In todays’ super-diverse societies, communication and interaction in clinical encounters are increasingly shaped by linguistic, cultural, social and ethnic complexities. It is crucial to better understand the difficulties patients with migration background and healthcare professionals experience in their shared clinical encounters and to explore ethical aspects involved. We accompanied 32 migrant patients during their medical encounters at two outpatient clinics using an ethnographic approach. Overall, data of 34 interviews with patients and physicians on how they perceived their encounter and which (...) difficulties they experienced are presented. We contrasted the perspectives on the difficult aspects and explore ethical questions surrounding the involved issues. Patients and physicians describe similar problem areas, but they have diverging perspectives on them. Two main themes were identified by both patients and physicians: >patients’ behaviour in relation to doctors’ advice relationship issues<. A deeper understanding of the difficulties and challenges that can arise in cross-cultural settings could be provided by bringing together healthcare professionals’ and patients’ perspectives on how a cross- cultural clinical encounter is perceived. Ethical aspects surrounding some of the difficulties could be highlighted and should get more attention in clinical practice and research. (shrink)

When it comes to behavioral change, economic design and behavioral science are complements, not substitutes. Chater & Loewenstein give examples from policy design. In this commentary, I use examples, often from my own research, to show how behavioral insights inform the design of the rules that govern market transactions.

A collection of Essays dealing with themes in the philosophy of Wilfrid Sellars.

A System of philosophy, a comprehensive world-view, is a work of art, although it is also more than that. Already Plato described the philosopher as a poet, and Plato himself was a great poet as well as a great philosopher. In recent years Professor Alexander has explained, on various occasions, that there is artistry involved in all scientific and philosophic thought. They demand creative intellectual construction of a high order. In so far as this is true, as I believe it (...) is, it should be possible, sometimes at least, to contemplate a great system of philosophy as a work of art, to enjoy it in a spirit of detachment, above the noise and the tumult of conflicting personal convictions.It is more or less in this spirit that I propose on this occasion to deal with some of the fundamental ideas of Spinoza. That, I believe, is in accordance with his own wishes. He wanted his works to be published anonymously, so that his philosophy might be considered impersonally, entirely on its own merits. Such a method of treatment may in any case be most suitable on this occasion when, in spite of probably great divergences in our individual views, we have come together to do honour to his memory. This kind of personal tribute may be contrary to his own wishes. But we owe it to ourselves, and to mankind at large, to keep alive the remembrance of one of the greatest masters of the art of high thinking and plain living. (shrink)

The essays in this book weave together insights and arguments from such diverse traditions as German critical theory, French philosophy and social theory, and recent Anglo-American moral and political theory, offering a unique approach to the political and theoretical consequences of the modernism/postmodernism discussion. Through an analysis of central themes in classical Marxism and early critical theory, the author shows how recent work in a variety of traditions converges on the need to question familiar distinctions between material production and culture, (...) the public and the private, and the political and the social, and to reconsider the conceptions of agency and power that have informed them. (shrink)

In his recent book, Recognition: A Chapter in the History of European ideas (2021), Honneth has explained how he understands the French concept of recognition. This article places Honneth's latest interpretation in the context of his long-standing and evolving engagement with French theory over several decades. Honneth acknowledges his significant debt to a French tendency to view recognition as a problem for self-realisation (and not an opportunity). Bourdieu's and Boltanski's account of how ambitions become limited by the availability of capital (...) and the internalisation of class was a major breakthrough in Honneth's intellectual development. Other formative French influences included the articulation of denigration in existentialist phenomenology, and the idea of regulative power in Foucault, with “deconstructive” asymmetrical care presented as productive but comparatively less important. The discussion also reveals why Honneth presents the “German” concept of recognition as having basic explanatory force (as an opportunity for self-realisation), and why he resists what he views as a French-influenced tendency (also present in some contemporary German critical theory) to depict recognition as ambivalent. The discussion reveals, on one hand, how working across perceived divides can be immensely productive, and, on the other hand, why a French-German divide remains entrenched in contemporary thinking. (shrink)

El artículo tiene la finalidad de explicar las dificultades existentes cuando las interpretaciones filosóficas sobre los hechos del pasado se basan en marcos conceptuales contemporáneos. En especial, cuando la intención de los autores se centra en tratar encajar los acontecimientos del pasado a lenguajes políticos modernos. Para alcanzar tal fin, me sirvo de las narraciones filosóficas dedicadas a la independencia de la Nueva España; en especial, la que efectúa el filósofo Enrique Dussel en su libro Política de la liberación. Mi (...) intención es vislumbrar los problemas hermenéuticos profundos cuando la intención de los autores se centra en realizar lecturas políticas del pasado, en vez de tratar de comprender los mundos de la vida de épocas pretéritas. (shrink)

European Journal of Philosophy, Volume 29, Issue 3, Page 581-591, September 2021.

