La exterioridad de una cosa o de un estado de cosas configurados por el ser humano no implica para Hegel que esa cosa o ese estado de cosas deban ya por ello ser considerados como formas del espíritu objetivo, mientras que en contrapartida las formas del espíritu absoluto estarían entonces conformadas por contenidos ideales del pensamiento. La diferencia entre espíritu objetivo y espíritu absoluto no radica en la diferencia entre lo que el espíritu humano “hace” y lo que “conoce”. En (...) efecto, las obras de arte, es decir, configuraciones exteriores hechas por el ser humano utilizando, por ejemplo, piedras, metales, colores o sonidos, son para Hegel instancias del espíritu absoluto, mientras que, por su parte, realidades que en cuanto tales no son intuibles, como, por ejemplo, los contratos o la organización estatal, son instancias del espíritu objetivo. Que Hegel considere al arte como una forma del espíritu absoluto pone de manifiesto que, a sus ojos, las cosas que intuimos en el universo son, en rigor, productos del propio sujeto que las conoce. Espontáneamente el sujeto cognoscente piensa que lo que intuye es algo que recibe desde un mundo externo; sostener que el arte es una forma de conocimiento es justamente el modo como Hegel está expresando que lo intuido es en todos los casos un contenido producido por el propio espíritu, que es, por así decirlo, una obra de arte humano. En el arte mismo, sin embargo, la producción de la cosa intuible es insuficiente, dado que el material que el espíritu utiliza para sus configuraciones conserva en mayor o menor medida, según el caso, una determinidad propia que resiste a la determinidad que el espíritu busca conferirle. Por esta razón, las obras de arte se presentan inicialmente como productos arbitrarios. Recién cuando integra sus intuiciones en la actividad de comprensión -actividad cognitiva con la que opera la filosofía- y media con ello completamente la determinidad de los contenidos intuidos, el espíritu configura finalmente un universo que le es propio y específico. El objetivo de mi ponencia es reconstruir desde el marco teórico recién expuesto el sentido y función que Hegel le atribuye al arte en su teoría del conocimiento. (shrink)

Fricker shows that virtue epistemology provides a general epistemological idiom in which these issues can be forcefully discussed.

The Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT) literature tends to focus on bias as a problem that requires ex post solutions (e.g. fairness metrics), rather than addressing the underlying social and technical conditions that (re)produce it. In this article, we propose a complementary strategy that uses genealogy as a constructive, epistemic critique to explain algorithmic bias in terms of the conditions that enable it. We focus on XAI feature attributions (Shapley values) and counterfactual approaches as potential tools to gauge these conditions (...) and offer two main contributions. One is constructive: we develop a theoretical framework to classify these approaches according to their relevance for bias as evidence of social disparities. We draw on Pearl’s ladder of causation (Causality: models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000, Causality, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511803161) to order these XAI approaches concerning their ability to answer fairness-relevant questions and identify fairness-relevant solutions. The other contribution is critical: we evaluate these approaches in terms of their assumptions about the role of protected characteristics in discriminatory outcomes. We achieve this by building on Kohler-Hausmann’s (Northwest Univ Law Rev 113(5):1163–1227, 2019) constructivist theory of discrimination. We derive three recommendations for XAI practitioners to develop and AI policymakers to regulate tools that address algorithmic bias in its conditions and hence mitigate its future occurrence. (shrink)

This paper aims to outline an analysis and interpretation of the process that led to First-Order Logic and its consolidation as a core system of modern logic. We begin with an historical overview of landmarks along the road to modern logic, and proceed to a philosophical discussion casting doubt on the possibility of a purely rational justification of the actual delimitation of First-Order-Logic. On this basis, we advance the thesis that a certain historical tradition was essential to the emergence of (...) modern logic; this traditional context is analyzed as consisting in some guiding principles and, particularly, a set of exemplares (i.e., paradigmatic instances). Then, we proceed to interpret the historical course of development reviewed in section 1, which can broadly be described as a two-phased movement of expansion and then restriction of the scope of logical theory. We shall try to pinpoint ambivalencies in the process, and the main motives for subsequent changes. Among the latter, one may emphasize the spirit of modern axiomatics, the situation of foundational insecurity in the 1920s, the resulting desire to find systems well-behaved from a proof-theoretical point of view, and the metatheoretical results of the 1930s. Not surprisingly, the mathematical and, more specifically, the foundational context in which Firs-Order-Logic matured will be seen to have played a primary role in its shaping. (shrink)

