While philosophers hold that it is patently absurd to blame robots or hold them morally responsible [1], a series of recent empirical studies suggest that people do ascribe blame to AI systems and robots in certain contexts [2]. This is disconcerting: Blame might be shifted from the owners, users or designers of AI systems to the systems themselves, leading to the diminished accountability of the responsible human agents [3]. In this paper, we explore one of the potential underlying reasons for (...) robot blame, namely the folk's willingness to ascribe inculpating mental states or "mens rea" to robots. In a vignette-based experiment (N=513), we presented participants with a situation in which an agent knowingly runs the risk of bringing about substantial harm. We manipulated agent type (human v. group agent v. AI-driven robot) and outcome (neutral v. bad), and measured both moral judgment (wrongness of the action and blameworthiness of the agent) and mental states attributed to the agent (recklessness and the desire to inflict harm). We found that (i) judgments of wrongness and blame were relatively similar across agent types, possibly because (ii) attributions of mental states were, as suspected, similar across agent types. This raised the question - also explored in the experiment - whether people attribute knowledge and desire to robots in a merely metaphorical way (e.g., the robot "knew" rather than really knew). However, (iii), according to our data people were unwilling to downgrade to mens rea in a merely metaphorical sense when given the chance. Finally, (iv), we report a surprising and novel finding, which we call the inverse outcome effect on robot blame: People were less willing to blame artificial agents for bad outcomes than for neutral outcomes. This suggests that they are implicitly aware of the dangers of overattributing blame to robots when harm comes to pass, such as inappropriately letting the responsible human agent off the moral hook. (shrink)

The recent controversy about misinformation has moved a question into the focus of the public eye that has occupied philosophers for decades: Under what conditions is it appropriate to assert a certain claim? When asserting a claim that x, must one know that x? Must x be true? Might it be normatively acceptable to assert whatever one believes? In the largest cross-cultural study to date (total n = 1,091) on the topic, findings from the United States, Germany, and Japan suggest (...) that, in order to claim that x, x need not be known, and it can be false. However, the data show, we do expect considerable epistemic responsibility on the speaker’s behalf: In order to appropriately assert a claim, the speaker must have good reasons to believe it. (shrink)

According to contextualism, the extension of claims of personal taste is dependent on the context of utterance. According to truth relativism, their extension depends on the context of assessment. On this view, when the taste preferences of a speaker change, so does the truth value of a previously uttered taste claim, and the speaker might be required to retract it. Both views make strong empirical assumptions, which are here put to the test in three experiments with over 740 participants. It (...) turns out that the linguistic behaviour of ordinary English speakers is consistent with contextualist predictions and inconsistent with the predictions of the most widely discussed form of truth relativism advocated by John MacFarlane. (shrink)

According to contextualism, the extension of claims of personal taste is dependent on the context of utterance. According to truth relativism, their extension depends on the context of assessment. On this view, when the tastes of a speaker change, so does the truth value of a previously uttered taste claim, and if it is false, the speaker is required to retract it. Both views make strong empirical assumptions, which are here put to the test for the first time in three (...) experiments with over 740 participants. It turns out that the linguistic behaviour of ordinary English speakers is consistent with contextualist predictions and inconsistent with the predictions of the most widely discussed form of truth relativism advocated by John MacFarlane. (shrink)

At the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, frontline medical professionals at intensive care units around the world faced gruesome decisions about how to ration life-saving medical resources. These events provided a unique lens through which to understand how the public reasons about real-world dilemmas involving trade-offs between human lives. In three studies (total N = 2298), we examined people’s moral attitudes toward the triage of acute coronavirus patients, and found elevated support for utilitarian triage policies. These utilitarian tendencies did not (...) stem from period change in moral attitudes relative to pre-pandemic levels–but rather, from the heightened realism of triage dilemmas. Participants favoured utilitarian resolutions of critical care dilemmas when compared to structurally analogous, non-medical dilemmas–and such support was rooted in prosocial dispositions, including empathy and impartial beneficence. Finally, despite abundant evidence of political polarisation surrounding Covid-19, moral views about critical care triage differed modestly, if at all, between liberals and conservatives. Taken together, our findings highlight people’s robust support for utilitarian measures in the face of a global public health threat, and illustrate how the dominant methods in moral psychology (e.g. trolley cases) may deliver insights that do not generalise to real-world moral dilemmas. (shrink)

