Le « cogito, ergo sum » cartésien apparaît depuis quarante ans comme « inférence et performance » (J. Hintikka). Mais de quelle inférence s'agit-il précisément ? Pour le savoir, cet article poursuit deux objectifs : d'abord, montrer que la question pertinente à laquelle il s'agit de répondre ne concerne pas la relation logique interne qui lie le cogito au sum, et qui est une intuition, mais celle, externe, qui lie le « cogito, ergo sum » tout entier au « quicquid (...) cogitat, est ». Ensuite, montrer que cette dernière relation est tout à la fois une induction et une déduction. (shrink)

L’indéfini cartésien, qui désigne ce dont on ne peut prouver les bornes, s’applique à deux domaines : les mathématiques et la physique. Cet article examine son application au monde physique, en deux moments. D’abord, par l’examen de l’indéfinité de l’univers, où l’on montre que l’univers cartésien n’est ni fini ni infini, mais in-défini, à la fois selon l’espace et selon le temps . Ensuite, par l’examen de l’indéfinité dans l’univers, qui pose le problème de la continuité, à la fois dans (...) l’espace et dans le temps, où nous défendons une interprétation continuiste et aprioriste selon laquelle le temps cartésien est continu, et cette continuité n’est jamais qu’un pour soi. (shrink)

Deuxième volet d'une étude consacrée à la possibilité et l'existence chez Leibniz, cet article tente de reconstruire la conception leibnizienne de l'existence, notion fondamentale qui soutient toute l'ontologie de l'auteur et qui n'est pourtant ni clairement définie ni systématisée. En trois parties, nous établissons que l'existence leibnizienne est bien un degré de possibilité, un ajout, un complément, mais elle n'ajoute rien de nouveau. Elle n'est pas une perfection, mais une relation comparative de perfections entre elles. Elle n'est pas un prédicat (...) réel, mais un prédicat logique. Elle se définit comme ce qui est distinctement senti, ce qui plaît à un esprit tout en ne déplaisant pas à l'esprit le plus puissant, et ce qui est le plus harmonique. La conception leibnizienne de l'existence a plusieurs couches, et à de nombreux égards préfigure déjà la position kantienne. (shrink)

Deuxième volet d’une étude consacrée à la possibilité et l’existence chez Leibniz, cet article tente de reconstruire la conception leibnizienne de l’existence, notion fondamentale qui soutient toute l’ontologie de l’auteur et qui n’est pourtant ni clairement définie ni systématisée. En trois parties, nous établissons que l’existence leibnizienne est bien un degré de possibilité, un ajout, un complément, mais elle n’ajoute rien de nouveau. Elle n’est pas une perfection, mais une relation comparative de perfections entre elles. Elle n’est pas un prédicat (...) réel, mais un prédicat logique. Elle se définit comme ce qui est distinctement senti, ce qui plaît à un esprit tout en ne déplaisant pas à l’esprit le plus puissant, et ce qui est le plus harmonique. La conception leibnizienne de l’existence a plusieurs couches, et à de nombreux égards préfigure déjà la position kantienne. Second part of a study dedicated to possibility and existence in the philosophy of Leibniz, this article attempts to reconstruct his conception of existence, a fundamental notion that supports the entirety of his ontology, which is nevertheless neither clearly defined, nor systematized. In three parts, we establish that Leibniz’s conception of existence is a degree of possibility, an addition, a complement, which does not, however, add anything new. Existence is not a perfection, but a comparative relation of perfections between themselves. It is not a real predicate, but a logical predicate, characterized as that which is distinctively felt, as that which pleases a mind without displeasing the most powerful mind, and as that which is the most harmonious. Leibniz’s conception of existence has several layers and already prefigures to many the position of Kant. (shrink)