Liberados el romanticismo y el idealismo del lastre secular de su vínculo imaginario con la “catástrofe alemana” deviene una vez más posible recurrir a ellos para repensar los problemas teóricos y prácticos del presente y localizar nuevos instrumentos conceptuales para su solución. En este contexto recobran interés numerosos temas que fueron objetos privilegiados de reflexión por parte de los pensadores románticos e idealistas. El romanticismo exaltó la Revolución Francesa como un acontecimiento epocal de reivindicación de los derechos de los individuos (...) contra la opresión de las formas anquilosadas de la religión y la organización estatal. Los pensadores románticos se rebelaron contra el orden burgués en todas sus formas, contra la pauta ubicua de la razón económico-instrumental. Para Kant, lo que es útil e intercambiable no posee dignidad, sino precio. El rechazo romántico de la exhaustiva reducción del mundo a mercancía conduce a la recuperación del valor infinito de la naturaleza, en esa medida, a su “reencantamiento”. En una misma línea, el romanticismo preconiza tendencialmente todos los fenómenos no cuantificables, aquéllos que no permiten ser calculados en términos mercantiles: la corporeidad, el erotismo, la pasión, la imaginación y la fantasía, el arte y la poesía, lo telúrico, la diversidad individual y cultural. El idealismo, por su parte, busca una síntesis entre la concepción ilustrada del mundo material y la visión pre-moderna del mismo. El resultado de esa mediación es la explicitación de las estructuras del propio espíritu humano presentes en su comprensión del mundo, toda vez que para el idealismo el mundo es siempre la teoría de la mente humana sobre el mundo. El pensamiento ilustrado pudo por ello confundir la filosofía de la naturaleza de los idealistas con una visión de lo material viciada de antropomorfismo, más próxima a la mística y a los bestiarios medievales que a las ciencias naturales de la Edad Moderna. El idealismo, por el contrario, encuentra en esta suerte de principio antrópico de toda teoría un factor de liberación moral y política. La toma de conciencia de que es el sujeto el que crea sistemas de sentido y que, por tanto, éstos deben reflejar en sí mismos su origen humano, implica el corolario de que con las teorías –sea cual sea el ámbito de la realidad que ellas busquen explicar– se trata en verdad de dispositivos de ordenamiento para el conocimiento y la acción construidas por la propia subjetividad humana; en esta medida, en su origen no se encuentran datos brutos de un supuesto orden natural que debe, por tanto, ser respetado sacralmente, sino la propia comunidad de sujetos vivientes. Aunque haya dejado tras de sí y olvidado el proceso de mediaciones que le dio origen, aunque se presente, pues, como replegado sobre sí mismo y, en esa medida, como la suma de re-presentaciones de un orden encontrado en el mundo, cada sistema de ideas contiene el conjunto de prácticas subjetivas inferenciales que lo constituyeron y que fueron realizadas por múltiples sujetos en plexos históricos concretos. El idealismo consiste en explicitar a la subjetividad actuando en el objeto y, con ello, en conminar el peligro de la mutación de las teorías en ideologías. El fundamento último de la libertad descansa para el idealismo menos en el orden determinado que funciona como condición de posibilidad del ejercicio de la libertad que en el modo de autoconcepción de la propia subjetividad. A partir del mundo de las autoconcepciones del sujeto –para Hegel se trata del ámbito específico del sujeto que ha devenido por ello mismo absoluto– derivan luego, como sus corolarios prácticos, las formas concretas de ordenamiento social y político. Si bien asume en sí numerosos motivos románticos, el idealismo aspira también a una mediación de esos elementos con las contribuciones teóricas de la Ilustración, con la que guarda entonces una relación menos crítica que el romanticismo. Fruto de este espíritu más ecuménico y menos orientado a la ruptura, defiende una concepción más pacífica de la racionalidad capitalista y el mundo burgués. Hegel reivindica así el rol positivo del mercado con su división social del trabajo y una concepción menos revolucionaria y más reformista de la vida política. El neoliberalismo contemporáneo se concibe a sí mismo como el sistema que resulta naturalmente del principio de la libertad negativa. Una tesis central del idealismo alemán es que para que sea posible el ejercicio de la capacidad de decidirse autónomamente por diferentes metas es necesario el marco efectivo de la libertad positiva. Sin la presencia de un orden racional con poder coercitivo sobre los miembros de la sociedad para regular su conducta, la libertad negativa de esos miembros, a primera vista disminuida y parcialmente cercenada por aquel orden, no es en la práctica posible. (shrink)