A coherent practice of mens rea (‘guilty mind’) ascription in criminal law presupposes a concept of mens rea which is insensitive to the moral valence of an action’s outcome. For instance, an assessment of whether an agent harmed another person intentionally should be unaffected by the severity of harm done. Ascriptions of intentionality made by laypeople, however, are subject to a strong outcome bias. As demonstrated by the Knobe effect, a knowingly incurred negative side effect is standardly judged intentional, whereas (...) a positive side effect is not. We report the first empirical investigation into intentionality ascriptions made by professional judges, which finds (i) that professionals are sensitive to the moral valence of outcome type, and (ii) that the worse the outcome, the higher the propensity to ascribe intentionality. The data shows the intentionality ascriptions of professional judges to be inconsistent with the concept of mens rea supposedly at the foundation of criminal law. (shrink)

The potential capacity for robots to deceive has received considerable attention recently. Many papers explore the technical possibility for a robot to engage in deception for beneficial purposes (e.g., in education or health). In this short experimental paper, I focus on a more paradigmatic case: robot lying (lying being the textbook example of deception) for nonbeneficial purposes as judged from the human point of view. More precisely, I present an empirical experiment that investigates the following three questions: (a) Are ordinary (...) people willing to ascribe deceptive intentions to artificial agents? (b) Are they as willing to judge a robot lie as a lie as they would be when human agents engage in verbal deception? (c) Do people blame a lying artificial agent to the same extent as a lying human agent? The response to all three questions is a resounding yes. This, I argue, implies that robot deception and its normative consequences deserve considerably more attention than they presently receive. (shrink)

Contextualism is the view that the extension of perspectival claims (involving e.g. predicates of personal taste or epistemic modals) depends on the context of utterance. Relativism is the view that the extension of perspectival claims depends on the context of assessment. Both views make concrete, empirically testable predictions about how such claims are used by ordinary English language speakers. This chapter surveys some of the recent empirical literature on the topic and presents four new experiments (total N=724). Consistent with contextualism (...) and inconsistent with relativism, the results suggest that the extension of perspectival claims depends on the context of utterance, not the context of assessment. (shrink)

In this paper we discuss a phenomenon we call perspectival plurality, which has gone largely unnoticed in the current debate between relativism and contextualism about predicates of personal taste. According to perspectival plurality, the truth value of a sentence containing more than one PPT may depend on more than one perspective. Prima facie, the phenomenon engenders a problem for relativism and can be shaped into an argument in favor of contextualism. We explore the consequences of perspectival plurality in depth and (...) assess several possible responses on behalf of advocates of relativism. (shrink)

According to indexical contextualism, the perspectival element of taste predicates and epistemic modals is part of the content expressed. According to nonindexicalism, the perspectival element must be conceived as a parameter in the circumstance of evaluation, which engenders “thin” or perspective-neutral semantic contents. Echoing Evans, thin contents have frequently been criticized. It is doubtful whether such coarse-grained quasi-propositions can do any meaningful work as objects of propositional attitudes. In this paper, I assess recent responses by Recanati, Kölbel, Lasersohn and MacFarlane (...) to the “incompleteness worry”. None of them manages to convince. Particular attention is devoted to an argument by John MacFarlane, which states that if perspectives must be part of the content, so must worlds, which would make intuitively contingent propositions necessary. I demonstrate that this attempt to defend thin content views such as nonindexical contextualism and relativism conflates two distinct notions of necessity, and that radical indexicalist accounts of semantics, such as Schaffer’s necessitarianism, are in fact quite plausible. (shrink)

In a series of ten preregistered experiments (N=2043), we investigate the effect of outcome valence on judgments of probability, negligence, and culpability – a phenomenon sometimes labelled moral (and legal) luck. We found that harmful outcomes, when contrasted with neutral outcomes, lead to increased perceived probability of harm ex post, and consequently to increased attribution of negligence and culpability. Rather than simply postulating a hindsight bias (as is common), we employ a variety of empirical means to demonstrate that the outcome-driven (...) asymmetry across perceived probabilities constitutes a systematic cognitive distortion. We then explore three distinct strategies to alleviate the hindsight bias and its downstream effects on mens rea and culpability ascriptions. Not all are successful, but at least some prove promising. They should, we argue, be taken into consideration in criminal jurisprudence, where distortions due to the hindsight bias are likely considerable and deeply disconcerting. (shrink)

