By assembling authors with a wide range of different disciplinary backgrounds, from philosophy, literature, political science, sociology to medical anthropology ...

Scientists of many disciplines use theoretical models to explain and predict the dynamics of the world. They often have to rely on digital computer simulations to draw predictions fromthe model. But to deliver phenomenologically adequate results, simulations deviate from the assumptions of the theoretical model. Therefore the role of simulations in scientific explanation demands itself an explanation. This paper analyzes the relation between real-world system, theoretical model, and simulation. It is argued that simulations do not explain processes in the real (...) world directly. The way in which simulations help explaining real-world processes is conceived as indirect, mediated by the theoretical model. Simulacra are characterized further, and turn out to be a priori measurable. This gives a clue to a better understanding of the epistemic role of computer simulations in scientific research. (shrink)

In [15], [16] G. Kreisel introduced the no-counterexample interpretation (n.c.i.) of Peano arithmetic. In particular he proved, using a complicated ε-substitution method (due to W. Ackermann), that for every theorem A (A prenex) of first-order Peano arithmetic PA one can find ordinal recursive functionals Φ A of order type 0 which realize the Herbrand normal form A H of A. Subsequently more perspicuous proofs of this fact via functional interpretation (combined with normalization) and cut-elimination were found. These proofs however do (...) not carry out the no-counterexample interpretation as a local proof interpretation and don't respect the modus ponens on the level of the no-counterexample interpretation of formulas A and A → B. Closely related to this phenomenon is the fact that both proofs do not establish the condition (δ) and--at least not constructively-- (γ) which are part of the definition of an 'interpretation of a formal system' as formulated in [15]. In this paper we determine the complexity of the no-counterexample interpretation of the modus ponens rule for (i) PA-provable sentences, (ii) for arbitrary sentences A, B ∈ L(PA) uniformly in functionals satisfying the no-counterexample interpretation of (prenex normal forms of) A and A → B, and (iii) for arbitrary A, B ∈ L(PA) pointwise in given α( 0 ) -recursive functionals satisfying the no-counterexample interpretation of A and A → B. This yields in particular perspicuous proofs of new uniform versions of the conditions (γ), (δ). Finally we discuss a variant of the concept of an interpretation presented in [17] and show that it is incomparable with the concept studied in [15], [16]. In particular we show that the no-counterexample interpretation of PA n by α( n (ω))-recursive functionals (n ≥ 1) is an interpretation in the sense of [17] but not in the sense of [15] since it violates the condition (δ). (shrink)

Incapacitated adults with a legally appointed guardian or conservator may be recruited for or involved with medical, behavioral, or social science research. Much of the research in which such persons participate is aimed at evaluating medical interventions for them, or contributing to general knowledge about disorders from which they may suffer. In this paper we will consider how the appointment of guardians for patients with disorders of consciousness —severe brain injuries that affect a patient’s level of arousal and ability to (...) interact —impacts such patients’ access to research.Such persons may be under guardianship because they have lost decisional capacity (i.e., those in a coma or... (shrink)

Stanovich & West analyze individual differences with respect to response output (e.g., participants' numerical estimates). They do not analyze the underlying cognitive processes that led to the outputs; they thereby probably misclassify some non-normative responses as normative. Using base rate neglect and overconfidence as examples, I demonstrate the advantages of analyzing cognitive processes further.

The intended title was “Universe Oriented Ontology” or “Multiverse Oriented Ontology”, or “Universe or Multiverse Metaphysics”. I mention this as it gives an idea about the meaning and intention of the title and the work as well as the titles I considered and why I moved away from them to the present one. The sub-title provides a further hint towards the intentions of the work, namely: ” Beyond Earth- and Human-centricity’. I opted for ‘transcending’ rather than beyond, as I am (...) still in the process of describing the process of transcending and many of the ideas I am obliged to use from our conceptual system and practices are still earth- and anthropo-centered, And, they have not yet gone to a state beyond those two -isms. I say something about universe-centeredness, then about planet earth as point and frame of reference and anthropo-centricity. The socio-cultural practice of philosophy and the doing of philosophy is merely one of many human, social and cultural practices. I post different notions of philosophy by a number of writers, some of them philosophers. These notions are about their perceptions of what philosophy is. Few of them go into detail about the subject-matter of philosophy. No one really deal with the aims, purposes and objectives of the discipline and none deal with the nature of the doing of philosophy or philosophizing. Activities that I suggest resemble certain features of the processes of theorizing. I end with explorations of possible characteristics of original- and creative thinkers. I do this by mentioning a number of themes of meta-philosophy listed and described by Peter Suber. I make a number of comments in them and highlight aspects relevant to these type of thinkers. One find them of course in all disciplines and socio-cultural [racticesand disciplines be they the arts,humanities, sciences, etc. I am of course specifically concerned with original andcreative thinkers inthe Western tradition of philosophy. As I am a radical and absolute sceptic, I end with an article on this theme. It is said by everyone, for example Hume, Russell and Pascal, that such a radical position is psychologically impossible and that it cannot be lived 24/7. Pascal for example opted for believe or faith and he and a number of writers suggest that that is the only way out and the final position of radical sceptics. I disagree with him. (shrink)