Die Poesie ist für Hegel die Endform der Kunst, in der die Kunst im Allgemeinen durch die Religion überwunden wird. Die These, dass die Poesie den anderen Künsten, d.h. der Architektur, der Skulptur, der Malerei und der Musik, überlegen ist, spricht von einer besonderen Hierarchisierung und Periodisierung, die Hegel zwischen die verschiedenen Kunstformen einführt. Das Kriterium für diese Hierarchisierung und Periodisierung ist offensichtlich das gleiche, nach dem Hegel die Kunst wiederum als eine der Religion und der Philosophie unterlegene Form betrachtet. (...) Dass die Poesie eine den anderen Künsten überlegene Kunstform ist, ist auf den ersten Blick eine überraschende These; und sie wirkt noch überraschender, wenn man sie durch die These ergänzt, dass die Kunst wiederum durch die Religion und die Philosophie als weitere Phasen eines linearen Prozesses aufgehoben wird. Um was für einen linearen Prozess handelt es sich hier eigentlich? Ein linearer Prozess wohin? Der Prozess, von dem Hegel in diesem Kontext spricht, ist ein Erkenntnisprozess, und zwar ein ziemlich spezifischer Erkenntnisprozess, nämlich Erkenntnis des Absoluten. Die Poesiegattung, die für Hegel die Endphase der Kunst ausmacht, ist das moderne Drama, in dessen Zentrum die Darstellung des Charakters und der Handlungen seiner verschiedenen Gestalten steht. Was hat das alles aber mit dem Absoluten zu tun? Was haben das Drama und seine Subgattungen - der Tragödie, der Komödie, der Satire usw. - mit Religion und Philosophie zu tun? Hegel verbindet außerdem die Kunst mit dem Absoluten als eine Erkenntnisform desselben. Aber in welchem Sinne ist die Kunst Erkenntnis? Ist Kunst nicht eher Darstellung und Ausdruck subjektiver Gefühle und Ideen - und eben nicht ein Erfassen der Realität, eben nicht eine Erkenntnisform der Wirklichkeit? Um den allgemeinen Sinn von Hegels Ästhetik und dadurch die besondere Rolle, die er darin der Poesie zuschreibt, verstehen zu können, ist es unentbehrlich, die oben gestellten Fragen zu beantworten. Ein theoretisches und exegetisches Modell zu liefern, das imstande ist, eine solche Aufgabe zu erfüllen, ist das Ziel dieses Beitrags. (shrink)

Ao analisar a teoria da memória mecânica de Hegel, a maioria dos intérpretes considerou apenas dois aspectos da memorização mecânica: o desaparecimento do significado nas palavras mecânicamente memorizadas ou a internalização totalmente abstrata da mente que as memoriza. No primeiro caso, a interpretação concentrou-se na relação entre o significante e o significado das palavras; no segundo caso, concentrou-se na relação entre o signo linguístico como um todo e a mente. Entretanto, a posição específica da memória mecânica na sistematização das atividades (...) cognitivas de Hegel não se baseia nessas duas relações, mas na relação entre o significado de cada palavra e o significado das outras palavras. Ao memorizar de cor fileiras de palavras que não estão conectadas umas às outras por seus significados, mas apenas pela força da mente que decide memorizá-las juntas, a mente se liberta de qualquer conteúdo dado externamente e sublima a referência linear do conteúdo representacional de cada significado à intuição em sua origem. A atualização do poder da mente de interconectar conteúdos de acordo com as próprias regras lógicas da mente realiza, para Hegel, a transição para o pensamento propriamente dito. (shrink)