In an important and widely discussed series of studies, Jonathan Phillips and colleagues have suggested that the ordinary concept of happiness has a substantial moral component. For in- stance, two persons who enjoy the same extent of positive emotions and are equally satisfied with their lives are judged as happy to different degrees if one is less moral than the other. Considering that the relation between morality and happiness or self-interest has been one of the central questions of moral philosophy (...) since at least Plato, such a result would be of considerable philosophical interest. On closer examination of the original research and new studies, we suggest that the data point to a different conclusion: in the dominant folk understanding of happiness, morality has no fundamental role. Findings seeming to indicate a moralized concept are better explained, we suggest, by folk theories on which extreme moral turpitude indicates that an individual suffers from psychological dysfunction. (shrink)

At the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, frontline medical professionals at intensive care units around the world faced gruesome decisions about how to ration life-saving medical resources. These events provided a unique lens through which to understand how the public reasons about real-world dilemmas involving trade-offs between human lives. In three studies (total N = 2298), we examined people’s moral attitudes toward triage of acute coronavirus patients, and found elevated support for utilitarian triage policies. These utilitarian tendencies did not stem (...) from period change in moral attitudes relative to pre-pandemic levels--but rather, from the heightened realism of triage dilemmas. Participants favored utilitarian resolutions of critical care dilemmas when compared to structurally analogous, non-medical dilemmas—and such support was rooted in prosocial dispositions, including empathy and impartial beneficence. Finally, despite abundant evidence of political polarization surrounding Covid-19, moral views about critical care triage differed modestly, if at all, between liberals and conservatives. Taken together, our findings highlight people’s robust support for utilitarian measures in the face of a global public health threat, and illustrate how hypothetical scenarios in moral psychology (e.g. trolley cases) should strive for more experiential and psychological realism, otherwise their results might not generalize to real-world moral dilemmas. (shrink)

The reasonable person standard is of great importance to US criminal and tort law. According to the law, whether or not an agent acted reasonably does not depend on features of the outcome which are not under her control. Mock juror attributions of reasonableness, however, are shown to be outcome-dependent. A series of experiments reveals that this outcome-dependence does not constitute a bias, since the very folk concept of reasonableness is outcome-sensitive. Consequently, the law makes a mistaken assumption as to (...) what kind of concept of reasonableness lay jurors will apply in court. This conceptual misalignment, it is argued, could lead to serious injustice in US trials. This paper presents a series of studies (total N=579) which demonstrate that folk judgments concerning the reasonableness of decisions and actions depend strongly on whether they engender positive or negative consequences. A particular decision is deemed more reasonable in retrospect when it produces beneficial consequences than when it produces harmful consequences, even if the situation in which the decision was taken and the epistemic circumstances of the agent are held fixed across conditions. This finding is worrisome for the law, where the reasonable person standard plays a prominent role. The legal concept of reasonableness is outcome-insensitive: whether the defendant acted in a reasonable fashion or not depends exclusively on her context of action, no matter how things play out. Folk judgments of reasonableness are thus inconsistent with the legal concept of reasonableness. Problematically, in common law jurisdictions, the decision whether a defendant’s behavior was reasonable or not is frequently (though not necessarily) delegated to a lay jury. (shrink)

Predictability is a prerequisite for effective human control of artificial intelligence (AI). The inability to predict malfunctioning of AI, for example, impedes timely human intervention. In this paper, we empirically investigate how AI’s predictability compares to the predictability of humans in a real-effort task. We show that humans are worse at predicting AI performance than at predicting human performance. Importantly, participants are not aware of the differences in relative predictability of AI and overestimate their prediction skills. These results raise doubts (...) about the human ability to effectively exercise control of AI — at least in certain contexts. (shrink)

While artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly applied for decision- making processes, ethical decisions pose challenges for AI applica- tions. Given that humans cannot always agree on the right thing to do, how would ethical decision-making by AI systems be perceived and how would responsibility be ascribed in human-AI collabora- tion? In this study, we investigate how the expert type (human vs. AI) and level of expert autonomy (adviser vs. decider) influence trust, perceived responsibility, and reliance. We find that partici- pants (...) consider humans to be more morally trustworthy but less capable than their AI equivalent. This shows in participants’ re- liance on AI: AI recommendations and decisions are accepted more often than the human expert’s. However, AI team experts are per- ceived to be less responsible than humans, while programmers and sellers of AI systems are deemed partially responsible instead. (shrink)

