In this excellent book, George A. Panichas, longtime editor of the conservative quarterly Modern Age, brings to a conclusion a critical trilogy, really a tetralogy, which includes The Reverent Discipline, The Courage of Judgment, and The Critic as Conservator. The unusual title is inspired by Plato’s Phaedrus, with Panichas writing at one point—concerning literary scholar Austin Warren’s “open celebration of great ideas, great writers, great souls”—that, “Literary greatness for him meant spiritual greatness, this is, the kind of greatness that gives (...) us guidance and helps to orient us towards the good, or, as Plato puts it, to make us ‘grow wings to overcome gravity’”. (shrink)

Recent moral philosophy has been characterized by some serious attempts to show that both Kantian and utilitarian moralities leave us with insufficient room to pursue our personal projects and relationships. These moralities have been charged with demanding a kind of impartiality that leaves us with too little space for developing ourselves and our friendships, family relations, communities, and nations in the ways best suited for us. Critics claim these theories implausibly maintain that if our personal relationships and affinities (...) do not further the ends of moral duty or maximum utility, they are of no value and hence we lack reason to devote ourselves to them. In what follows, I will assume that a conception of morality would indeed be implausible if it were to demand impartiality in the strong sense that it would be impermissible to favor our own projects and ambitions, to care especially about the welfare of certain persons rather than others, and sometimes to give preference to those we care most about, even when we could benefit strangers more. (shrink)

Recent moral philosophy has been characterized by some serious attempts to show that both Kantian and utilitarian moralities leave us with insufficient room to pursue our personal projects and relationships. These moralities have been charged with demanding a kind of impartiality that leaves us with too little space for developing ourselves and our friendships, family relations, communities, and nations in the ways best suited for us. Critics claim these theories implausibly maintain that if our personal relationships and affinities (...) do not further the ends of moral duty or maximum utility, they are of no value and hence we lack reason to devote ourselves to them. In what follows, I will assume that a conception of morality would indeed be implausible if it were to demand impartiality in the strong sense that it would be impermissible to favor our own projects and ambitions, to care especially about the welfare of certain persons rather than others, and sometimes to give preference to those we care most about, even when we could benefit strangers more. (shrink)

Let the moral question of personal identity be the following: what is the nature of the entities we should focus our prudential concerns and ascriptions of responsibility around? (If indeed we should structure these things around any entities at all.) Let the semantic question of personal identity be the question of what is the nature of the entities that ‘person’ is true of. A naive (in the sense of simple and intuitive) view would have it that the two (...) questions are so intimately connected that the entities we should focus our concerns and ascriptions around are, pretty trivially, the persons. In part, my aim here is to evaluate this naive view. However, I will not actually attempt to give a definite verdict on it. Rather, I will identify the assumptions under which the naive view is true, and discuss how to go about evaluating those assumptions. (shrink)

Many philosophers have taken there to be an important relation between personal identity and several of our practical concerns (among them moral responsibility, compensation, and self-concern). I articulate four natural methodological assumptions made by those wanting to construct a theory of the relation between identity and practical concerns, and I point out powerful objections to each assumption, objections constituting serious methodological obstacles to the overall project. I then attempt to offer replies to each general objection in a way (...) that leaves the project intact, albeit significantly changed. Perhaps the most important change stems from the recognition that the practical concerns motivating investigation into personal identity turn out to be not univocal, as is typically thought, such that each of the different practical concerns may actually be related to personal identity in very different ways. (shrink)

This paper focuses on three theories of personal identity that incorporate the idea that personal identity is the result of a person’s adopting certain attitudes towards certain mental states and actions. I call these theories subjective theories of personal identity. I argue that it is not clear what the proponents of these theories mean by “personal identity”. On standard theories, such as animalism or psychological theories, the term “personal identity” refers to the numerical identity of (...) persons and its analysis provides the persistence conditions for persons. I argue that if the subjective theories purport to provide a criterion of numerical personal identity, they fail. A different interpretation may suggest that they purport to provide a non-numerical type of identity for the purpose of providing plausible analyses of certain identity-related practical concerns. I argue that the criteria the subjective theories provide fail to capture several of the identity-related concerns. As a result, this interpretation must be rejected as well. (shrink)