Delusions are one of the most classical symptoms described in schizophrenia. However, despite delusions are often emotionally charged, they have been investigated using tasks involving non-affective material, such as the Beads task. In this study we compared 30 patients with schizophrenia experiencing delusions with 32 matched controls in their pattern of responses to two versions of the Beads task within a Bayesian framework. The two versions of the Beads task consisted of one emotional and one neutral, both with ratios of (...) beads of 60:40 and 80:20, considered, respectively, as the “difficult” and “easy” variants of the task. Results indicate that patients showed a greater deviation from the normative model, especially in the 60:40 ratio, suggesting that more inaccurate probability estimations are more likely to occur under uncertainty conditions. Additionally, both patients and controls showed a greater deviation in the emotional version of the task, providing evidence of a reasoning bias modulated by the content of the stimuli. Finally, a positive correlation between patients’ deviation and delusional symptomatology was found. Impairments in the 60:40 ratio with emotional content was related to the amount of disruption in life caused by delusions. These results contribute to the understanding of how cognitive mechanisms interact with characteristics of the task in the context of delusional thinking. These findings might be used to inform improved intervention programs in the domain of inferential reasoning. (shrink)

Hegel ofrece dos formas -en su filosofía en último análisis complementarias- de caracterizar al idealismo: La primera es próxima a la concepción habitual de idealismo previa a Kant, a saber: como una posición que considera que aquello que conocemos es una modificación de la propia conciencia. La segunda descansa en la tesis de la nulidad de lo finito; según esto, ?idealista? es la filosofía que considera que lo finito no tiene en cuanto tal realidad; ?realista?, a la inversa, es la (...) filosofía que toma el ser de las cosas determinadas como algo fijo y definitivo. Hegel denomina a este idealismo ?absoluto?.El idealismo absoluto es el modelo teórico que interrelaciona la tesis del carácter intrínsecamente ideal de los objetos de conocimiento y la tesis de que las cosas singulares que constituyen el mundo real surgen como una autodeterminación del ser. La premisa que permite tal vínculo es la tesis defendida por Hegel de que ser y pensar nunca se han separado y que su separación es el resultado de una concepción posterior errónea de la mente humana sobre la naturaleza de su actividad cognitiva. La hipostasiación de la disociación que la forma cognitiva de la representación introduce en la unidad indiferenciada de ser y pensar de la que parte la actividad de conocimiento en el sentimiento y la intuición sensibles es para Hegel la que provoca la ilusión retroactiva de que ambos -ser y pensar, mundo conocido y mente que conoce- se diferencian y contraponen. Por el contrario, desde el momento que la sensación es también ella misma un modo particular de la actividad continua e ininterrumpida del pensamiento, en el itinerario que va de la percepción sensible a la comprensión del objeto no hay para Hegel un punto en donde pueda introducirse una fractura que disuelva la unidad primigenia entre el ser y el pensar. En esta precisa medida, el momento final de la actividad de conocimiento, es decir, la actividad de comprender el mundo, es a un tiempo la singularización de los contenidos universales que constituyen la teoría del sujeto sobre el mundo y la autodeterminación de la unidad ser-pensar de la que parte y en todo momento permanece el sujeto que elabora esa teoría. Arribados al punto de vista del concepto, la dicotomía realismo-idealismo queda develada como un corolario de la autoconcepción representacionalista de la subjetividad cognoscente. Esta concepción define al paradigma general del realismo, el cual incluye para Hegel como el anverso y reverso de un mismo modelo teórico tanto lo que tradicionalmente ha sido entendido como realismo como al idealismo que resulta de una universalización de la idealidad de la conciencia singular, ya sea en la variante propuesta por Berkeley, ya sea en la del idealismo trascendental de Kant. A ojos de Hegel, por el contrario, el idealismo no puede ser sino absoluto, es decir, debe incluir en sí mismo el momento del ser y, con él, la realidad de las cosas que el sujeto conoce: la tarea esencial de la filosofía no consiste para Hegel más que en tomar conciencia de la co-pertenencia y unidad intrínseca de ambos. (shrink)