Language’s intentional nature has been highlighted as a crucial feature distinguishing it from other communication systems. Specifically, language is often thought to depend on highly structured intentional action and mutual mindreading by a communicator and recipient. Whilst similar abilities in animals can shed light on the evolution of intentionality, they remain challenging to detect unambiguously. We revisit animal intentional communication and suggest that progress in identifying analogous capacities has been complicated by (i) the assumption that intentional (that is, voluntary) production (...) of communicative acts requires mental-state attribution, and (ii) variation in approaches investigating communication across sensory modalities. To move forward, we argue that a framework fusing research across modalities and species is required. We structure intentional communication into a series of requirements, each of which can be operationalised, investigated empirically, and must be met for purposive, intentionally communicative acts to be demonstrated. Our unified approach helps elucidate the distribution of animal intentional communication and subsequently serves to clarify what is meant by attributions of intentional communication in animals and humans. (shrink)

As our experience with this special issue shows, climate change is such a multi-faceted problem that interdisciplinary research is a necessity. This is much more easily said than done. In the course of the publication of this special issue there were many lessons to be learned. First of all we saw how the exchange between our authors allowed them to expand the focus of their respective disciplines. Philosophers considered literature from various fields they would not have touched upon in their (...) usual course of inquiry. Scientists and legal scholars became more sensitive to the normative dimensions and justice-related intricacies involved in their research. This enabled all contributors to open up to different vocabularies and standards of research. At the same time, however, several obstacles to the success of this issue emerged as well. For such an endeavor it is necessary to find researchers who are ready to engage with other disciplines and to take up ideas and comments which at first sight might not seem relevant and out of place from their disciplinary perspective. Due to the special format another challenge was to communicate the interdisciplinary character of this special issue to the reviewers and to put the reviews in context accordingly without risking to diminish the disciplinary quality of contributions. For the guest editors this came with a further challenge. We not only had to become familiar with different disciplinary vocabularies and standards of research but also had to judge the quality and relevance of contributions in the light of our overall aim as well as disciplinary standards of quality. (shrink)

Pioneering molecular work on chelicerate visual system development in the horseshoe crab Limulus polyphemus surprised with the possibility that this process may not depend on the deeply conserved retinal determination function of Pax6 transcription factors. Genomic, transcriptomic, and developmental studies in spiders now reveal that the arthropod Pax6 homologs eyeless and twin of eyeless act as ancestral determinants of the ocular head segment in chelicerates, which clarifies deep gene regulatory and structural homologies and recommends more unified terminologies in the comparison (...) of arthropod visual systems. Following this phylotypic stage, chelicerate visual system development differs fundamentally from other arthropods during the compartmentalization of the ocular segment in that eye and optic neuropil primordia originate independently from each other. Comparative analyses of this phase identified further gene regulatory homologies but also major differences, most notably the possibly compensatory replacement of Pax6 by Pax2 in lateral eye specification. Also see the video abstract here: https://youtu.be/Hdfr3z5kEXU. (shrink)

PurposeThe COVID-19 lockdown interrupted normal daily activities, which may have led to an increase in sedentary behavior. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the level of physical activity among Swiss office workers.MethodsOffice workers from two Swiss organizations, aged 18–65 years, were included. Baseline data from January 2020 before the COVID-19 pandemic became effective in Switzerland were compared with follow-up data during the lockdown phase in April 2020. Levels of physical activity were (...) assessed using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. Paired sample t-tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank test were performed for statistical analysis.ResultsData from 76 participants were analyzed. Fifty-four participants were female. The mean age was 42.7 years at baseline. About 75% of the participants met the recommendations on minimal physical activity, both before the COVID-19 pandemic and during the lockdown. Weak statistical evidence for a decline in total physical activity in metabolic equivalent of task minutes per week was found, with no evidence for a decrease in the three types of activity: walking, moderate-intensity activity and vigorous-intensity activity. Across the three categories “high,” “moderate,” and “low” physical activity, 17% of the participants became less active during the lockdown while 29% became more active.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic did not result in a reduction in total physical activity levels among a sample of Swiss office workers during the first weeks of lockdown. Improved work-life balance and working times may have contributed to this finding.Clinical Trial Registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04169646. Registered 15 November 2019 – Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04169646. (shrink)

A provoking new approach to how we understand metaphors thoroughly comparing and contrasting the claims made by relevance theorists and cognitive linguists. The resulting hybrid theory shows the complementarity of many positions as well as the need and possibility of achieving a broader and more realistic theory of our understanding.