Parfit's reductionist theory of personal identity states that a person's persistence through time is just a matter of psychological continuity and connectedness. He uses this theory to argue against the requirement of equal concern: the view that a rational person should be equally concerned about all parts of her future. The argument is that since psychological connectedness is one of grounds of a person's concern for her future and since connectedness is weaker over longer periods, it follows (...) that a person can rationally care less about her more distant future. I argue that Parfit's argument fails because the principles it employs generate counterexamples. I conclude by showing that if Parfit's view is modified so as to avoid these counterexamples, his argument against the requirement dissolves. (shrink)

Marya Schechtman offers a new theory of personal identity, which captures the importance of being able to reidentify people in our daily lives. She sees persons as loci of practical interaction, and defines the unity of such a locus in terms of biological, psychological, and social functions, mediated through social and cultural infrastructure.

Purpose Human genomic research demands very large pools of data to generate meaningful inference. Yet, the sharing of one’s genetic data for research is a voluntary act. The collection of data sufficient to fuel rapid advancement is contingent on individuals’ willingness to share. Privacy risks associated with sharing this unique and intensely personal data are significant. Genetic data are an unambiguous identifier. Public linkage of donor to their genetic data could reveal predisposition to diseases, behaviors, paternity, heredity, intelligence, etc. (...) The purpose of this paper is to understand individuals’ willingness to volunteer their private information in this high-risk/high-reward context. Design/methodology/approach The authors collect survey data from 273 respondents and use structural equation modeling techniques to analyze responses. Findings The authors find statistical support for our theorization. They find that while heightened awareness of the benefits and risks of sharing correlates with increased privacy concerns, the net impact is an increase in intention to share. Social implications The findings suggest that prescriptive awareness might be an effective tool with which policy-makers can gain the sufficient voluntary participation from individuals necessary to drive large-scale medical research. Originality/value This study contributes a theoretically and empirically informed model which demonstrates the impact of awareness and privacy concern on individuals’ willingness to share their genetic data for large-scale HGR. It helps inform a rising class of data sufficiency problems related to large-scale medical research. (shrink)

Editor's introduction by Leonard Levin -- A personal viewpoint: autobiographical essay -- My way in the research and teaching of Jewish thought -- Judaism and the lonely Jew -- Faith: its trusting and testing - the question of God's righteousness -- History in the postmodern age -- The idolatrous values and rituals of the global village.

This paper addresses the debate concerning the nature of Aristotelian phronêsis and the objects to which it is directed. After a preparatory distinction from other intellectual virtues, I elucidate phronêsis’s connection to character-virtue and deliberation, highlighting the crucial role of perception. Focusing on moral sensibility serves to underscore the particular nature of the objects of phronêsis, and introduces its aspect of self-knowledge. This determination, finally, helps characterize the project of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics as an indirect education in phronêsis.

Social exclusion, especially social exclusion in old age, represents an area of interest at European level, in the context of demographic transformations. At national level, studies and research on social exclusion in old age are scarce, although the older population is more likely to be at risk of social exclusion. The article presents the results of a quantitative research methodology based on a questionnaire applied to older people of age 65 years and over. The research was conducted during November - (...) December 2021 and the survey was representative at national level with a margin of error of ±3.5%. The aim of this article is to analyse the perceptions of older persons regarding the access and quality of social and healthcare services accessed, and thus, to gain a better understanding on how these types of services could contribute to social inclusion. Data interpretation was made using techniques of descriptive statistical analysis. Results emphasize that access to social and healthcare services are essential in old age. Perceptions of older persons highlight the need for structural changes at national level, so that social and healthcare services could make a real contribution to reducing social exclusion. (shrink)