When we hope to explain and perhaps vindicate a practice that is internally diverse, philosophy faces a methodological challenge. Such subject matters are likely to have explanatorily basic features that are not necessary conditions. This prompts a move away from analysis to some other kind of philosophical explanation. This paper proposes a paradigm based explanation of one such subject matter: blame. First, a paradigm form of blame is identified—‘Communicative Blame’—where this is understood as a candidate for an explanatorily basic form (...) of blame. Second, its point and purpose in our lives is investigated and found to reside in its power to increase the alignment of the blamer and the wrongdoer's moral understandings. Third, the hypothesis that Communicative Blame is an explanatorily basic form of blame is tested out by seeing how far other kinds of blame can reasonably be understood as derivative, especially in respect of blame's point and purpose. Finally, a new and quasi-political worry about blame is raised. (shrink)

In this paper I respond to three commentaries on Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. In response to Alcoff, I primarily defend my conception of how an individual hearer might develop virtues of epistemic justice. I do this partly by drawing on empirical social psychological evidence supporting the possibility of reflective self-regulation for prejudice in our judgements. I also emphasize the fact that individual virtue is only part of the solution – structural mechanisms also have an essential role (...) in combating epistemic injustice. My response to Goldberg principally concerns my perceptual account of the epistemology of testimony, which I defend as being both well-motivated and best categorized as a species of non-inferentialism. I also explain its relation to the reductionism/non-reductionism contrast, and defend my resistance to casting it as any kind of default view. In response to Hookway, I contrast discriminatory with distributive forms of epistemic injustice, and defend the basic taxonomy I present in the book, which casts testimonial and hermeneutical injustice as the two fundamental discriminatory forms of epistemic injustice. (shrink)

There are two kinds of forgiveness that appear as radically different from one another: one presents forgiveness as essentially earned through remorseful apology; the other presents it as fundamentally non-earned—a gift. The first, which I label Moral Justice Forgiveness, adopts a stance of moral demand and conditionality; the second, which I label Gifted Forgiveness, adopts a stance of non-demand and un-conditionality. Each is real; yet how can two such different responses to wrongdoing be of one and the same kind? This (...) paper explains how, by showing that the basic role each plays in moral-social life is the same; and that one is conceptually and therefore historically prior to the other. The result is pluralism, with each kind of forgiveness represented as distinctive in both its psychology and its normativity; and yet an ordered pluralism—with Moral Justice Forgiveness revealed as the root kind, and Gifted Forgiveness a culturally contingent iteration. (shrink)

Bernard Williams is a sceptic about the objectivity of moral value, embracing instead a qualified moral relativism—the ‘relativism of distance’. His attitude to blame too is in part sceptical. I will argue that the relativism of distance is unconvincing, even incoherent; but also that it is detachable from the rest of Williams's moral philosophy. I will then go on to propose an entirely localized thesis I call the relativism of blame, which says that when an agent's moral shortcomings by our (...) lights are a matter of their living according to the moral thinking of their day, judgements of blame are out of order. Finally, I will propose a form of moral judgement we may sometimes quite properly direct towards historically distant agents when blame is inappropriate—moral-epistemic disappointment. Together these two proposals may help release us from the grip of the idea that moral appraisal always involves the potential applicability of blame, and so from a key source of the relativist idea that moral appraisal is inappropriate over distance. (shrink)

Sometimes subjects have sufficient internal and external resources to retrieve information stored in memory, in particular information that carries socially charged content. Yet, they fail to do so: they forget it. These cases pose an explanatory challenge to common explanations of forgetting in cognitive science. In this paper, I take this challenge and develop a new explanation of these cases. According to this explanation, these cases are best explained as cases of norm-induced forgetting: cases in which forgetting is caused by (...) social norms in a relevant sense. These cases draw attention to the normative aspects of the mechanisms of forgetting. This is an important but neglected aspect of cases of everyday forgetting, in particular of those characterized by a social dimension. By investigating some ways in which the psychology of social norms is causally relevant in the mechanisms of retrieval failure, I begin to fill this gap. (shrink)

On knowledge and practices: a manifesto -- The web of practices -- Agents and frameworks -- Complementarity in mathematics -- Ancient Greek mathematics: a role for diagrams -- Advanced math: the hypothetical conception -- Arithmetic certainty -- Mathematics developed: the case of the reals -- Objectivity in mathematical knowledge -- The problem of conceptual understanding.