What, if anything, is the correlation between the specialized or technical ideas of the philosopher and the rest of his existence? His everyday life outside his philosophical role. In the specialized reality and reality constitution, when employing the discourse and discipline of philosophy, the philosopher subscribe to many things in an explicit manner and he employs a number of implicit things and assumptions that are not stated explicitly. These things concern the different branches, areas and domains of the philosophical discourse, (...) for example metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, ontology, cognition, consciousness, mind, perception, thinking, etc. Is there a relation between these technical 'beliefs' of the philosopher and other, not philosophical areas of his existence? Does and can all of his non-philosophical existence reflect his philosophical beliefs, statements and expressions? Is it possible that the everyday existence or life world of the philosopher can resemble, confirm and express his philosophical ideas? If this is not the case, what are the factors that are involved in such discrepancies? Do they imply a lack of integrity, of wholeness of integration on behalf of the philosopher? What are the causes of such an illogical or surprising lack of compatibility or similarity between these sets of two or more facts? What are the things that we can look for in such a lack of compatibility – things such as the following? - inconsistency, difference, disparity, variance, variation, deviation, divergence, -/- disagreement, dissimilarity, dissimilitude, mismatch, lack of similarity, contrariety, contradictoriness, disaccord, discordance, incongruity, -/- lack of congruence, incompatibility, irreconcilability, conflict, opposition? -/- I illustrate the above by means of four examples. 1 Let us assume that the embodied human person consists of both voluntary and involuntary processes and activities. Do the philosophy of an individual reflect or express these activities or is it completely or partially unrelated to them? Do the voluntary processes and activities or the voluntary aspects of perception, cognition, brain processes and other activities resemble or express the philosophy of a thinker? 2 Some thinkers are seriously concerned about the importance of discourse and dialogue and the equality of all those involved. We find their concern about the ideal discourse and dialogue described in their written work and talks, but to what an extend do their own discursive and dialogical actions and behaviour reflect the ideal situation they preach? 3 Ethics and morality can be find in and are emphasized in all sorts of disciplines, of course they are major subjects in providing ways to live off for philosophers and we even find institutions devoted to their teaching and investigation. Do the lives, the lived morality and ethics of those individuals who preach the ideals of ethics or ethical ideals reflect the ideals they preach and that provides them with ways to earn a living? Or, is it the case that morality and ethics are merely faked by those individuals living off their preaching of ethics? And, that they merely employ the values, norms, customs and attitudes of a culture, sub-culture, community, group or another social grouping? In other words are the preachers of ethics really more ethical than the rest of the community and society? 4 When the philosopher expresses his ideas by means of all sorts of philosophical tools he is aware of the fact that he employs them, or at least aware of some of them being intentionally employed by him while he is unaware of others that he employs. Do the tools the philosopher employs to theorize (identify problems, the nature of the questions he asks, the nature of his ways of questioning, the assumptions he makes, the forming and testing of hypotheses, the making of generalizations, etc) or philosophize (perceive things, think, think about things, reason, argumentation etc) resemble what he beliefs, asserts and says about thinking, perception, cognition, understanding, subjects, objects, relationships between subjects and objects and other features and processes of epistemology? In short – does the lived philosophy, ontology, epistemology, ethics etc of the philosopher resemble, represent, confirm, substantiate, back, endorse, support, authenticate and corroborate the ideas, assertions and speculations that are expressed by the statements his philosophy or philosophizing consist of? Does he walk the walk of his talk? Are they similar and identical, the same things and merely expressions of the same things in different mediums? (shrink)