This collection of original essays, written by scholars from disciplines across the humanities, addresses a wide range of questions about love through a focus on individual films, novels, plays, and works of philosophy. The essays touch on many varieties of love, including friendship, romantic love, parental love, and even the love of an author for her characters. How do social forces shape the types of love that can flourish and sustain themselves? What is the relationship between love and passion? Is (...) love between human and nonhuman animals possible? What is the role of projection in love? These questions and more are explored through an investigation of works by authors ranging from Henrik Ibsen to Ian McEwan, from Rousseau to the Coen Brothers. (shrink)

Die vorliegende Bildmonographie Eugen Finks (1905-1975) ruft die eindrucksvolle Gestalt des Freiburger Philosophen, Phänomenologen und Pädagogen in die Erinnerung zurück. Sie bietet zum ersten Male aufschlussreiche Einblicke in die nachgelassenen Bilddokumente, aus denen der Takt seines Lebenslaufes selbst vernommen werden kann. über die biographischen Schlaglichter hinaus führt sie den Leser schrittweise in die Werkstatt seiner nachgelassenen Manuskripte und Entwürfe, in ausgewählte Partien seines Briefwechsels, in die Akten und Urkunden hinein, die seinen beruflichen Werdegang dokumentieren. Auf diese Weise stellt sie nicht (...) nur die Gesamtausgabe der Werke Eugen Finks in ein umgreifendes Landschaftsbild hinein, sondern hebt zugleich die vielfältigen Motive und Beweggründe der phänomenologischen Bewegung hervor, als deren Vermittler und Bindeglied Eugen Fink weltweite Anerkennung zuteilde wurde. (shrink)

Much of Arnold Hauser’s work on the social history of art and the philosophy of art history is informed by a concern for the cognitive dimension of art. The present paper offers a reconstruction of this aspect of Hauser’s project and identifies areas of overlap with the sociology of knowledge—where the latter is to be understood as both a separate discipline and a going intellectual concern. Following a discussion of Hauser’s personal and intellectual background, as well as of the shifting (...) political and academic setting of his work, the paper addresses one of Hauser’s central questions, viz. how best to square a thoroughgoing commitment to the social nature of art with the reality of successive artistic styles, given that the latter seem to be characterizable on purely formal grounds. This is followed by a discussion of Hauser’s conflicted views on the relation between art, science, and technology. This injects a tension into Hauser’s work, due to his initial reluctance to explain just how the aesthetic and the cognitive realms relate. The final part of the paper, through a closer examination of the analogies and disanalogies that Hauser sees between art history and the history of science, attempts to give a positive answer—“on Hauser’s behalf”, as it were—to the question of whether art may be credited with a specific cognitive dimension of its own, and if so, what its contribution to our cognitive enterprise may consist in. (shrink)

In face of the postmodern ideal of a 'mutiple' subject, there has been talk at regular classical psychoanalysis's normative orientation toward intervals since the end of the the ego's capacity to cope consistently with reality may Second World War of psy seem obsolete. However, a psychoanalytic theory choanalysis being obsolete. which is revised in the light of object-relations theory, In these fields - where the integrationist social psychology, and an intersubjectivist notion is not just an ideolo account of the formation (...) of the drives can answer the gical weapon - this signifies postmodern challenge. According to this alternative the tendency of a growing psychoanalytic view, the goal of a 'healthy' development discrepancy said to have of personality is a state of an inner capacity for dialo opened up between the origue, able to account normatively for altering forms of ginal and the current socio-ego-identity under changing social conditions. (shrink)

I argue that joint attention solves the “base problem” as it arises for Schiffer’s and Lewis’s theories of common knowledge. The problem is that an account is needed of the perceptual base of some forms of common knowledge that gets by without itself invoking common knowledge. The paper solves the problem by developing a theory of joint attention as consisting in the exercise of joint know-how involving particular and sometimes distal targets and arguing that certain joint perceivers can always have (...) a minimal form of propositional common knowledge about the location of these targets. On such a view, perceptual common knowledge is based on the experience of a process that is maintained by way of perceivers’ exercise of an object-involving form of joint know-how. Some reductive theories of collective intentionality require that agents’ intentions and subplans are common knowledge (or “out in the open”) between them. For these theories the base problem arises again. The enacted theory of joint attention can solve the problem. The argument is exactly parallel to the common knowledge case. The openness of joint agents’ intentions and meshing subplans is explained by appeal to their practical knowledge of how to maintain the process by way of which they pursue the collective intention. They can then make this knowledge explicit by linguistic communication. When they succeed in communicating knowledge of their meshing subplans as pursued in a joint action context, they necessarily have this knowledge in common. For theories of collective intentionality that include a common knowledge condition, the experience of participating in a perceptually constituted joint action provides the base that renders harmless the regress that otherwise threatens reductive analyses. (shrink)