Der Mündigkeitsbegriff fordert begriffslogisch ein Vernunftvermögen, das es erlaubt, sich unabhängig von Zwängen und Bedürfnissen - in Freiheit - selbst regieren zu können. Kants Idee der Freiheit zeigt, warum Freiheit trotz (neuronaler) Determination gedacht werden kann und verschafft dem Mündigkeitsbegriff so seine philosophische Fundierung.

The Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Frege On Sense and Reference helps the student to get to grips with Frege's thought, and introduces and assesses:the ...

Zeit und Zeitlichkeit erscheinen für die Natur und die Existenz des Menschen grundlegend und fordern zugleich sein Denken wesentlich heraus. Das gilt in besonderer Weise für die Epoche des Mittelalters, in der sich Philosophen und Theologen, sowohl in Christentum als auch Islam, intensiv mit dem Thema auseinandergesetzt haben. Das daraus hervorgegangene, vielfältige und interessante Material ist oft als Gefüge aus naturphilosophischen, ethischen und religiösen Komponenten zu charakterisieren und eröffnet überraschende Einblicke - gerade in vergleichender Perspektive. Zu diesem Zweck wurden in (...) der vorliegenden Studie die zwei Denker al-Gazali ( 1111 Tus) und Meister Eckhart ( 1328 Avignon?) ausgewählt und gegenübergestellt. Nach der historischen bzw. ideengeschichtlichen Kontextualisierung beider werden im Detailzugriff auf die Texte die wichtigsten Punkte zu den jeweiligen Zeit- und Ewigkeitsvorstellungen herausgearbeitet und die Kategorien zu ihrer Gruppierung gebildet. Schliesslich werden im Vergleich die Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede benannt. Die zwei Hauptthesen, denen die Arbeit dabei folgt, sind erstens die relative Ähnlichkeit der Referenzautoren, deren Zeitvorstellungen und spiritueller Ausrichtung. Und zweitens daran anknüpfend die Annahme, dass bei intellektueller und lebenspraktischer Vertiefung der Religion kulturelle und religionsspezifische Unterschiede in den Hinter- und universale Motive in den Vordergrund rücken."-- Back cover. (shrink)

Die mannigfaltigen, oftmals konflikttrachtigen Beziehungen zwischen unterschiedlichen Weltreligionen sowie zwischen Religion und Philosophie reichen weit in die Geschichte des spannungsreichen Verhaltnisses von Glauben und Wissen zuruck. Zugleich haben sie im 21. Jahrhundert durch Globalisierung, Migration und Digitalisierung ein neues Niveau erreicht: Religioser Fundamentalismus und sakulare Areligiositat bezeichnen dabei nur die aussersten Pole eines Feldes, das in seiner breiten Mitte von religioser und weltanschaulicher Pluralitat und Diversitat gekennzeichnet ist. Eine philosophisch fundierte Untersuchung der Potentiale und Grenzen interreligioser sowie religios-sakularer Dissense ist (...) vor diesem Hintergrund nicht nur von wissenschaftlichem, sondern auch von gesellschaftspolitischem Interesse. Die vorliegende Studie sucht in Anknupfung an die Religionsphilosophie Kants sowie an idealistische und nachmetaphysische Positionen Perspektiven fur eine interkulturell orientierte Religionsphilosophie auszuloten, die sich als rationales Forum interreligioser sowie religios-sakularer Verstandigung versteht. In der Auseinandersetzung mit namhaften Religionsphilosophien der europaischen Moderne sowie mit den Philosophien des Buddhismus, des Christentums und des Islam werden exemplarische Momente der Komplementaritat, der Kompatibilitat und der Konvergenz ontologischer, ethischer und mystischer Dimensionen des Religiosen ermittelt und philosophisch gedeutet. (shrink)

This book collects major original essays developed from lectures given at the award of the Lauener Prize 2016 to T. M. Scanlon for his outstanding oeuvre in Analytical philosophy. In "Contractualism and Justification," Scanlon identifies some difficulties in his theory and explores possible ways to deal with them. In "Improving Scanlon’s Contractualism," D. Parfit recommends revisions and extensions of Scanlon’s theory, while R. Forst suggests in "Justification Fundamentalism" that Scanlon may want to replace reason with justification as his foundational concept. (...) T. Nagel raises fundamental questions concerning "Moral Reality and Moral Progress," and S. Mantel offers in "On How to Explain Rational Motivation" a critical discussion of Scanlon’s cognitivist theory of motivation. Z. Stemplowska does the same for Scanlon’s conception of responsibility in "Substantive Responsibility and the Causal Thesis," and S. Olsaretti suggests in "Equality of Opportunity and Justified Inequalities" an alternative to Scanlon’s arguments against economic inequalities. All contributors receive extensive replies by Scanlon. For anyone interested in Scanlon’s seminal work in moral and political philosophy, the present volume is utterly indispensable. (shrink)

