Examines modern science, looks at scientific literature, and discusses the growth of science, invisible colleges, and the process of discovery.

El examen de los actores, instituciones y materiales implicados en el Proyecto Genoma Humano (PGH) remite inmediatamente al contexto de los macroproyectos científicos que suelen caracterizarse con el expresivo rótulo de «Big Science». Como es bien sabido, la afortunada expresión fue acuñada por el sociólogo de la ciencia Derek de Solla Price en 1936 quien elaboró su concepción considerando, principalmente, a la física de su época. Sin embargo, las ciencias biológicas tardaron varios decenios más en adquirir las (...) dimensiones de la Big Science. En el caso del PGH se presenta un panorama muy distinto al contexto en el que surgió la estructura de la doble hélice. El investigador aislado no tiene cabida en este contexto, y los grandes científicos son ahora directores de proyectos y el caso de James Watson es de nuevo paradigmático. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Reading Kierkegaard I: Fear and Trembling by Paul MartensDerek HostetterReading Kierkegaard I: Fear and Trembling Paul Martens EUGENE, OR: CASCADE BOOKS, 2017. 130 pp. $18.00The very first line of Reading Kierkegaard I: Fear and Trembling warns that "reading Søren Kierkegaard is a task that requires a relatively high level of intellectual investment" (ix). Yet the difficult task Paul Martens sets for himself, in keeping with the goal of (...) the Cascade Companions series, is to provide a short introduction to Kierkegaard's thought for a nonspecialist readership. In this first volume, the primary text in focus is Fear and Trembling (FT), with a second volume to focus on Works of Love. More specifically, the threefold purpose of this volume is "(1) to illuminate the internal logic of the text in a manner that renders the text more accessible; (2) to highlight the links between FT and Kierkegaard's broader context in a way that helps one make sense of some of its more opaque sections; and (3) to attend to the theological themes that permeate and drive the text" (xi). [End Page 205]Martens helpfully follows the structure provided by FT, explicating each "chapter" in turn and highlighting the ways it relates to the others as well as to the argument as a whole. This approach is particularly helpful for the long and difficult Problem III "chapter" in FT, which Martens frames as an attempt by Kierkegaard's pseudonymous author Johannes de Silentio to perform the text's argument by demonstrating "that the whole investigation—any investigation, even an unlimited poetic investigation of characters and concepts—only leads to one conspicuous conclusion: Abraham is unintelligible" (54).Attention to the links between FT and Kierkegaard's broader context is also helpful for unifying the seemingly disparate arguments in FT. In Martens's reading of this context, FT is to be understood against the broad backdrop of Kierkegaard's criticisms of nineteenth-century Danish Christendom and the particular backdrop of the Hegelianism that de Silentio finds within it. The overall task of FT is then "to raise the price of faith" (71).Martens clearly attends to the text's theological themes with his repeated juxtaposition between "faith" as de Silentio sees it in the story of Abraham and "the ethical" as de Silentio sees it in nineteenth-century Denmark. Many theological themes are also highlighted and then brought into the reader's context in the discussion questions that follow each chapter.In addition to the discussion questions, Martens provides an appendix, which includes a timeline of Kierkegaard's first authorship, a glossary of important terms that may be unfamiliar, and a list of suggested readings for further study. The glossary will be a particularly helpful tool for those less familiar with Kierkegaard. However, there are also several terms missing that are both significant enough and unclear enough to warrant inclusion. One thinks here of a figure like Socrates and concepts like the knight of faith and the knight of infinite resignation.Similarly, another feature of the book that is both a strength and a weakness is its commitment to the text of FT rather than the scholarship surrounding the text. This is a strength because it keeps the book short and accessible for nonspecialists. It is also a weakness, however, because the reader interested in further study is not clearly pointed toward competing interpretations, despite the fact that some lines are ripe for a brief footnote providing such a reference—"Not all agree with me on this" (76).Overall, the discussion questions and appendix, its short length and overall readability, and its commitment to the text make Reading Kierkegaard I: Fear and Trembling a significant pedagogical contribution to ethics and Kierkegaard studies as an entry point for nonspecialists. [End Page 206]Derek HostetterUniversity of DaytonCopyright © 2018 Society of Christian Ethics... (shrink)