What are the philosophical arguments justifying limited strikes? This essay, as part of the roundtable “The Ethics of Limited Strikes,” adopts a French perspective both because France is, along with the United States and the United Kingdom, one of the states that launched such limited strikes in recent years, and because it developed a limited warfare ethos. There is something specific about such an ethos that makes it particularly receptive to thejus ad vimframework and, therefore, to the issue of limited (...) strikes. This essay also builds on the case of the use of limited force in Syria as a response to the country's use of chemical weapons between 2013 and 2018. Presented as a way to “punish” the Syrian regime as much as to “deter” it from using chemical weapons again, these limited strikes are a good illustration of the traditional retributive/preventive dichotomy of penal philosophy. I argue that the moral justification of those strikes should be guided by a consequentialist ethic, preventive rather than retributive. From a consequentialist perspective, limited strikes are justified when they “work”—that is, when they have a deterrent/compellent effect. For that to happen, they need to be credible and imply the potential of an escalation; the challenge being to keep the escalation under control. Carrying the risk of inefficacy at one end of the spectrum and of escalation at the other, limited strikes are indeed a matter of balance. (shrink)

La question de l’infini cartésien est vaste et polymorphe, de la métaphysique à la philosophie des sciences en passant par la philosophie pratique. Mais c’est en mathématiques que l’attitude de l’auteur est la plus ambivalente et paradoxale, car il n’y a pas, chez Descartes, d’infini en mathématiques. Le but de cet article est d’analyser les manifestations et les raisons de cette prudence cartésienne. Pour ce faire, nous procédons en deux temps. D’abord, nous constatons l’absence d’infini en mathématiques à travers l’examen (...) de l’infinitésimal. Ensuite, nous montrons qu’il n’y a, dans les mathématiques cartésiennes, qu’un indéfini, en discutant l’existence et le statut du « plus grand nombre ». Ce parcours dévoilera les deux motifs de la prudence cartésienne : la contrainte métaphysique et la rigueur méthodologiqueThe question of the Cartesian infinite is vast and polymorphic, from metaphysics to the philosophy of science and practical philosophy. But it is in mathematics that the attitude of the author is the most ambivalent and paradoxal because, for Descartes, there is no infinite in mathematics. This article aims to analyze the signs and the reasons of this cartesian prudence. We will proceed in two steps. Firstly, we notice the absence of the infinite in Cartesian mathematics through the examination of the infinitesimal. Secondly, we will demonstrate that there is, in Cartesian mathematics, only an indefinite, by discussing the existence and the status of the « biggest number ». This examination will reveal the two motives of cartesian prudence : metaphysical constraint and methodological rigour. (shrink)

On sait que l'ontologie leibnizienne trace, pour ainsi dire, le plus court chemin de la possibilité à l'existence. On mesure moins que cette ligne est parcourue d'étapes dont la première, assurément, est l'existentiabilité des possibles. Cet article examine d'abord la conception leibnizienne de la possibilité, à travers cinq définitions. Il analyse ensuite la nature et le rôle de cette existentiabilité, dans ses rapports à la possibilité d'une part et à l'existence elle-même d'autre part, pour finalement conclure sur l'existentialisme d'un auteur (...) dont on souligne habituellement l'essentialisme. De cette manière, possibilité et existentiabilité permettent de redécouvrir à nouveaux frais tout un pan de la pensée de Leibniz. (shrink)

Jean-Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer | : À première vue, il s’agit d’une chose et son contraire : la guerre est tellement le lieu par excellence de la violation des droits humains que leur relation semble se résumer à cet antagonisme primaire — l’un serait la négation de l’autre. La guerre viole les droits et les droits ont la paix, donc l’absence de guerre, comme condition de possibilité. Puis l’on se souvient que, contrairement aux apparences, la guerre n’est pas (...) cet état de non-droit où tout est permis, mais un espace normé, codifié. Il est question des droits humains pendant la guerre — pour dénoncer leur violation, certes, mais la violation des règles n’est pas la preuve de leur absence — mais aussi avant la guerre, puisque certains conflits sont justifiés par la protection des droits des populations locales, ou en vertu d’un « droit de l’humanité » qui serait un intérêt à agir. Les relations entre droits humains et conflits armés sont résumées dans cet article en quatre parties : d’un point de vue historique, d’abord, où l’on montre leur réciprocité. En reprenant la trilogie de l’éthique de la guerre ensuite : la guerre au nom des droits humains, les droits humains dans la guerre et, en guise de conclusion, les droits humains après la guerre. | : At first glance these two terms may seem contradictory. War is the most extreme context of human rights violations, suggesting that they have a fundamentally antagonistic relationship and that one is the negation of the other. War violates rights, while rights require peace and hence the absence of war. Despite this appearance, however, war is not a state of lawlessness where all is permitted, but rather a regulated, codified space. There is a question of human rights in war and we obviously denounce their violation, but the violation of rules is not proof of their absence. There is another question of human rights before war, since certain conflicts are justified by the protection of the local population’s rights, or the “rights of humanity” as a cause for action. This article summarises the relations between human rights and armed conflicts in four sections : firstly from a historical perspective, focusing on their reciprocity. The next sections follow the trinity of the ethics of war : war in the name of human rights, human rights in war and, to conclude, post-war human rights. (shrink)