It is not the case that there is only one literal sense of “same person.” When presented in different contexts, “she is/is not the same person” can have different answers concerning the same entity or set of entities across the same period of time. This is because: Persons are composed of many parts, and different parts have different persistence conditions. This follows from a reductionist view of the self. When we ask about sameness of persons, or “personal identity,” we (...) are asking because of certain practical concerns. Different concerns will look to the persistence of different parts of the person for criteria of sameness. No single criterion of sameness tracks all concerns. By combining reductionism with contextualism, the disparate answers to the personal identity question can be clarified without losing the practical concerns motivating them. (shrink)

In present-day political and moral philosophy the idea that all persons are in some way moral equals is an almost universal premise, with its defenders often claiming that philosophical positions that reject the principle of equal respect and concern do not deserve to be taken seriously. This has led to relatively few attempts to clarify, or indeed justify, 'basic equality' and the principle of equal respect and concern. Such clarification and justification, however, would be direly needed. After all, (...) the ideas, for instance, that Adolf Hitler and Nelson Mandela have equal moral worth, or that a rape victim owes equal respect and concern to both her rapist and to her own caring brother, seem to be utterly implausible. Thus, if someone insists on the truth of such ideas, he or she owes his or her audience an explanation. The authors in this volume - which breaks new ground by engaging egalitarians and anti-egalitarians in a genuine dialogue - attempt to shed light into the dark. They try to clarify the concepts of "basic equality", "equal moral worth","equal respect and concern", "dignity," etc; and they try to justify-or to refute-the resulting clarified doctrines. The volume thus demonstrates that the claim that all persons have equal moral worth, are owed equal concern and respect, or have the same rights is anything but obvious. This finding has not only significant philosophical but also political implications. (shrink)

In the Treatise Hume argues that the self is really many related perceptions, which we represent to ourselves as being one and the same thing. In the Appendix he finds this account inconsistent. Why? The problem arises from Hume's theory that representation requires resemblance. Only a many can represent a many recognized as such, and only a one can represent something as one. So for the many distinct perceptions (recognized as such) to be represented as one and the same, the (...) many distinct ideas that reflect them must be one and the same. But the distinct cannot be identical. (shrink)

This book argues that in fact it is Locke 's critics who are wrong, and that the famous objections to his theory are invalid.

Philosophers have long suggested that our attitude of special concern for the future is problematic for a reductionist view of personal identity, such as the one developed by Derek Parfit in Reasons and Persons. Specifically, it is often claimed that reductionism cannot provide justification for this attitude. In this paper, I argue that much of the debate in this arena involves a misconception of the connection between metaphysical theories of personal identity and our special concern. A (...) proper understanding of this connection reveals that the above-mentioned objection to reductionism cannot get off the ground. Though the connection I propose is weaker than the connection typically presupposed, I nonetheless run up against a conclusion reached by Susan Wolf in “Self-Interest and Interest in Selves.” According to Wolf, metaphysical theses about the nature of personal identity have no significance for our attitude of special concern. By arguing against Wolf’s treatment of self-interest, I suggest that her arguments for this conclusion are misguided. This discussion leads to further clarification of the nature of the link between theories of personal identity and our special concern and, ultimately, to a better understanding of the rationality of this attitude. (shrink)