Biological processes are often explained by identifying the underlying mechanisms that generate a phenomenon of interest. I characterize a basic account of mechanistic explanation and then present three challenges to this account, illustrated with examples from molecular biology. The basic mechanistic account is insufficient for explaining nonsequential and nonlinear dynamic processes, is insufficient for explaining the inherently stochastic nature of many biological mechanisms, and fails to give a proper framework for analyzing organization. I suggest that biological processes are best approached (...) as a multidimensional gradient—with some processes being paradigmatic cases of mechanisms and some being marginal cases. (shrink)

This article explores the work of Pedro de Valencia (1555-1620) with the purpose of establishing his philosophical allegiances. On the basis of his only published work, theAcademicaof 1596, widely circulated and translated into French twice in the eighteenth century, some authors have assumed that he was an Academic skeptic. On the basis of his translations of Dio Chrysostome and Epictetus and other manuscripts in imitation of the literature of retirement of Greek cynicism, others have taken him for a cynic. Placing (...) this work in the context of his other manuscripts on social and economic issues from the price of bread to the burning of witches ; his serious Biblical scholarship and polemics ; and his work as Royal Chronicler in the years 1606-1620, his writings on ancient skepticism and cynicism begin to look like little more than the scholarly exercises of a late humanist. Skepticism and cynicism were rendered harmless as only a part —-and a relatively small part—- of the arsenal of scholarly skills and philosophical sympathies of this knowledgeable and influential early modern scholar. (shrink)

Available from UMI in association with The British Library. Requires signed TDF. ;Metaphor and analogy are the scaffolding of science. Kepler's theory of the retinal picture could not have been built without the analogy between an eye and a camera obscura, and, two hundred and fifty years later, Charles Darwin devoted most of the first chapter of The origin of Species to discussion of pigeon fanciers. Unlike Darwin, Kepler was bewitched by his own imagination and was led to wonder "how (...) this image or picture is joined to the visual faculty, which is situated in the retina and in the nerve, and whether it is placed within the hollows of the brain, before the soul or tribunal of the visual faculty, or whether the visual faculty, like a magistrate sent by the soul from the administrative chamber of the brain, descends into the optic nerve or retina to meet this image, as though to a lower court" . ;The theory of the retinal image answered the crucial question of medieval optics: the scaffolding had served its purpose and should have been dismantled. Instead, Kepler mistook it for a part of the building: what he construed as a scientific problem was nothing more than the extension of a metaphor. As a result, and in spite of his remarkable achievement, he left the theory of vision in a state of confusion. ;I intend to show that Descartes revolutionized visual theory by manipulating the pair of analogies which had dominated visual theory since its inception and by advancing a theory of depiction which has since become orthodox. Advocates of the first analogy suggest that seeing the world is rather like seeing pictures of it; Kepler's analogy between the eye and a camera obscura, which was anticipated by Leonardo de Vinci, was a variation on this theme. Advocates of the second analogy compare vision to the use of a walking-stick: the air transmits an impression of a visible object to the eye rather as a walking-stick enables us to find our way around in the dark by transmitting pressures to the hand. As I shall show, Descartes' rejection of the pictorial analogy in favour of the walking-stick analogy and his theory of depiction were designed to salvage Kepler's theory of the retinal picture, a pearl of great price, from its murky setting. ;Descartes aimed to show that whilst Kepler's theory of the retinal picture correctly described the optics of the eye, the pictorial analogy was misleading and stood in the way of a mechanistic theory of perception. ;Current visual theory is Cartesian in some respects and un-Cartesian in others. The walking-stick analogy is no longer used, but the explanatory pattern that it served to illustrate is adhered to closely where the perception of brightness and colour are concerned, and the causal theory of depiction commands widespread support. At the same time, the pictorial analogy has not lost its appeal. (shrink)

Étude linguistique de nissaya birmans: traduction commentée de textes bouddhiques. William Pruitt. Presses de l'École française d'Extrême Orient, monographies, no. 174, Paris 1994. 287 pp. No price given.