“Toujours, dans toute proposition affirmative véritable, nécessaire ou contingente, universelle ou singulière, la notion du prédicat est comprise en quelque façon dans celle du sujet, praedicatum inest subjecto, ou bien je ne sais ce que c’est que la vétité.”Parce qu’elles mettaient principalement l’accent sur les liaisons conceptuelles, les précisions de ce genre ont été interprétées comme autant d’indices permettant de reconstituer le contenu du prédicat de vérité à partir de présupposés cohérentistes. Dans le concensus qui s’est établi sur ce point, (...) le rôle herméneutique très excessif accordé à la notion de système a eu une portée aussi considérable que le contenu des quelques textes généralement allégués. Si on admet, au contraire, qu’il y a bien une “doctrine leibnizienne de la vérité”, alors on est amené à inscrire la position de Leibniz dans le contexte du débat relatif à l’adaequatio rei et à souligner davantage ce qui l’apparente à une théorie de la vérité-correspondance.Cet argument principal est soutenu par des analyses de détail dans la logique. Un attention particulière est apportée aux valeurs des variables du nouveau calcul, à la fonction du prédicat de possibilité, au problème relatif à la constantia subjecti et au statut des entités intensionnelles. L’image de l’ontologie leibnizienne s’en trouve modifiée et précisée : à la fois possibiliste et factualiste, elle est traversée de tensions importantes et occupe une place tout à fait singulière dans cette partie de la philosophie qui connaît aujourd’hui un si profond renouveau. (shrink)

Leibniz a tenté de donner une formulation logique de l'ordre, en cherchant à spécifier de la manière la plus générale possible, le sens des termes « antérieur » , « postérieur » et « conjoint ». L'analyse de ces termes tient en trois points. 1) Deux êtres étant donnés, est antérieur par nature (natura prius) celui qui est plus simple, c'est-à-dire celui dont l'analyse requiert un plus petit nombre d'opérations de l'esprit. Par suite, les êtres qui sont conjoints (simul) doivent (...) nécessairement se caractériser par le même degré de composition. 2) Le degré de composition d'un être correspond à son degré de perfection. Si les êtres antérieurs sont plus simples, les êtres postérieurs sont donc plus parfaits. 3) Enfin, deux êtres étant donnés, tels que l'un est plus simple et l'autre plus parfait, on dira que ces êtres diffèrent par le temps si en outre ils se contredisent et, réciproquement, que deux êtres compossibles se contredisent si et seulement s'ils ne sont pas tempore simul, ou s'ils n'appartiennent pas au même « état de l'univers ». Une telle analyse a le mérite de donner un exemple précis et relativement développé de ce que peut être le traitement leibnizien d'une relation particulière. Cette relation reçoit dans la mathesis, quand il s'agit de caractériser l'ordre axiomatique des notions incomplètes, une interprétation satisfaisante, à laquelle Leibniz n'a, semble-t-il, jamais renoncé. Mais l'interprétation métaphysique des termes prius, posterius et simul, qu'on trouve esquissée dans certains fragments des années 1680, soulève des problèmes insurmontables. It is well known that Leibniz's logic is grounded in the inherence of the predicate in the subject and in the compossibility of notions. It naturally stresses, therefore, relations of equivalence, rather than of order. Nevertheless, Leibniz provided a logical analysis of order, i.e. an account of the meaning of "prior", "subsequent", "concomitant". His account comprises three points: 1) Given two beings, the one that is more simple (i.e. the one whose analysis requires less operations of the mind) is prior by nature (natura prius). Hence, concomitant (simul) being. 2) The degree of composition of being corresponds to its degree of perfection. Hence, prior beings being simpler, subsequent beings are more perfect. 3) Given two beings such that one is simpler and the other more perfect, they differ temporally if they also contradict each other; conversely, two compossible beings contradict each other if, and only if, they are not simultaneous (i.e. if they do not belong to the same "state of the universe"). It will be shown that this relation makes it possible to characterize the axiomatic order of incomplete notions (in the field of the mathesis universalis). But the attempt to explain the terms prius, posterius and simul in a metaphysical manner, i.e. by laying the stress on the order among substances, raises grave philosophical problems. (shrink)