본 논문은 1인칭 외부의 ‘복수 주체(multiple subjects)’가 윤리적 주체로서 성립될 수 있는가하는 문제를 ‘책임’ 개념을 중심으로 살펴본다. 통상 윤리적 책임의 귀속여부는 분명한 행위자를 요구하기에, 윤리학은 1인칭을 전제로 전개된다. 그러나 독립적이고 자율적인 개인만을 전제하는 강한 1인칭의 윤리학에서 역사적 부당행위에 대한 집단 사죄와 같은 문제는 미답 상태로 남겨진다. 이러한 문제에서 보다 적극적으로 책임질 수 있는 윤리적 주체를 사유한 것이 공동체주의자로 꼽히는 알레스데어 매킨타이어(A. MacIntyre)와 마이클 샌델(M. Sandel)이었다. 이들이 제시하는 ‘서사적 자아관’에서 개인은 언제나 타자의 이야기의 부분으로 들어가고, 타자 역시 나의 이야기의 한 부분으로 (...) 개입해 들어온다. 때문에 서사적 자아관은 상호 긴밀하게 결부되어 있는 관계성과 그로부터 발생하는 책임의 문제를 강조한다. 동일한 관심사에서 도나 해러웨이(D. Haraway)는 복수의 행위자들이 함께 사는 문제는 전적인 책임의 문제임을 환기시킨다. 그러나 이러한 복수 주체라는 토대에서, ‘설명책임(accountability)’을 동일하게 중시하면서도, 매킨타이어에게 중시되는 것이 상호간에 ‘이해가능성(intelligibility)’을 가능하게 하는 종착지로서의 ‘설명책임’이라면, 해러웨이에게 ‘설명책임’은 그로부터 다시 ‘응답책임(responsibility)’로 나아가야 하는 출발점으로 다뤄진다. 해러웨이에게 공동의 운명에 처해있는 복수의 주체란 ‘독립적이고 자율적인 개인’들로 구성된 것이 결코 아니다. 공동의 행위자들은 언제나 불균등하고 비동등한 입장에서 상호결부되어 있다. 때문에 불균등한 관계 속에서 행위자들간에 지속적인 응답의 노력이 수행되지 않는다면, ‘이해가능성’ 만으로 공동의 운명을 꾸려나갈 책임은 온전히 성취될 수 없다. 강한 1인칭의 관점에서 벗어나 복수의 주체를 윤리적 주체로 상정함에도 불구하고, 매킨타이어의 서사적 자아관이 궁극적으로 ‘함께 사는 문제’에 대한 실제적인 답변을 제출하지 못했던 것은, 이러한 불균등한 행위자들의 입장에 대한 고찰이 결여되어있었기 때문이라는 것이 이하 논의의 주장이다. 그로써 우리는 해러웨이의 주장을 따라 공동의 행위자들이 함께 사는 문제에서 어떻게 책임이 사유되고, 수행될 수 있는지 살펴본다. (shrink)

Within contemporary philosophy of religion there are three main ways in which God is conceptualised in relation to personhood:God is a person and so personal. God is non-personal, and so is not a person. God is a personal non-person. The first two of these options will be familiar to many, with held by most contemporary monotheist philosophers of religion and mainly by those who are pantheists., however, is a view some may not have come across, despite its (...) proponents claiming it was the view of great philosophical theologians from the past. However, within recent times has become more popular. On the face of it, it might not be clear what the difference between and is, and whether debate had between the two positions is substantive. The goal of this paper is therefore to clarify the debate and assess whether the many claims advocates of make as to why God cannot be a person stand up to scrutiny or are persuasive. My suggestion will be that on the whole they do and are not. As such, defenders of will either need to defend these reasons in more detail or focus on the area I suggest the debate really rests on. (shrink)

This study investigated their views concerning evidence and expert opinion of 10th‐grade students, accessed by an open‐ended questionnaire in the context of a socio‐scientific issue: the cause of flood disasters, and personal epistemology identified by the Learning Environment Preference Questionnaire . Students' responses to the open‐ended questions showed that when thinking about the flood issue, most students rely heavily on direct and numerical data to draw their conclusions, while experts represented a source of conclusive information. The LEP scores indicated (...) that, in terms of epistemological development, students were mostly at the stage of the ‘multiplicists’ in Perry's model. The statistical analysis suggested that view towards evidence and expert were associated with personal epistemology. (shrink)

Hume's Treatise Book III appendix on personal identity is analyzed as concerned with a difficulty not with the Book I account of personal identity as such (the self as product of associational imagination) but a presupposition of that account: the succession of perceptions present to consciousness (which the imagination associates, thus giving to the fiction of an identity). It is then claimed that while Hume's theory of imagination offers no way out of quandary, Kantian imagination-based transcendental idealism does.