The central idea behind this paper is that presuppositions of soft triggers arise from the way our attention structures the informational content of a sentence. Some aspects of the information conveyed are such that we pay attention to them by default, even in the absence of contextual information. On the other hand, contextual cues or conversational goals can divert attention to types of information that we would not pay attention to by default. Either way, whatever we do not pay attention (...) to, be it by default, or in context, is what ends up presupposed by soft triggers. This paper attempts to predict what information in the sentence is likely to end up being the main point (i.e. what we pay attention to) and what information is independent from this, and therefore likely presupposed. It is proposed that this can be calculated by making reference to event times. The notion of aboutness used to calculate independence is based on that of Demolombe and Fariñas del Cerro (In: Holdobler S (ed) Intellectics and computational logic: papers in honor of Wolfgang Bibel, 2000). (shrink)

I shall first briefly revisit the broad idea of ‘epistemic injustice’, explaining how it can take either distributive or discriminatory form, in order to put the concepts of ‘testimonial injustice’ and ‘hermeneutical injustice’ in place. In previous work I have explored how the wrong of both kinds of epistemic injustice has both an ethical and an epistemic significance—someone is wronged in their capacity as a knower. But my present aim is to show that this wrong can also have a political (...) significance in relation to non-domination, and so to freedom. While it is only the republican conception of political freedom that presents nondomination as constitutive of freedom, I shall argue that non-domination is best understood as a thoroughly generic liberal ideal of freedom to which even negative libertarians are implicitly committed, for non-domination is negative liberty as of right—secured non-interference. Crucially on this conception, non-domination requires that the citizen can contest interferences. Pettit specifies three conditions of contestation, each of which protects against a salient risk of the would-be contester not getting a ‘proper hearing’. But I shall argue that missing from this list is anything to protect against a fourth salient threat: the threat that either kind of epistemic injustice might disable contestation by way of an unjust deflation of either credibility or intelligibility. Thus we see that both testimonial and hermeneutical injustice can render a would-be contester dominated. Epistemic justice is thereby revealed as a constitutive condition of non-domination, and thus of a central liberal political ideal of freedom. (shrink)

Some presuppositions are easier to cancel than others in embedded contexts. This contrast has been used as evidence for distinguishing two fundamentally different kinds of presuppositions, ‘soft’ and ‘hard’. ‘Soft’ presuppositions are usually assumed to arise in a pragmatic way, while ‘hard’ presuppositions are thought to be genuine semantic presuppositions. This paper argues against such a distinction and proposes to derive the difference in cancellation from inherent differences in how presupposition triggers interact with the context: their focus sensitivity, anaphoricity, and (...) question–answer congruence properties. The paper also aims to derive the presuppositions of additive particles such as too, also, again, and of it-clefts. (shrink)

Interpreting Bernard Williams’s ethical philosophy is not easy. His style is deceptively conversational; apparently direct, yet argumentatively inexplicit and allusive. He is moreover committed to evading ready-made philosophical “-isms.” All this reinforces the already distinct impression that the structure of his philosophy is a web of interrelated commitments where none has unique priority. Against this impression, however, I will venture that the contours of his philosophy become clearest if one considers that there is a single, unchanging root conviction from which (...) his ethical philosophy grows. Despite the perpetual motion of his philosophical thought—its erudition, originality, range, and unceasing forward momentum—still, I contend, there is something unchanging at the heart of it. I will show this by reference to three signature theses: internal reasons, the relativism of distance, and the porous borders of philosophy and history. I will argue that the root conviction of which these are the fruits is the conviction that the constraints of universal rationality seriously underdetermine how one should live. This, I believe, is the vision of the human ethical condition that constitutes the largely inexplicit yet utterly fundamental presupposition beneath Williams’s ethical philosophy taken as a whole. I label the object of this root conviction ethical freedom, and thus portray Williams as a philosopher of ethical freedom. (shrink)

This paper examines a little studied type of perspective shift that I call protagonist projection, following Holton :625–628, 1997). PP is a way of describing the mental state of a protagonist that conveys, to some extent, her perspective. Similarly to its better known cousin free indirect discourse, the shift in perspective is achieved without an overt operator. Unlike FID, PP is not based on a presumed speech-act of a protagonist. Rather, it gives a linguistic form to pre-verbal perceptual content, sensations, (...) feelings or implicit beliefs. I propose to analyse PP in a bi-contextual framework, extending Eckardt’s approach to FID. Under the resulting analysis, FID and PP are two instances of a more general category of perspective shift. (shrink)