RGVV (History of Religion: Essays and Preliminary Studies) brings together the mutually constitutive aspects of the study of religion(s)--contextualized data, theory, and disciplinary positioning--and engages them from a critical historical perspective. The series publishes monographs and thematically focused edited volumes on specific topics and cases as well as comparative work across historical periods from the ancient world to the modern era.

Für viele neuzeitliche Menschen sind zentrale religiöse Begriffe wie "Gott", "Gnade" oder "Heil" weitgehend unverständlich geworden. Im Bereich des alltäglichen Lebens lassen sich mit ihnen kaum noch persönliche Erfahrungen verbinden. In Anbetracht der daraus resultierenden Krise des christlichen Glaubens hat der Freiburger Religionsphilosoph Bernhard Welte (1906-1983) umfangreiche hermeneutische Überlegungen angestellt. Ausgehend von der These, dass sich der menschliche Verstehenshorizont im Lauf der Geschichte immer wieder modifiziert, entwirft er eine christologische Hermeneutik für das neuzeitliche Seinsverständnis. Diese umfasst sowohl eine Hermeneutik des (...) christlichen Glaubens als auch eine Hermeneutik der dogmatischen Christusverkündigung. Die vorliegende Arbeit untersucht beide Stränge der genannten Hermeneutik und prüft, ob Weltes Vermittlungsversuche auch für die heutige Theologie von Nutzen sein können."-- Back cover. (shrink)

Biblical theology is confronted with tensions between love and justice. There are sometimes attempts to avoid these tensions by dissolving one side of the opposing concept. One such attempt is to identify love and mercy as the essence of Christian theology, overcoming law and reciprocal justice. However, such a dissolution is irresponsible not only ethically, but also theologically--as the discussion in a number of the studies collected in the present volume will demonstrate.

Der Schweizer Johann Georg Zimmermann (1728-1795) gilt als Prototyp eines philosophischen Arzt-Schriftstellers. Die in der Forschungslandschaft Literarische Anthropologie angesiedelte Monographie untersucht einleitend Zimmermanns Bestimmung des Menschen im zeitgenössischen Kontext. Fünf daran anknüpfende Fragekreise analysieren sein Hauptwerk Über die Einsamkeit (1784/85). Der Versuch einer Ortsbestimmung fragt nach der Literarität von Zimmermanns Gesamtwerk vor dem epochalen Hintergrund, nach medizin- und wissenschaftsgeschichtlichen Bezügen sowie nach seiner frommen Befürwortung der Aufklärung.

Zwischen Menschen- und Tierbild besteht eine enge begriffliche Beziehung (Einleitung). Im Hauptteil wird der für diese These grundlegende Begriff der anthropologischen Differenz eingeführt (Abschn. 2). Im Anschluss daran werden die Wichtigkeit von Tierbildern (Abschn. 3) sowie Asymmetrien zwischen Menschen- und Tierbildern (Abschn. 4) hervorgehoben. Die begriffliche Beziehung zwischen Menschen- und Tierbildern führt zu einer parallelen Definition der beiden Begriffe (Abschn. 5). Die zwischen Tierbildern bestehende Spannung wird an drei Beispielen näher ausgeführt (Abschn. 6). Abschließend werden Gründe für die Existenz dieser (...) Spannung genannt (Abschn. 7). (shrink)

MenschenrechteBürgerrechtesindMenschenrechte Rechte, die Menschen aufgrund ihres Menschseins schon immer haben. Die bloße Eigenschaft, ein Mensch zu sein, ist für ihren Besitz hinreichend. Alle Menschen besitzen aufgrund ihrer gleichen NaturNaturdes Menschendieselben RechteRecht(e) (s. a. Menschenrechte, Grundrechte)Naturrecht.