In the chapter "Of Identity and Diversity" of An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Locke claims that justice is based on personal identity and that personal identity is based on consciousness. However, this view of justice leads to an impasse when the defendant alleges that he has no consciousness of the crime and, therefore, that he does not identify himself as the person who committed the crime: if it is not possible to determine that he is the one who (...) committed the crime, can we say that the punishment is just? This article seeks (i) to analyse the impasse exploring (a) its conceptual framework and (b) its development in the letters Molyneux and Locke exchanged in order (ii) to elaborate a criticism of Locke’s answer to it. Compared to the secondary bibliography, in which one objection to Locke’s answer is well established, the originality of this article consists in elaborating a new objection based on the distinction between the first and third person perspectives and in showing that, when questioned by Molyneux, Locke failed to discuss the conceptual issue necessary to give an adequate answer to the impasse. Keywords: Locke, Molyneux, personal identity, justice. (shrink)

Der soziale und medizinische Umgang mit „Transsexualität“ (Transidentität) stößt in zunehmendem Maße auf Kritik. Der vorliegende Beitrag geht der Frage nach, welches semantisch-begriffliche „Konzept“ von Transidentität in Deutschland vorherrscht und inwieweit die Konstituenten dieses Konzeptes den Denkhorizont, vor dem die ethischen Implikationen des Phänomens Transidentität verhandelt werden, begrenzen. Es lässt sich zeigen, dass der gegenwärtige Umgang mit Transidentität auf mehreren kaum hinterfragten, gleichwohl systematisch und ethisch problematischen Setzungen basiert. Zu diesen gehören (1) die Pathologisierung von Transidentität und deren weitgehende Überstellung (...) in den Zuständigkeitsbereich der Medizin, (2) die Behauptung eines Primats der chirurgischen Therapie (Vernachlässigung der postoperativen Phase), (3) das Paradigma „Bigenus“, (4) die terminologisch fassbare „Sexualisierung“ des vorliegenden Identitätsproblems und (5) die juristische Vorgabe, wonach der Personenstand an gonadal-morphologischen Kriterien festzumachen ist. Um das Ziel eines ethisch reflektierten und dadurch gesellschaftlich wie medizinisch verantwortungsvollen Umgangs mit Transidentität ernsthaft verfolgen zu können, ist es zunächst erforderlich, die bezeichneten Setzungen in einem offen geführten Diskurs auf den Prüfstand zu stellen. Erst das Ergebnis einer solchen Prüfung kann den Weg für einen zeitgemäßeren, medizinethisch belastbaren (reflektierten) Umgang mit Transidentität ebnen. (shrink)

Personal Versus Political Affairs in Churchill's This is a Chair There are plenty of issues in the world to petition and fight for, yet each individual also has "battles" at home to contend with. Which is of more importance? We often separate the two indefinitely. In studying Caryl Churchill's work This Is a Chair, however, I would suggest the personal and political to be intimately related and possibly each even a causation of the other. To take care of (...) one may be eliminating the problem of the other as well. Might political problems stem from petty, personal qualms? Even more specifically might jeopardizing moral norms affect the greater social order? If so, this would be a revelation and fresh pursuit in solving many of the monumental political issues which are faced today. (shrink)

This is the second volume of Professor Macmurray's Gifford Lectures on The Form of the Personal. The first volume, The Self as Agent, was concerned to shift the center of philosophy from thought to action. Persons in Relation, starting from this practical standpoint, sets out to show that the form of personal life is determined by the mutuality of personal relationship, so that the unit of human life is not the "I" alone, by the "You and I.".