In my contribution I ask whether the version of secular reason Jürgen Habermas characterises as “post-metaphysical” can really provide us children of modernity with a comprehensive self- and world-understanding. I begin by asking what it means to claim that secular reason is “post-metaphysical” (1). There are various possible ways of understanding this characterisation, some stronger than others; but there needs to be clarity on this issue to address my second question: What would secular reason really have to achieve in order (...) to make good on its claim that it can still provide us with a comprehensive understanding of our relation both to ourselves and to the world? I will split this question along two dimensions: from a theoretical standpoint we should explore how reality has to be understood in order to allow us to attain a consistent understanding of self and world; from a practical standpoint, we need to ask which attitudes we would actually have to adopt towards reality in order to find in it the kind of orientation that Habermas believes his version of secular reason holds in store (2). In a third step, I follow up on these practical considerations by asking whether, at the level of everyday praxis, an orienting conception of self and world in this day and age does not in fact demand more than Habermas seems to have in mind (3). Finally, and returning, albeit indirectly, to the meaning of “post-metaphysical”, I cast some doubt on the Habermasian thesis that secular reason can survive only in the form of a tradition that reaches back either to Kant or to Hume; I want to question whether this division is exhaustive and briefly bring a third alternative into play (4). (shrink)

An attempt to answer in some detail the questions and criticism brought up in a colloquium on my book on ‘Socialism’.

The article attempts to show that Hegel’s concept of “civil society” is characterised by a deep ambivalence regarding the value of the new market economy. On the one hand, Hegel believed that the economic system represented by “civil society” succeeded like no other in simultaneously giving free reign to the desires of individual subjects and integrating them into a stable structural framework (I). On the other hand, Hegel’s reflections are increasingly overtaken by doubts as to whether, in the light of (...) its self-destructive tendencies, the market system can be as successful in guaranteeing individual freedom as he first envisaged it tobe (II). In the course of this essay, it will ultimately become clear that Hegel’s attempt to redefine “civil society” reveals considerably more conceptual indecision and inner conflict than one might have suspected from the great system builder. (shrink)

Arthur James Balfour was born at Whittinghame, East Lothian, on July 25, 1848. He was barely ten years old when his father died, and he succeeded to the estate. He entered Eton in 1862, and there met Lord Rosebery. In 1866 he went to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he studied philosophy under Henry Sidgwick. In 1869 he obtained a second-class in the Moral Sciences Tripos. In an autobiographical note, written long afterwards, Lord Balfour made the following reference to his mental (...) attitude as an undergraduate: “I went to Cambridge with a very small equipment of either philosophy or science, but a very keen desire to discover what I ought to think, and why . For the history of speculation I cared not a jot. Dead systems seemed to me of no more interest than abandoned fashions. My business was with the groundwork of living beliefs: in particular with the groundwork of that scientific knowledge whose recent developments had so profoundly moved the world.” Considering his attachment to the past in matters of Church and State, Lord Balfour's contempt for the history of philosophy seems to betray a curious limitation. Unfortunately for him, the history of philosophy was not an important feature in the Cambridge philosophical curriculum, and the defect avenged itself by marring his subsequent philosophy in various ways. No doubt Sidgwick did all he could to encourage and develop Balfour's critical powers. Cambridge philosophy, under the influence of Sidgwick, was critical rather than imaginative, just as Oxford philosophy, under the influence of Green, was imaginative rather than critical. (shrink)

The article attempts to show that Hegel’s concept of “civil society” is characterized by a deep ambivalence about the value of the new market economy. On the one side, Hegel believed that the economic system represented by “civil society” succeeded like no other in simultaneously giving free reign to the desires of individual subjects and integrating them into a stable structural framework. On the other side, Hegel’s reflections are growingly overtaken by doubts as to whether, in light of its self-destructive (...) tendencies, the market system can be as successful in guaranteeing individual freedom as he first envisaged it to be. In the course of this essay, it will ultimately become clear that Hegel’s attempt to redefine “civil society” reveals considerably more conceptual indecision and inner conflict than one might have suspected from the great system builder. (shrink)