"Das Buch ist gut zu lesen und als Urlaubslektüre zu empfehlen." (Sachverhalte 3/2015) "Der klare und sachlogisch überzeugende Argumentationsgang des vorliegenden Bands macht ihn, in Kombination mit einer sehr gelungenen, sprachlichen Gestaltung zu einem echten Lesevergnügen und kann für philosophische 'Einsteiger' zum Beginn einer philosophischen Liebesgeschichte werden. Für Lehrende der Philosophie an Schule und Hochschule ist Tiedemanns Band (…) Fundgrube sowie fachlich fundierter und didaktisch ausgezeichnet aufbereiteter Begleiter durch Unterricht und Seminar." (Mathias Balliet, ZDPE 1/2015) Liebe, Sexualität und Freundschaft gehören (...) nicht nur zu den intensivsten Erfahrungen des Menschen, sie werfen auch zahlreiche Fragen auf: Wie wichtig sind sie für ein gelungenes Leben? Wie genau unterscheiden sich Liebe und Freundschaft? Ist Sexualität ein eigenständiges Phänomen oder notwendig mit Liebe verbunden? Besteht Liebe eher aus selbstloser Fürsorge oder aus eigennütziger Habsucht? Von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart haben sich namhafte Denker von Sokrates über Rousseau bis hin zu Sigmund Freud und Simone de Beauvoir dieser Fragen angenommen und dabei erstaunliche Antworten formuliert. Die Philosophie der Liebe ist so vielgestaltig wie ihr Gegenstand. Ist platonische Liebe wirklich lustfeindlich und entsagungsvoll? Beruht die christliche Sexualmoral auf einem Mutterkomplex? Muss man dichten können wie Goethe, um mit Schiller befreundet zu sein? Ist alle Liebe so egoistisch, wie Schopenhauer uns einreden will, oder sind wahre Liebe und Freundschaft vielleicht doch für jeden von uns möglich? Das Buch bietet einen abwechslungsreichen Streifzug durch die Antworten der Ideengeschichte und lädt ein zum Weiterdenken. Love, sexuality and friendship are not only among the most intense of human experiences, they also give rise to many questions: How important are they for a successful life? How exactly do love and friendship differ? Is sexuality an independent phenomenon or does it have to be connected with love? Is love more a matter of selfless care or of selfish desire? From antiquity to the present day prominent thinkers from Socrates through Rousseau to Sigmund Freud and Simone de Beauvoir have taken on these questions and come up with surprising answers. The philosophy of love is as varied as love itself. Is Platonic love really opposed to pleasure and obsessed with self-denial? Is Christian sexual morality based on a mother-complex? Is it necessary to write like Goethe to be friends with Schiller? Is all love as egotistical as Schopenhauer would have us believe, or are true love and friendship still possible for all of us? This book takes us on a diverse foray into the answers offered by intellectual history and invites us to think further for ourselves. (shrink)

Authentizität entwickelte sich im Lauf der letzten Jahrzehnte von einem ominösen "Wort aus der Fremde" (Theodor W. Adorno) zu einem omnipräsenten "Hauptwort der Moderne" (Alessandro Ferrara). Die vorliegenden Studien verfolgen das Ziel, die Grundlagen für ein genaueres Verständnis des Begriffs der Authentizität und der mit ihm verbundenen Verfahren der Authentifizierung zu schaffen, indem sie zentrale historische Ausprägungen und diskursive Verwendungsweisen ordnen und zueinander in Beziehung setzen. Im Fokus der Untersuchung steht dabei der historische Wechsel von Objekt- zu Subjektauthentizität, in dessen (...) Folge sich Verfahren der Authentifizierung zunehmend von überlieferten geschriebenen Texten (Textidentifikation) auf anwesende sprechende Individuen (Selbstidentifikation) verlagern. Mit der differenzierten Ausarbeitung der Begrifflichkeit von Authentizität und dem Vergleich verschiedener Formen der Authentifizierung wird in den ersten drei Abschnitten des Buches ein literatur-und sozialwissenschaftlich ausgerichtetes Beschreibungs- und Analyseinstrumentarium entwickelt, dessen Tauglichkeit und Ergiebigkeit im abschließenden vierten Abschnitt in Form von Lektüren dreier autobiografischer Texte aus dem Umfeld der "Neuen Subjektivität" konkret demonstriert wird. (shrink)

This study uses a comparative analysis of key texts in the history of literature and philosophy to uncover the historical-semantic foundations of structuralist thought. By examining shifts within the paradigm of 'articulation' the author demonstrates how language became an explanatory model for a range of other organizing systems. This background makes it possible to comprehend the broadly disseminated network of modern structuralist theories."--Publisher's website.