Dans cet article, je discute l’épistémologie de Pascal Engel, en particulier sa stratégie de réponse aux arguments sceptiques dans Va Savoir!. Après avoir présenté de manière synthétique les grands axes de cette stratégie, je reviens avec plus d’attention sur deux éléments de cette stratégie avec lesquels je suis en désaccord : le rejet par Engel de tout principe de réflexivité épistémique, et le rejet par Engel d’une défense « forte » du sens commun. Je défends qu’un certain principe de réflexivité (...) ne peut pas être raisonnablement rejeté ; puis je montre que l’épistémologie d’Engel ne permet pas d’apporter une réponse satisfaisante au défi sceptique que pose le principe de Méta-Cohérence. Enfin, je soutiens que la seule manière de répondre de manière satisfaisante à ce défi est de recourir à une défense « forte » du sens commun, c’est-à-dire à une stratégie dans laquelle les propositions de sens commun sont justifiées parce qu’elles sont de sens commun. (shrink)

Si le nom d’Albert Camus continue de s’imposer, aujourd’hui, comme une figure incontournable de la littérature et de la pensée françaises du XXe siècle, il n’en est pas moins demeuré une personnalité cosmopolite, sensible à ce que la culture ne s’accomplit véritablement qu’en l’absence de sectarisme, qu’en présence de l’autre — avec ou envers lui, peu importe. C’est aussi tout le sens de la collection « Exotopies » de l’Association portugaise des études françaises (A.P.E.F.) qu’inaugure ce volume : présenter des (...) travaux sur la langue et la culture françaises, mais d’un point de vue singulier, celui d’un autre pays. En lisant ce bouquet assez restreint, mais en même temps assez diversifié de travaux sur l’oeuvre d’Albert Camus, on relèvera donc qu’il ne s’agissait ni d’un hommage, ni d’une commémoration, si contraires au vif esprit de la littérature, mais de s’aviser de l’exceptionnelle variété et actualité de son oeuvre. En ce sens, il n’est de meilleure figure pour débuter cette collection à visée cosmopolite que celle d’Albert Camus, chez qui le geste d’écriture est totalement inscrit dans une vocation humaniste. Celle-ci ne s’entend pas dans un sens moraliste, mais dans un sens existentiel — sinon existentialiste —, qui veut que chacun se définisse par le souci qu’il a de l’autre, et que l’humanité s’apparaisse comme le perpetuum mobile de l’histoire, en même temps que son point fixe, son sens dernier. (shrink)

Les conférences dont se compose le présent ouvrage furent écrites au profit de jeunes étudiants en philosophie. Par le terme de Platonisme ne s’entend certes pas ici un quelconque Néoplatonisme mais les seuls principes fondateurs de la doctrine de Platon, doctrine que nous avons tenté d’observer en un rapport direct avec son auteur tel qu’il se présente au travers de ses propres écrits.Plongeant aux racines antiques avec une décision toute nitzschéenne, Pater en revient pourtant conforté dans sa distance : pour (...) lui l’esthétique forme bien le primum mobile de l’histoire de l’esprit.Cet ouvrage permet, bien mieux qu’un manuel, d’acquérir une solide connaissance de Platon et d’intéressants éléments touchant aussi ses deux antipodes : les présocratiques et, comme nous le suggérons, Nietzsche. (shrink)

The article analyses the idea that according to the averroist Jean de Jandun, Master of Arts in Paris at the beginning of the 14th century, human beings are composed of a «double form» the separated intellect on the one hand, the cogitative soul on the other hand. After recalling several major accounts of the time, we explore Jean's reading of Averroes' major conceptions concerning the problem. Finally, we challenge the idea according to which we observe in his writings (...) the radical thesis of a sometimes cogitating sometimes thinking «double human being» that makes of the homo intelligens a punctual and exclusive new being, which is accidentally produced while the thinking takes place. (shrink)

