Name der Zeitschrift: Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook Jahrgang: 2013 Heft: 1 Seiten: 143-156.

The Cybernetic State is about using what we know now about cybernetics to create a better society for all. It is about satisfying people’s needs from a platform of individual freedom and responsibility. It is also about using computers wisely. In order to do that, technology has to produce transparency so that as many people as possible contribute to the new social order. To create a transparent government implies making it easy to understand and very dependable.

When Aristotle argues at the Metaphysics Z.17, 1041b11–33 that a whole, which is not a heap, contains ‘something else’, i.e. the form, besides the elements, it is not clear whether or not the form is a proper part of the whole. I defend the claim that the form is not a proper part within the context of the relevant passage, since the whole is divided into elements, not into elements and the form. Different divisions determine different senses of ‘part’, and (...) thus the form is not a part in the same sense as the elements are parts. I object to Koslicki’s (2006) interpretation, according to which the form is a proper part along the elements in a single sense of ‘part’, although she insists that the form and the elements belong to different categories. I argue that Koslicki’s reading involves a category mistake, i.e. the conjunction of items that do not belong to the same category (Goldwater 2018). Since for Aristotle parthood presupposes some kind of similarity of parts, the conjunction of form and elements requires treating these items as somehow belonging to the same category, e.g. ‘being’, but no such category exists. (shrink)

Medical students’ concerns during clinical clerkships may not always be addressed with mentors who work under significant time constraints. This study examined 3rd year students’ survey responses regarding patient encounters to elucidate what may be hidden aspects of their learning environment. We analyzed results to an 18-item survey completed during a required ethics and professionalism course in third-year medicine clerkships over a period of 18 months. The survey covered types of concerns elicited by patient encounters, interactions with mentors about concerns, (...) perceptions of mentors, and level of moral distress. We also examined results of a 7-item evaluation of small group discussions during the study period. 1210 surveys and 195 evaluations constituted the study samples. Students’ concerns related primarily to ethics (36.4%, n = 441) and quality of care (34.5%, n = 418). Concerns had not been raised with a mentor in 535 (44.2%) instances. Students experienced moral distress in connection with 35.4% (n = 324) of cases; this was particularly common when a concern applied to a mentor. Higher levels of moral distress were associated with a lower likelihood of wishing to emulate the mentor (r = -0.27, p <.001). Two thirds of students, 66.9% (n = 107), stated that small group discussions where concerns were discussed lowered their stress levels. We suggest that clinical mentors be made aware of students’ learning needs and that structured discussions be available for students to articulate concerns with peers and facilitators in efforts to uncover elements of the hidden curriculum with the goal of optimizing students’ well-being, learning and professional development. (shrink)