We gain information from collective, often institutional bodies all the time—from the publications of committees, news teams, or research groups, from web sites such as Wikipedia, and so on—but do these bodies ever function as genuine group testifiers as opposed to mere group sources of information? In putting the question this way I invoke a distinction made, if briefly, by Edward Craig, which I believe to be of deep significance in thinking about the distinctiveness of the speech act of testimony. (...) The distinction is that between somebody’s functioning as a ‘good informant’ and their functioning merely as a ‘source of information’. The difference between these has, as he remarks, a crucial ethical aspect: What I have in mind is the special flavour of situations in which human beings treat each other as subjects with a common purpose, rather than as objects from which services, in this case true belief, can be extracted. In this paper I shall try to bring out the distinctive nature of the role of good informant in a way that helps to clarify what is at stake in asking whether there can be group testimony in the sense of genuinely collective testimony—that is to say, where the group testifier is a collective and not merely a sum of individuals testifying in one or another form of aggregated chorus. (shrink)

The dual aim of this article is to reveal and explain a certain phenomenon of epistemic injustice as manifested in testimonial practice, and to arrive at a characterisation of the anti–prejudicial intellectual virtue that is such as to counteract it. This sort of injustice occurs when prejudice on the part of the hearer leads to the speaker receiving less credibility than he or she deserves. It is suggested that where this phenomenon is systematic it constitutes an important form of oppression. (...) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]. (shrink)

This paper explores the relation between rational authority and social power, proceeding by way of a philosophical genealogy derived from Edward Craig's Knowledge and the State of Nature. The position advocated avoids the errors both of the 'traditionalist' (who regards the socio-political as irrelevant to epistemology) and of the 'reductivist' (who regards reason as just another form of social power). The argument is that a norm of credibility governs epistemic practice in the state of nature, which, when socially manifested, is (...) likely to imitate the structures of social power. A phenomenon of epistemic injustice is explained, and the politicizing implication for epistemology educed. (shrink)

A complete, illustrated survey of Etienne-Jules Marey's work that investigates the far reaching effects of her inventions on stream-of-consciousness literature, psychoanalysis, Bergsonian philosophy, and the art of cubists and futurists.

[T]he dominated live in a world structured by others for their purposes — purposes that at the very least are not our own and that are in various degrees inimical to our development and even existence.We are perhaps used to the idea that there are various species of oppression: political, economic, or sexual, for instance. But where there is the phenomenon that Nancy Hartsock picks out in saying that the world is “structured” by the powerful to the detriment of the (...) powerless, there is another species of oppression at work, one that has not been registered in mainstream epistemology: epistemic oppression. The word ‘structured’ may be read materially, so as to imply that social institutions and practices favour the powerful, or ontologically, so as to imply that the powerful somehow constitute the world. But for present purposes I am interested only in an epistemological reading, which implies that the powerful have some sort of unfair advantage in “structuring” our understandings of the social world. I will try to present an account of what this initially vague idea involves. I hope thereby to explain an exact sense in which the powerful can have a kind of epistemic advantage that means the powerless are epistemically oppressed. (shrink)

ABSTRACTWe discuss the thesis of universality of geometric notions and offer critical reflections on the concept of “natural geometry” employed by Spelke and others. Promoting interdisciplinary wor...

This paper defends a conceptualistic version of structuralism as the most convincing way of elaborating a philosophical understanding of structuralism in line with the classical tradition. The argument begins with a revision of the tradition of “conceptual mathematics”, incarnated in key figures of the period 1850 to 1940 like Riemann, Dedekind, Hilbert or Noether, showing how it led to a structuralist methodology. Then the tension between the ‘presuppositionless’ approach of those authors, and the platonism of some recent versions of philosophical (...) structuralism, is presented. In order to resolve this tension, we argue for the idea of ‘logical objects’ as a form of minimalist realism, again in the tradition of classical authors including Peirce and Cassirer, and we introduce the basic tenets of conceptual structuralism. The remainder of the paper is devoted to an open discussion of the assumptions behind conceptual structuralism, and—most importantly—an argument to show how the objectivity of mathematics can be explained from the adopted standpoint. This includes the idea that advanced mathematics builds on hypothetical assumptions (Riemann, Peirce, and others), which is presented and discussed in some detail. Finally, the ensuing notion of objectivity is interpreted as a form of particularly robust intersubjectivity, and it is distinguished from fictional or social ontology. (shrink)