There are three families of solutions to the traditional Amputation Paradox: Eliminativism, Contingent Identity Theories, and Theories of Coincident Entities. Theories of Coincident Entities challenge our common understanding of the relation between identity and parthood, since they accept that two things can be mereologically coincident without being identical. The contemporary discussion of the Amputation Paradox tends to mention only one theory of Coincident Entities, namely the Constitution View, which violates the mereological principle of Extensionality. But in fact, there is another (...) theory, namely the Unique Part View, which violates another mereological principle. In this paper, I argue that the contemporary focus on the Constitution View is unmotivated, at least when we are confronted with the Amputation Paradox, and that a balanced comparison of the two views should favour the Unique Part View. (shrink)

What makes humans moral beings? This question can be understood either as a proximate question or as an ultimate question. The question is about the mental and social mechanisms that produce moral judgments and interactions, and has been investigated by psychologists and social scientists. The question is about the fitness consequences that explain why humans have morality, and has been discussed by evolutionary biologists in the context of the evolution of cooperation. Our goal here is to contribute to a fruitful (...) articulation of such proximate and ultimate explanations of human morality. We develop an approach to morality as an adaptation to an environment in which individuals were in competition to be chosen and recruited in mutually advantageous cooperative interactions. In this environment, the best strategy is to treat others with impartiality and to share the costs and benefits of cooperation equally. Those who offer less than others will be left out of cooperation; conversely, those who offer more will be exploited by their partners. In line with this mutualistic approach, the study of a range of economic games involving property rights, collective actions, mutual help and punishment shows that participants' distributions aim at sharing the costs and benefits of interactions in an impartial way. In particular, the distribution of resources is influenced by effort and talent, and the perception of each participant's rights on the resources to be distributed. (shrink)

Any philosopher who defends Free Will should have an answer to the epistemological question: “how do we know that we have such a capacity?” A traditional answer to this question is that we have some form of introspective access to our own Free Will. In recent times though, many philosophers have considered any such introspectionist theory as so obviously wrong that it hardly needs discussion, especially when Free Will is understood in libertarian terms. One of the rare objections to appear (...) as an explicit argument was proposed by van Inwagen in his Essay on Free Will. In this paper, I address van Inwagen’s anti-introspection argument; I argue that it is both inconsistent with his overall treatment of the Existence Question (namely, with his defence of the existence of Free Will from reflections about morality), and inconclusive in itself (at least for anyone not ready to endorse general scepticism about perception). In passing, I give a clarification of the notion of Introspection, in the case of Freedom, that also sets a more favourable stage for the evaluation of further objections. (shrink)

To remain financially viable and continue to accomplish their social missions, nonprofits are increasingly adopting a hybrid organizational form that combines commercial and social welfare logics. While studies recognize that individual organizations vary in how they incorporate and manage hybridity, variation at the level of the organizational form remains poorly understood. Existing studies tend to treat forms as either hybrid or not, limiting our understanding of the different ways a hybrid form may combine multiple logics and how such combinations evolve (...) over time. Analyzing 14 years of data from Canadian nonprofits seeking funding for social enterprise activities, we identify two novel dimensions along which a hybrid form may vary—the locus of integration and the scope of logics. We further find that as the commercial logic became more widespread within the nonprofit sector, variants of the hybrid form shifted from primarily emphasizing the commercial logic to more equally emphasizing both the commercial and social welfare logics and integrating the two logics in multiple ways. Drawing on these findings, we contribute a multi-dimensional conception of hybrid forms and theorize how form-level variation in hybridity can arise from organization-level cognitive challenges that actors face when combining seemingly incompatible logics. We then build on this theorizing to offer an alternative perspective on commercialization of the nonprofit sector as a contextually dependent rather than universal trend. (shrink)

Last paragraphe: Finally, we need to take on board the strange and disturbing fact that the modern destruction of environments has occurred not as if nature counted for nothing but, on the contrary, has occurred in a world of longstanding climatic theories that have earmarked environmental objects as the very things that produce humankind. Modern man, oblivious of the impact of his actions and blinded by his faith in progress and polarized vision of the world? Our postmodernity also has its (...) own mythologies. (shrink)

