Gordon Baker and I had been colleagues at St John’s for almost ten years when we resolved, in 1976, to undertake the task of writing a commentary on Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations. We had been talking about Wittgenstein since 1969, and when we cooperated in writing a long critical notice on the Philosophical Grammar in 1975, we found that working together was mutually instructive, intellectually stimulating and great fun. We thought that we still had much to say about Wittgenstein’s philosophy, (...) and it seemed to us that misinterpretations of passages in the Investigations were so extensive that it would be worth trying to write a detailed analytical commentary. It is difficult to recapture the excitement of those early days in being among the first to work on the microfilms and, subsequently, on the photocopies of Wittgenstein’s Nachlass. We spent many hundreds of hours poring over the typescripts and the often only semi-legible manuscripts, fascinated and privileged to be able to try to follow the development of the thoughts of a great philosophical genius. We talked endlessly about what we had found in Wittgenstein’s manuscripts and typescripts, and debated how it should be understood. The first fruit of our labours was Wittgenstein – Understanding and Meaning. Its guiding idea was to draw attention to the manner in which Wittgenstein linked the concepts of meaning, understanding and explanation, and so to bypass the connections between meaning, truth and truth-conditions that so fascinated philosophers of the 1970s, and to abandon the red-herring of assertion-conditions and anti-realism. After a hiatus of four years, during which time we wrote a controversial book entitled Frege – Logical Excavations and a polemical book on contemporary philosophy of language – Language, Sense. (shrink)

The timely feature article by van der Pijl et al 1 highlights not only the widespread frequency with which unconsented episiotomies and other procedures during labour are reported by women but also that there is hardly any discussion in the literature on the ethics of consent for procedures in labour. Those national and international bodies with responsibility for midwifery and obstetric practice need not only to recognise but also act to remedy this unacceptable situation. The studies quoted used the recollection (...) of women in reporting consent or lack of it and, although this is an entirely appropriate measure, it gives no insight into what, if any, informed decision-making the care providers carried out. Such information would be useful to determine how better practice might be achieved. A study into the practice of episiotomies by Dutch midwives and obstetricians is referred to and is not reassuring.2 They frequently expressed surprise that consent should be necessary and women were minimally involved in the decision for performing episiotomy. This and other examples quoted of lack of valid consent have a corrosive effect on the fundamental but fragile trust and necessary trustworthiness of the relationship between the person being cared for …. (shrink)

Teaching and learning of medical ethics and law are at the heart of medical education because they are integral to all clinical encounters and public health interventions, and a foundation in medical ethics and law is essential for students to become virtuous doctors. The first model curriculum for medical ethics and law within medical education in the UK, published in 1998, has recently been reviewed and updated. Now called a core content of learning, it emphasizes that teaching and learning of (...) medical ethics and law should be attuned to the students' needs appropriate both to their particular stage of training and to relevant specialty-specific ethical issues; is a shared obligation of all teachers throughout the course; and should be integrated vertically and horizontally throughout the whole medical curriculum. The General Medical Council and the British Medical Association have confirmed that the revised core content of learning is consistent with their guidance on undergraduate education. (shrink)

The metaphor drug model of money slights the possibility that money may literally tap into and exploit brain systems underlying motivational systems, and it also ignores growing evidence on the common neural substrates of behavioral and “physiological” addictions. Additionally, many objects other than money can gain such drug-like properties. The treatment of play in the evolutionary explanation for the unique role of money in people ignores key conceptual and empirical issues. (Published Online April 5 2006).

Penn et al. do not demonstrate Darwin made a mistake, because they largely ignore the semantics underlying the meanings of and An analysis based on the work of Mortimer Adler shows such terminology conflates at least three different meanings of only one of which challenges Darwin – and one which the authors almost certainly would reject.We must also admit that there is a much wider interval in mental power between one of the lowest fishes, as a lamprey or lancelet, and (...) one of the higher apes, than between an ape and man; yet this immense interval is filled with numberless gradations.;>. (shrink)

Posner & Raichle's (1994) exciting, wonderfully illustrated book describes the past successes and future potential of the relatively noninvasive imaging of the nervous systems of living people. The focus has been on cognitive processes but there is no reason why emotional and motivational systems cannot also be tapped. Although the authors do not formally address such contentious issues as consciousness and the private experience of other species, imaging methods may hold promise for helping us to understand these phenomena, as well (...) as to integrate psychological processes into ethological and phylogenetic research in general. (shrink)

Book reviewed in this article: Animal Consciousness. By Daisie Radner and Michael Radner The Unheeded Cry: Animal Consciousness, Animal Pain and Science. By Bernard E. Rollin.

In their preface to this book, the editors rightly state that “few social or technological developments in history have captivated people's imagination or raised more ethical questions than today's reproduction revolution”. The authors then set that revolution in a wider context from which it is all too easily divorced today, namely the nature and meaning of sexuality and the fundamental importance of the family. As a “Christian appraisal” it is a useful apologia pro vita sua for those of us who (...) share this credo. It also sets down a clear and consistent ethical position for all interested in the field. It never pretends that the issues are simple and straightforward. I, for example, …. (shrink)