En este texto retomo una pregunta importante que había quedado abierta al final del segundo capítulo de mi (2019): ¿cuáles son los límites del análisis? Sabemos que por obvias limitaciones materiales, todo análisis siempre será incompleto y por lo tanto, limitado. A estos límites les hemos llamado “metodológicos”, para distinguirlos de los metafísicos. Si el análisis tiene límites en este segundo sentido, aun si termináramos de analizar por completo un concepto, no podremos estar seguros de conocer todas sus propiedades esenciales (...) (ya que hay propiedades de este tipo que no las capta ningún análisis) o de ser capaces de distinguirlo de todos los conceptos (pues lo que lo distingue de otros conceptos puede ser inanalizable). Comúnmente se dice que el análisis no nos da todo el contenido de los conceptos, sino sólo su forma lógica o estructura semántica. Por lo tanto, otra manera de reformular la pregunta por los límites del análisis es ¿cuál es la relación entre forma y contenido? (shrink)

In dem Aufsatz wird vorgeschlagen, die Kritik der gesellschaftlichen Arbeitsverhältnisse nicht länger an irgendwelchen intrinsischen Werten oder Normen der Arbeitshandlung selbst zu orientieren; als aussichtsreicher erscheint vielmehr die Strategie, sich auf die normativen Bedingungen des marktvermittelten Leistungsaustauschs zu besinnen, um darin die Maßstäbe einer solchen Kritik ausfindig zu machen. Im Anschluss an Hegel und Durkheim wird hier der Weg umrissen, der angeschlagen werden müsste, um im Ausgang von dieser Idee noch einmal das Projekt einer Kritik der kapitalistischen Arbeitsverhältnisse in Angriff (...) zu nehmen. (shrink)

The juxtaposition of strong and weak critique, which is so common today, represents the somewhat fruitless attempt to bring to a head a multifaceted discussion. For years now—in fact, since the end of Marxism as an autonomous theory—there has been a question regarding the possibility of finding an appropriate standpoint for a probing critical examination of the underlying assumptions of liberal-democratic society without relying upon a philosophy of history. On the one hand, material questions play a large role in the (...) discussion since it is difficult to envision alternatives to the institutional framework of highly developed societies of the West that are both desirable and efficient. On the other hand, philosophical questions play an eminent role in this debate, and these philosophical questions are often of a methodological nature. Specifically, at the center of the debate stands the problem of how to describe and justify a standpoint from which one can fruitfully critique society and its institutional practices. (shrink)

Este artículo propone la reconstrucción del punto de vista moral sobre la base de una compleja teoría del reconocimiento mutuo. Su punto de partida consiste en la comprensión del Hegel temprano de la lucha por el reconocimiento como el proceso dinámico de establecer distintas formas de afirmación mutua de la propia identidad en las relaciones de amor, respeto legal y moral, y estima social. Su punto de llegada es la afirmación de diferentes tipos de obligaciones en los diferentes contextos sociales, (...) a saber, deberes asimétricos de cuidar de los demás en sus necesidades y deseos individuales, deberes recíprocos de tratar igualitariamente a cada persona, y deberes de demostrar solidaridad y estimar a los demás en su particularidad. (shrink)

We hypothesize that life began not with the first self‐reproducing molecule or metabolic network, but as a prebiotic ecology of co‐evolving populations of macromolecular aggregates (composomes). Each composome species had a particular molecular composition resulting from molecular complementarity among environmentally available prebiotic compounds. Natural selection acted on composomal species that varied in properties and functions such as stability, catalysis, fission, fusion and selective accumulation of molecules from solution. Fission permitted molecular replication based on composition rather than linear structure, while fusion (...) created composomal variability. Catalytic functions provided additional chemical novelty resulting eventually in autocatalytic and mutually catalytic networks within composomal species. Composomal autocatalysis and interdependence allowed the Darwinian co‐evolution of content and control (metabolism). The existence of chemical interfaces within complex composomes created linear templates upon which self‐reproducing molecules (such as RNA) could be synthesized, permitting the evolution of informational replication by molecular templating. Mathematical and experimental tests are proposed. BioEssays 28: 399–412, 2006. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (shrink)

During the latter half of the twentieth century, many philosophers in Europe and America turned towards social pragmatist and holistic accounts of concepts and theories. In this paper, I make the case that many forms of relativism—moral and otherwise—that emerge from this turn are misguided. While we must always operate from some framework of practices in which things may serve as reasons for us, most forms of relativism in recent decades have more boldly granted us immunity from external rational scrutiny. (...) I argue that this strong form of relativism is possible only with sharp divisions between communities of speakers that I call “strict boundaries” and that these are implausible. We are left with the possibility of social pragmatist theories that do not entail strong relativism. (shrink)