This paper argues for a new understanding of Strawson’s distinction between personal, impersonal, and self-reactive attitudes. Many Strawsonians take these basic reactive attitude types to be distinguished by two factors. Is it the self or another who is treated with good- or ill-will? And is it the self or another who displays good- or ill-will? On this picture, when someone else wrongs me, my reactive attitude is personal; when someone else wrongs someone else, my reactive attitude is impersonal; (...) and when I wrong someone else, my attitude is self-reactive. Against this account, I argue that the basic reactive attitude types are better distinguished according to whether they express partial or impartial concern. This fits Strawson’s discussion in “Freedom and Resentment”, and it allows us to see an important point that the alternative approach obscures. Namely, while attitudes like resentment, gratitude, shame, and pride can arise as responses to our own treatment and behavior, they can also arise as third-party responses to the treatment and behavior of our family members, romantic partners, and close friends. Similarly, attitudes like moral indignation and disapprobation also have a wider scope than is often acknowledged; they can arise as responses to others’ treatment, but they can also arise as responses to our own treatment when we react impartially to circumstances involving ourselves. (shrink)

There has been a growing interest in research concerning memory modification technologies (MMTs) in recent years. Neuroscientists and psychologists are beginning to explore the prospect of controllable and intentional modification of human memory. One of the technologies with the greatest potential to this end is optogenetics—an invasive neuromodulation technique involving the use of light to control the activity of individual brain cells. It has recently shown the potential to modify specific long-term memories in animal models in ways not yet possible (...) with other MMTs. As the therapeutic potential of optogenetics has already prompted approval of the first human trials, it is especially important and timely to consider the opportunities and dangers this technology may entail. In this article, we focus on possible consequences of optogenetics as an MMT by analyzing fundamental threats potentially associated with memory modifications: the potential disruption of personality and authenticity. (shrink)

Hylomorphism offers a third way between animalist approaches to personal identity, which maintain that psychology is irrelevant to our persistence, andneo-Lockean accounts, which deny that humans are animals. This paper provides a Thomistic account that explains the intuitive responses to thought experiments involving brain transplants and the transformation of organic bodies into inorganic ones. This account does not have to follow the animalist in abandoning the claim that it is our identity which matters in survival, or countenance the puzzles (...) of spatially coincident entities that plague the neo-Lockean. The key is to understand the human being as only contingently an animal. This approach to our animality is one that Catholics have additional reason to hold given certain views about purgatory, our uniqueness as free and rational creatures, and our having once existed as zygotes. (shrink)

When talking about personal identity in the context of medical ethics, ethicists tend to borrow haphazardly from different philosophical notions of personal identity, or to abjure these abstract metaphysical concerns as having nothing to do with practical questions in medical ethics. In fact, however, part of the moral authority for respecting a patient’s self-regarding decisions can only be made sense of if we make certain assumptions that are central to a particular, psychological picture of personal identity, namely, (...) that patients will remain psychologically connected to a certain degree with their future selves. I draw this out, show problems with approaches in medical ethics based on alternate theories of personal identity that do not recognise this, and explore some important implications. Namely, I show how this recognition can better explain the circumstances under which we should respect advance directives and why, and how it can better make sense of patient fears that they will not "survive" personality-altering deep brain stimulation procedures, and provide guidance on approaching patient decisions concerning this type of procedure in a manner that captures and addresses such concerns. (shrink)

The aim of this study was to identify and analyse ethical decision making in the home care of persons with long-term mental illness. A focus was placed on how health care workers interpret and deal with the principle of autonomy in actual situations. Three focus groups involving mental health nurses who were experienced in the home care of persons with chronic mental illness were conducted in order to stimulate an interactive dialogue on this topic. A constant comparative analysis of the (...) transcribed audiotaped sessions identified a central theme that concerned the moral symbolic meaning of ‘home’. This reflected the health care workers’ conflict between their professional role and their moral role, which they perceived as unclear. (shrink)