primitivization”) and robustness (“adaptive resilience”). The parsimonious explanation is not convergent evolution, but the (...) release of an highly conserved survival program, honed by the exigencies of the Pre‐Cambrian, to which the cancer cell seems better adapted; and which is recreated within, and at great cost to, its host. Central to this program is the Warburg Effect, whose malign influence permeates well beyond aerobic glycolysis to include biomass interconversion and genomic heuristics. Warburg‐type metabolism and genomic instability are targets whose therapeutic disablement is a major priority. (shrink)

In the atavistic model of cancer progression, tumor cell dedifferentiation is interpreted as a reversion to phylogenetically earlier capabilities. The more recently evolved capabilities are compromised first during cancer progression. This suggests a therapeutic strategy for targeting cancer: design challenges to cancer that can only be met by the recently evolved capabilities no longer functional in cancer cells. We describe several examples of this target‐the‐weakness strategy. Our most detailed example involves the immune system. The absence of adaptive immunity in immunosuppressed (...) tumor environments is an irreversible weakness of cancer that can be exploited by creating a challenge that only the presence of adaptive immunity can meet. This leaves tumor cells more vulnerable than healthy tissue to pathogenic attack. Such a target‐the‐weakness therapeutic strategy has broad applications, and contrasts with current therapies that target the main strength of cancer: cell proliferation. (shrink)

In this article, we reflect critically on how moral actions are categorised in some recent studies on moral spillovers. Based on classic concepts from moral philosophy, we present a framework to categorise moral actions. We argue that with a finer classification of moral values, associated behaviour is better understood, and this understanding helps to identify the conditions under which moral licensing takes place. We illustrate our argument with examples from the literature on pro-environmental behaviours. Moral spillovers are frequently studied in (...) this behavioural domain and to understand what causes their occurrence is highly (policy) relevant if we wish to promote sustainable behaviour. (shrink)

From an evolutionary perspective, both atavism and somatic evolution/convergent evolution theories can account for the consistent occurrence, and astounding attributes of cancers: being able to evolve from a single cell to a complex organized system, and malignant transformations showing significant similarities across organs, individuals, and species. Here, we first provide an overview of these two hypotheses, including the possibility of them not being mutually exclusive, but rather potentially representing the two extremes of a continuum in which the diversity of cancers (...) can emerge. In reviewing the current literature, we also discuss the criteria that should be applied to discriminate between the two competing theories and to determine their relevant contributions to oncogenesis and cancer progression. Finally, we deliberate on the potential applications of this conceptual framework in developing novel treatment strategies. (shrink)

I hope to demonstrate the value of a close reading Williams’s ‘Internal and External Reasons’, and to provide a theory of error regarding the substantial body of work which seeks to, in various ways, defang the essay. I do this by providing some historical context for the paper, and sketching where, historically, internalism and certain sorts of moral realism became separated. It will likely not surprise the reader when I suggest that the modern scientific worldview has an important place in (...) the discussion of the notion of external reasons. As mind, motivation, and perception have become less opaque to us, certain avenues for explaining our reasons have come closer to relying on hypotheses which may turn out to be falsifiable, and have thus been abandoned. What may come as more of a surprise is my suggestion that modern egalitarianism is an important factor as well. I suggest that impersonal reason has been used as an (implausible, but perhaps well-intentioned) alternative to the practice of some inflicting their reasons on others. (shrink)

General theories are reductionist explications of apparently independent facts. Here, in reviewing the literature, I develop a GT to simplify the cluttered landscape of cancer therapy targets by revealing they cluster parsimoniously according to only a few underlying principles. The first principle is that targets can be only exploited by either or both of two fundamentally different approaches: causality-inhibition, and ‘acausal’ recognition of some marker or signature. Nonetheless, each approach must achieve both of two separate goals, efficacy and selectivity ; (...) if the mechanisms are known, this provides a definition of rational treatment. The second principle is target fragmentation, whereby the target may perform up to three categoric functions, potentially mediated by physically different target molecules, even on different cell types, or circulating freely. This GT remains incomplete until the minimal requirements for cure, or alternatively, proof that cure is impossible, become predictable. A reductionist General Theory of Cancer Targets is presented, proposing that all good targets are based either on causality-inhibition, or recognition; essential tasks emerge differently in each case. Sophisticated hybrids may provide additional benefit. General theory analysis, including target fragmentation concepts, provides deeper insights into therapeutic mechanisms. (shrink)

L’article se propose d’explorer l’univers des facultés de droit sous la République de Weimar, que les contemporains jugent en « crise ». Cette perception renvoie tout d’abord aux difficultés d’adaptation d’un enseignement qui est de plus en plus écartelé entre les exigences de la science (transmettre une compréhension historique de l’évolution du droit) et celles de la pratique (préparer les étudiants au monde professionnel par une connaissance du droit en vigueur) : l’Université apparaît ainsi comme un lieu de confrontation entre (...) professeurs et autorités étatiques pour le contrôle du cursus juridique. Par ailleurs, dans un contexte de grande expansion des effectifs étudiants, les facultés de droit ne connaissent pas de démocratisation de leur public et restent le domaine des élites traditionnelles ; de ce fait, elles semblent en décalage avec leur époque et continuent de former un univers passéiste que conforte l’engagement des étudiants dans des corporations traditionnelles. Ce mode de socialisation explique leur radicalisation dans le camp antirépublicain dès les années 1920. (shrink)

Espace d'expression et de discussion, les forums médiatiques font se rencontrer des individus aux opinions et appartenances variées. Il s'agit d'observer le rôle du dispositif communicationnel et la manière dont ses membres en usent: privilégient-ils la dimension conversationnelle ou publicitaire? quelle est la nature de cet espace public et des échanges qui s'y déroulent? L'analyse statistique et de contenu des courriels révèle un espace interactionnel de groupe où la publicité l'emporte sur la sociabilité, ainsi qu'une parole publique dégradée marquée par (...) l'incommunication et une dérive ethniciste.Space for expression and discussion forums are media meet individuals with varied opinions and affiliations. It is to observe the role of communicative device and how its members wear: they prefer the conversational dimension or advertising? What is the nature of public space and exchanges that take place? Statistical analysis and content of emails reveals a group interactional space where advertising outweighs sociability, and a degraded public speech marked by miscommunication and a drift ethnocentric. (shrink)