Part 1 of this exchange consists in a critique by Smith of Searle’s The Construction of Social Reality focusing on Searle’s use of the formula ‘X counts as Y in context C’. Smith argues that this formula works well for social objects such as dollar bills and presidents where the corresponding X terms (pieces of paper, human beings) are easy to identify. In cases such as debts and prices and money in a banks computers, however, the formula fails, because these (...) are cases of what he calls ‘free-standing Y terms’, since there is here no X which can count as the corresponding Y. In his response in Part 2, Searle argues that Smith’s critique rests on three misunderstandings: 1. in wrongly presupposing that Searle is trying to analyze the nature of what he calls “social objects”, rather than of social facts; 2. in thinking that the counts as formula is intended as a definition, rather than as a mere mnemonic; and 3. in neglecting the naturalism of Searle’s account. (shrink)

First published in 1995. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

In J. B. Schneewind's The Invention of Autonomy we are given a monumental history of moral philosophy of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, a history more comprehensive and richer in detail than one would have thought possible in a single volume. Though the daunting erudition, agreeably unobtrusive, inspires confidence, it is Schneewind's gift of narrative that makes his book such a pleasure and his story so compelling. Schneewind originally conceived the book, he tells us, to "broaden our historical comprehension of (...) Kant's moral philosophy by relating it to the earlier work to which it was a response", but he does much, much more as he charts the fitful transition from morality as obedience to the later and now widely accepted conception of morality as self-governance. In its broad outline, the story is familiar, beginning with Montaigne's skepticism, moving through modern natural law theory, rationalist, perfectionist, and moral sense responses and ending with Bentham and Kant. But Schneewind adds to acute and deeply informed discussions of Hobbes, Locke, Clarke, Hume, and Kant, clear, often arresting summaries, in varying degrees of detail, of Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Machiavelli, Suarez, Charron, Grotius, Cumberland, Pufendorf, Thomasius, DuVair, Justus Lipsius, Herbert of Cherbury, Descartes, Gassendi, Whichcote, John Smith, More, Cudworth, Spinoza, Leibniz, Barbeyrac, Malebranche, Nicole, Bayle, Harrington, Shaftesbury, Mandeville, Butler, Price, Adam Smith, Reid, Paley, Hartley, Helvetius, d'Holbach, Bentham, de Sade, Wolff, Crusius, Voltaire, La Mettrie, Diderot, Rousseau, and others. If, as no doubt they will, some readers will fault some of Schneewind's interpretations, none will fail to admire his achievement in ferreting out and combining in such a fascinating narrative the leading ideas of this host of thinkers. It is safe to predict, moreover, that this study will inspire others to explore some of these less-read authors and to produce more fine-grained monographs, and further to deepen our understanding of the period and of the way we have come to think of ourselves. (shrink)

One of the central explananda in the debate on social cognition is the interpretation of other people in terms of reasons for action. There is a growing dissatisfaction among participants in the debate concerning the descriptive adequacy of the traditional belief-desire model of action interpretation. Applying this model as an explanatory model at the subpersonal level threatens to leave the original explanandum largely unarticulated. Against this background we show how Brandom’s deontic scorekeeping model can be used as a valuable descriptive (...) tool for making folk psychology explicit. Following Brandom’s non-formalist and non-mentalistic account of reason discourse, we suggest that the process of making sense of others is best captured as proceeding from a ‘factive’ baseline. According to this picture the ascription of beliefs and desires is not the default interpretation strategy, but rather the result of prior scaffolding of the agent’s deontic score. We close by discussing Brandom’s model in the light of empirical findings on the ontogeny of reason attribution. (shrink)