When is a conclusion worth deriving? We claim that a conclusion is worth deriving to the extent that it is relevant in the sense of relevance theory (Sperber & Wilson, 1995). To support this hypothesis, we experiment with ''indeterminate relational problems'' where we ask participants what, if anything, follows from premises such as A is taller than B, A is taller than C . With such problems, the indeterminate response that nothing follows is common, and we explain why. We distinguish (...) several types of determinate conclusions and show that their rate is a function of their relevance. We argue that by appropriately changing the formulation of the premises, the relevance of determinate conclusions can be increased, and the rate of indeterminate responses thereby reduced. We contrast these relevance-based predictions with predictions based on linguistic congruence. (shrink)

In many experimental sciences, like particle physics or molecular biology, the proper place for establishing facts is the laboratory. In the sciences of population biology, however, the laboratory is often seen as a poor approximation of what occurs in nature. Results obtained in the field are usually more convincing. This raises special problems: it is much more difficult to obtain stable, repeatable results in the field, where environmental conditions vary out of the experimenter’s control, than in the laboratory. We examine (...) here how this problem affected an influential experimental research tradition in community ecology, the study of the ecology of the rocky seashores. In the 1960s, a handful of North-American ecologists, most notably Joseph Connell, Robert Paine and Paul Dayton, made the rocky seashores a model study system for experimenting in the field. Their experiments were deceptively simple: they removed species living on the seashore and described the resulting effects on the local ecology. These experiments exerted a deep influence on community ecology. They provided evidence for speculative developments concerning the theory of interspecific competition, the factors responsible for species richness and the ecology of food webs. They also stimulated novel conceptual developments. In particular, Paine developed the predation hypothesis, which states that the presence of predators can favour species richness, before introducing the keystone species concept, according to which some species exert disproportionate effects on ecological systems. More broadly, these experiments gave support to a methodological trend in favour of field experimentation. Only controlled perturbations in the field, it seemed, provided a reliable method to get insights into the structure of ecological communities. However, as experiments were continued in time and repeated in different sites, divergent results appeared. We analyse here how intertidal researchers coped with the variability of environmental conditions and tried to stabilize their results. In the process, they reconsidered not only their early conclusions, but also the exclusive status given to field experiments. Expanding on this case study, we discuss some significant differences between laboratory and field experiments. (shrink)

Plusieurs auteurs anciens attribuent aux stoïciens une distinction entre le logos endiathetos et le logos proféré, qui est souvent assimilée à l’opposition entre le langage proféré et la raison intérieure, et tend à confondre la position stoïcienne avec l’identification platonicienne de la pensée à un dialogue intérieur. Mais, tandis que le logos endiathetos est clairement identifié à la capacité humaine de raisonner, il n’est pas présenté comme un dialogue intérieur. Il réside d’abord dans une certaine disposition de l’homme à enchaîner (...) des énoncés de manière logique, tandis que le langage proféré des hommes repose sur la capacité d’attacher un sens au mot, d’émettre le langage depuis la pensée. Par ailleurs, Chrysippe semble bien avoir reconnu un langage intérieur, mais celui-ci n’est pas identifiable au logos endiathetos ni à la pensée, dont il est nettement distingué, et il est encore moins un dialogue. (shrink)

This paper aims to study the ?economics made fun? literature with regard to its main purpose: popularizing economics. We shed an historical light on such literature by showing that its main strategy for introducing economics to non-specialists had already been tried in the 1970s in what were described as ?issues-oriented? textbooks. We show that both literatures, as introductory enterprises, were responses to similar challenges. The first one is the problem of economic illiteracy, a problem that has concerned teachers in economics (...) since the early 1960s. Both literatures did offer an interesting response to perceived shortcomings of introductory courses. The second challenge came from the attacks on economics and its teaching for their lack of relevance. We explore how the notion of relevance evolved in time and how both literatures attempted to respond to the criticisms of their time accordingly. By addressing these questions, our study explores how economists used these introductory enterprises to disseminate a certain image of them and their discipline in comparison to other social scientists and non-specialists, and how these representations evolved in time. (shrink)