The thirteen specially-commissioned essays in this volume are written by philosophers at the forefront of feminist scholarship, and are designed to provide an accessible and stimulating guide to a philosophical literature that has seen massive expansion in recent years. Ranging from history of philosophy through metaphysics to philosophy of science, they encompass all the core subject areas commonly taught in anglophone undergraduate and graduate philosophy courses, offering both an overview of and a contribution to the relevant debates. Together they testify (...) to the intellectual value of feminism as a radicalizing energy internal to philosophical inquiry. This volume will be essential reading for any student or teacher of philosophy who is curious about the place of feminism in their subject. (shrink)

I consider Katherine Hawley's commitment account of interpersonal trustworthiness alongside her sceptical challenge regarding the value of philosophically modelling institutional trustworthiness as distinct from reliability. I argue, pace Hawley's challenge, that there would be significant diagnostic and explanatory loss if we were to content ourselves with ideas of institutional (un)reliability alone; and I offer an illustrative case where institutional unreliability is only the half of it, indicating that when it comes to certain kinds of institutional dysfunction, we do need philosophical (...) models of institutional ‘distrustworthiness’ if we are to achieve a proper diagnosis. (shrink)

There is currently a consensus among comparative psychologists that nonhuman animals are capable of some forms of mindreading. Several philosophers and psychologists have criticized this consensus, however, arguing that there is a “logical problem” with the experimental approach used to test for mindreading in nonhuman animals. I argue that the logical problem is no more than a version of the general skeptical problem known as the theoretician’s dilemma. As such, it is not a problem that comparative psychologists must solve before (...) providing evidence for mindreading. (shrink)

David Hilbert’s early foundational views, especially those corresponding to the 1890s, are analysed here. I consider strong evidence for the fact that Hilbert was a logicist at that time, following upon Dedekind’s footsteps in his understanding of pure mathematics. This insight makes it possible to throw new light on the evolution of Hilbert’s foundational ideas, including his early contributions to the foundations of geometry and the real number system. The context of Dedekind-style logicism makes it possible to offer a new (...) analysis of the emergence of Hilbert’s famous ideas on mathematical existence, now seen as a revision of basic principles of the “naive logic” of sets. At the same time, careful scrutiny of his published and unpublished work around the turn of the century uncovers deep differences between his ideas about consistency proofs before and after 1904. Along the way, we cover topics such as the role of sets and of the dichotomic conception of set theory in Hilbert’s early axiomatics, and offer detailed analyses of Hilbert’s paradox and of his completeness axiom (Vollständigkeitsaxiom). (shrink)

Dedekind’s methodology, in his classic booklet on the foundations of arithmetic, has been the topic of some debate. While some authors make it closely analogue to Hilbert’s early axiomatics, others emphasize its idiosyncratic features, most importantly the fact that no axioms are stated and its careful deductive structure apparently rests on definitions alone. In particular, the so-called Dedekind “axioms” of arithmetic are presented by him as “characteristic conditions” in the _definition_ of the complex concept of a _simply infinite_ system. Making (...) sense of Dedekind’s method may be dependent on an analysis of the classical model of deductive science, as presented by authors from the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Studying the modern reconstructions of Euclidean geometry, we show that they did not presuppose deductive independence of the axioms from the definitions. Authors like Wolff elaborated a mathematics _based on definitions_, and the Wolffian model of deductive science shows significant coincidences with Dedekind’s method, despite the great differences in content and approach. Wolff had a conception of definitions as _genetic_, which bears some similarities with Kant’s idea of synthetic definitions: they are understood as positing the content of mathematical concepts and introducing thought objects (_Gedankendinge_) that are the objects of mathematics. The emphasis on the spontaneity of the understanding, which can be found in this philosophical tradition, can also be fruitfully related with Dedekind’s idea of the “free creation” of mathematical objects. (shrink)