O objetivo deste artigo é investigar a filosofia do diálogo, de Martin Buber, e a ética da alteridade, de Emmanuel Lévinas, como propostas filosóficas de mudança de paradigma em relação à alteridade e sensibilidade. Almeja-se expor as aproximações e divergências entre os pensamentos dos filósofos para, na sequência, analisar sua influência sobre o trabalho de Enrique Dussel. Trata-se de pesquisa qualitativa, que emprega a técnica de pesquisa bibliográfica e se divide em três momentos, cada qual representado por um dos autores (...) elencados neste estudo. Como conclusão, destaca-se que ainda que tanto o pensamento levinasiano quanto o buberiano representem formas distintas (ainda que, em diferentes passagens, aproximadas e quiçá comparáveis) de entender a alteridade, Dussel parece reagir mais vividamente à influência de Lévinas, cujas reflexões constituem uma crítica à lógica do eu egocêntrico. (shrink)

Rigorous proof is supposed to guarantee that the premises invoked imply the conclusion reached, and the problem of rigor may be described as that of bringing together the perspectives of formal logic and mathematical practice on how this is to be achieved. This problem has recently raised a lot of discussion among philosophers of mathematics. We survey some possible solutions and argue that failure to understand its terms properly has led to misunderstandings in the literature.

In this article we take issue with theory theory and simulation theory accounts of folk psychology committed to (i) the belief-desire (BD) model and (ii) the assumption of universality (AU). Recent studies cast doubt on the compatibility of these commitments because they reveal considerable cross-cultural differences in folk psychologies. We present both theory theory and simulation theory with the following dilemma: either (i) keep the BD-model as an account of the surface properties of specific explicit folk psychologies and give up (...) AU in light of the cross-cultural evidence; or (ii) defend AU with respect to core capacities underlying different culture-specific folk psychologies, and explain why the BD-model will be genuinely explanatory at this level. (shrink)

Several authors have argued that socially significant places such as countries, cities and establishments are immaterial objects, despite their being spatially located. In contrast, we aim to defend a reductive materialist view of such entities, which identifies them with their physical territories or premises. Accordingly, these are all material objects; typically, aggregates of land and infrastructure. Admittedly, our terms for these entities may also sometimes be used to denote their associated groups of people. But as long as countries, cities and (...) establishments are understood as places, we submit, they are all material objects: the physical territories or premises of their associated groups. (shrink)

Neste artigo, tratamos de um desafio lançado inicialmente por Derek Parfit contra a teoria da justiça de Rawls, que diz respeito ao problema da identidade pessoal e como isso pode se relacionar com os princípios distributivos da justiça. Acreditamos, como indicado por Paul Weithman, que tal problema desempenha um papel relevante na guinada política de Rawls – movimento pelo qual designamos as transformações em sua teoria do período de Uma Teoria da Justiça para o da publicação de Political Liberalism. (...) O próprio Weithman já forneceu uma análise acurada de como essa objeção, a qual daqui em diante nos referimos como a objeção do self parfitiano, minou a primeira tentativa de Rawls de mostrar como sua concepção de justiça seria estável. É provável, no entanto, que seja fácil perder o rumo desse debate, que foi de certa forma mediado por Samuel Scheffler. É por isso que fornecemos uma exposição cronológica desse debate na seção 1. Depois disso, na seção 2, reafirmamos o relato de Weithman de como o self parfitiano mina a estabilidade da concepção de justiça de Rawls em Uma Teoria da Justiça. Por fim, na seção 3, examinamos se essa dificuldade é devidamente tratada em Political Liberalism. Assim, sobretudo com este último passo, esperamos que esta abordagem possa acompanhar e complementar as contribuições anteriores de Weithman. (shrink)

This research analyzes the theoretical answer received by one of the factors that cause the so-called Price Revolution in Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries, specifically the aspect related to the alterations in the monetary values ​​of pieces of vellón and silver in Castile and England. In both countries, these episodes were rigorously analyzed from a theoretical point of view, as can be seen from the study of the monetary ideas of the period that were developed in these (...) territories. In this study, in light of the historical events that took place, we analyze the foundations of the monetary thought of Juan de Mariana and John Locke who oppose the the alteration of money by the sovereign for fiscal reasons, as well as their different reception. (shrink)