Four experiments examined the strategies that individuals develop in sentential reasoning. They led to the discovery of five different strategies. According to the theory proposed in the paper, each of the strategies depends on component tactics, which all normal adults possess, and which are based on mental models. Reasoners vary their use of tactics in ways that are not deterministic. This variation leads different individuals to assemble different strategies, which include the construction of incremental diagram corresponding to mental models, and (...) the pursuit of the consequences of a single model step by step. Moreover, the difficulty of a problem (i.e. the number of mental models required by the premises) predisposes reasoners towards certain strategies. Likewise, the sentential connectives in the premises also bias reasoners towards certain strategies, e.g., conditional premises tend to elicit reasoning step by step whereas disjunctive premises tend to elicit incremental diagrams. (shrink)

Reasoning research has focussed mainly on the type of cognitive processes involved when representing premises and when producing conclusions. But less is known about the factors that guide these representational and inferential processes. What premises are actually taken as input in reasoning? And what conclusions are intended? In this paper it is argued that considerations of relevance are helpful for addressing these issues as a pragmatic analysis of two sorts of tasks is carried out, Wason’s 2-4-6 problem and a conditional (...) reasoning problem . Study 1 indicates that the way this task is communicated may encourage participants to consider misleading information as highly relevant for solving it. Two experiments go on to show that when the relevance of misleading information is contextually diminished, participants are more efficient at providing the correct solution. Study 2 compares the production rate of two sorts of conclusions: logically valid but weakly relevant conclusions and invalid but relevant and pragmatically justified conclusions. This study shows that the relevance of conclusions determines to a large extent whether or not they will be produced. (shrink)

The present report is a, somewhat lengthy, addendum to "A new deconstructive logic: linear logic," where the elimination of cuts from derivations in sequent calculus for classical logic was studied ‘from the point of view of linear logic’. To that purpose a formulation of classical logic was used, that - as in linear logic - distinguishes between multiplicative and additive versions of the binary connectives.The main novelty here is the observation that this type-distinction is not essential: we can allow classical (...) sequent derivations to use any combination of additive and multiplicative introduction rules for each of the connectives, and still have strong normalization and confluence of tq-reductions.We give a detailed description of the simulation of tq-reductions by means of reductions of the interpre- tation of any given classical proof as a proof net of PN2 (the system of second order proof nets for linear logic), in which moreover all connectives can be taken to be of one type, e.g., multiplicative.We finally observe that dynamically the different logical cuts, as determined by the four possible combinations of introduction rules, are independent: it is not possible to simulate them internally, i.e., by only one specific combination, and structural rules. (shrink)

Expatriate managers of international businesses in emerging countries often struggle to mobilize their workforces. They sometimes perceive profound cultural differences as a barrier to the progress of their organizations. Some international businesses may adopt a paternalistic attitude toward their employees; but this questionable strategy brings mixed results. Are there ways out of paternalism for international businesses in emerging areas? This paper examines the diverging views held by foreign managers and local personnel of a foreign-owned production plant in Mexico, which managed (...) to mobilize its workforce by building a strong sense of community, allowing a certain form of collective control to replace the paternalistic model, with its bonds of personal allegiance. Contrasting perspectives between Mexican and foreign employees show that intercultural misunderstandings, rather than the peculiarities of the local culture, are the greatest challenge to cooperation. (shrink)

Researchers currently working on relational reasoning typically argue that mental model theory (MMT) is a better account than the inference rule approach (IRA). They predict and observe that determinate (or one-model) problems are easier than indeterminate (or two-model) problems, whereas according to them, IRA should lead to the opposite prediction. However, the predictions attributed to IRA are based on a mistaken argument. The IRA is generally presented in such a way that inference rules only deal with determinate relations and not (...) with indeterminate ones. However, (a) there is no reason to presuppose that a rule-based procedure could not deal with indeterminate relations, and (b) applying a rule-based procedure to indeterminate relations should result in greater difficulty. Hence, none of the recent articles devoted to relational reasoning currently presents a conclusive case for discarding IRA by using the well-known determinate vs indeterminate problems comparison. (shrink)

Our discussion of the commentaries begins, at the evolutionary level, with issues raised by our account of the evolution of morality in terms of partner-choice mutualism. We then turn to the cognitive level and the characterization and workings of fairness. In a final section, we discuss the degree to which our fairness-based approach to morality extends to norms that are commonly considered moral even though they are distinct from fairness.