Are our beliefs justified only relatively to a specific culture or society? Is it possible to give reasons for the superiority of our scientific, epistemic methods? Markus Seidel sets out to answer these questions in his critique of epistemic relativism. Focusing on the work of the most prominent, explicitly relativist position in the sociology of scientific knowledge – so-called 'Edinburgh relativism' or the 'Strong Programme' –, he scrutinizes the key arguments for epistemic relativism from a philosophical perspective: underdetermination and (...) norm-circularity. His main negative result is that these arguments fall short of establishing epistemic relativism. -/- Despite arguing for epistemic absolutism, Seidel aims to provide an account of non-relative justification that nevertheless integrates the basic, correct intuition of the epistemic relativist. His main positive result is that the epistemic absolutist can very well accept the idea that people using different standards of justification can be equally justified in holding their beliefs: Rational disagreement, he maintains, is perfectly possible. -/- The book provides a detailed critique of relativism in the sociology of scientific knowledge and beyond. With its constructive part it aims at making conciliatory steps in a highly embittered discussion between sociology and philosophy of science. (shrink)

Previous research in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) suggests that a main aim of explainability approaches is to satisfy specific interests, goals, expectations, needs, and demands regarding artificial systems (we call these “stakeholders' desiderata”) in a variety of contexts. However, the literature on XAI is vast, spreads out across multiple largely disconnected disciplines, and it often remains unclear how explainability approaches are supposed to achieve the goal of satisfying stakeholders' desiderata. This paper discusses the main classes of stakeholders calling for explainability (...) of artificial systems and reviews their desiderata. We provide a model that explicitly spells out the main concepts and relations necessary to consider and investigate when evaluating, adjusting, choosing, and developing explainability approaches that aim to satisfy stakeholders' desiderata. This model can serve researchers from the variety of different disciplines involved in XAI as a common ground. It emphasizes where there is interdisciplinary potential in the evaluation and the development of explainability approaches. (shrink)

In der 1970 gegr ndeten Reihe erscheinen Arbeiten, die philosophiehistorische Studien mit einem systematischen Ansatz oder systematische Studien mit philosophiehistorischen Rekonstruktionen verbinden. Neben deutschsprachigen werden auch englischsprachige Monographien ver ffentlicht. Gr ndungsherausgeber sind: Erhard Scheibe (Herausgeber bis 1991), G nther Patzig (bis 1999) und Wolfgang Wieland (bis 2003). Von 1990 bis 2007 wurde die Reihe von J rgen Mittelstra mitherausgegeben.

This article introduces an “ordonomic” approach to corporate citizenship. We believe that ordonomics offers a conceptual framework for analyzing both the social structure and the semantics of moral commitments. We claim that such an analysis can provide theoretical guidance for the changing role of business in society, especially in regard to the expectation and trend that businesses take a political role and act as corporate citizens. The systematicraison d'êtreof corporate citizenship is that business firms can and—judged by the criterion of (...) prudent self-interest—“should” take on an active role in rule-finding discourses and rule-setting processes with the intent of realizing a win-win outcome of the economic game. We identify—and illustrate—four ways that corporate citizens can employ moral commitments as a factor of production to enhance their processes of economic value creation. (shrink)

In this paper, I argue that many arguments from expert opinion are strong arguments. Therefore, in many cases it is rational to rely on experts since in many cases the fact that an expert says that p makes it highly likely that p is true. I will defend this claim by providing 5 arguments that illuminate and elaborate on 5 crucial claims about expertise. In this way, I aim to undermine recent attempts to establish a rampant scepticism about arguments from (...) expert opinion. (shrink)

The argument from inductive risk is considered to be one of the strongest challenges for value-free science. A great part of its appeal lies in the idea that even an ideal epistemic agent—the “perfect scientist” or “scientist qua scientist”—cannot escape inductive risk. In this paper, I scrutinize this ambition by stipulating an idealized Bayesian decision setting. I argue that inductive risk does not show that the “perfect scientist” must, descriptively speaking, make non-epistemic value-judgements, at least not in a way that (...) undermines the value-free ideal. However, the argument is more successful in showing that there are cases where the “perfect scientist” should, normatively speaking, use non-epistemic values. I also show that this is possible without creating problems of illegitimate prescription and wishful thinking. Thus, while inductive risk does not refute value-freedom completely, it still represents a powerful critique of value-free science. (shrink)