I intended to deal with the different sections or chapters in one volume,‭ ‬but as certain sections or chapters are very long,‭ ‬like chapter‭ ‬1,‭ ‬THEORIZING AND PHILOSOPHIZING‭ (‬VOLUME‭ ‬1‭)‬,‭ ‬I divided some of them into separate volumes,‭ ‬chapter‭ ‬2‭ ‬HEURISTICS AND PROBLEMSOLVING‭ (‬Volume‭ ‬2‭) ‬and‭ ‬chapter‭ ‬3‭ ‬IMAGINARY EXPERIMENTS AND METAPHORS‭ (‬Vol‭ ‬3‭)‬. -/- In Volume‭ ‬1‭ ‬THEORIZING AND PHILOSOPHIZING‭ (‬VOLUME‭ ‬1‭) ‬I show that and how‭ (‬the different features,‭ ‬steps and stages of‭) ‬philosophizing resemble the processes of theorizing. (...) -/- I deal with a number of basic approaches that philosophers employ to do philosophy.‭ ‬These approaches form part of the traditional methodologies of all Philosophy. -/- The processes and techniques of doing philosophy resemble the techniques and methods one finds in different steps,‭ ‬stages and features of the processes of theorizing,‭ ‬theory development and construction.‭ ‬As many philosophers lack meta-cognitive awareness of what they are doing‭ (‬namely theorizing‭) ‬and how they are doing it‭ (‬the techniques of the different steps and stages of theorizing‭) ‬they do not complete the entire process of theorizing and theory development,‭ ‬but instead concentrate on only certain features of it. -/- The different features,‭ ‬steps and stages of theorizing are explained and the doing of philosophy is compared with them. (shrink)

LOGIC‭ & ‬ARGUMENTATION‭ (‬VOLUME‭ ‬5) The first section deals with different ways,‭ ‬approaches or methods of the doing of philosophy or the methodology of philosophizing or the discourse and socio-cultural practice of the Western tradition of philosophy. -/- I then insert a number of articles and post concerning the fact that Philosophy in the Western World concentrates on the History of the Western Tradition of philosophical ideas,‭ ‬complaints that it is white,‭ ‬male and Euro-centered and that it has become too (...) academic,‭ ‬professional and institutionalized. -/- The subsequent sections deal with the topics of Logic and a number of notions‭ ‬related to‭ ‘‬logic‭’‬.‭ ‬The logic referred to are those that are relevant to philosophy or the doing of philosophizing.‭ ‬Truth,‭ ‬meaning,‭ ‬arguments and argumentation are then dealt with.‭ ‬This leads to another section on logic and finally reasoning is mentioned as the coming together of most of the previous sections. -/- If you wish to think and write about multi-dimensional things like the‭ ‘‬world‭’‬,‭ ‬embodied persons,‭ ‬consciousness,‭ ‬human thinking etc,‭ ‬you should at least think multi-dimensional and many levelled.‭ ‬Attempting to investigate,‭ ‬reflect on and‭ ‬describe the nature and functioning of these multi-dimensional,‭ ‬many-levelled‭ ‬entities in a one-dimensional,‭ ‬verbal,‭ ‬linear manner surely is irrational and do not make sense‭? ‬Visual Argument Mapping is one of these multi-dimensional,‭ ‬many-levelled tools.‭ (‬See Appendix‭). (shrink)

Human beings employ concepts not merely to re-constitute their worlds, realities, including their selves, minds, consciousness, lives and loves but to fabricate and constitute these things. .Concepts, conceptual practices, usage and meanings are loaded and associated with predetermined -isms, presuppositions, assumptions, attitudes, beliefs, restrictions, perspectives, frames of reference, and other phenomena that will determine how they are used, their effects, results, consequences, etc. Concepts, conceptual practices, usage and meanings are loaded and associated with pre-determined -isms, pre-suppositions, assumptions, attitudes, beliefs, restrictions, (...) perspectives, frames of reference, and other phenomena that will determine how they are used, their effects, results, consequences, etc. -/- The above is earth- and anthropo-centered and restricted. The origins, nature, past, present and future is explored. This is suggested as point of reference and not the minute and irrelevant planet earth. Changes, modifications even the destruction of this planet will have little effect on and consequences for our galaxy and the universe. Against or in this universal context the nature, the functions, aims, objectives, methods, techniques, relevance, meaning and possibility of philosophy and philo- sophizing is explored. -/- Reductionistic humans are obsessed with and drawn to minimalist and generalized patterns or sets and systems of ideas as explanations and underlying foundations of complex realities and phenomena. (shrink)

Traditionally, conceptual thinking is explored via philosophical analysis or psychological experimentation. We seek to complement these mainstream approaches with the perspective of a first person exploration into pure thinking. To begin with, pure thinking is defined as a process and differentiated from its content, the concepts itself. Pure thinking is an active process and not a series of associative thought-events; we participate in it, we immerse ourselves within its active performance. On the other hand, concepts are also of an experiential (...) nature. And yet, little is known about what is it like to have or produce a thought, a concept, or an idea? Is a concept our own construction, a product of our own activity, or is it something we merely discover instead of producing it? We address these issues in a systematic first person enquiry into pure thinking. (shrink)

Wittgensteins "Philosophische Untersuchungen," von N. Malcolm.--Kritische Notiz zu einigen Begriffen in Wittgensteins Philosophie, von P. F. Strawson.--Wittgenstein über die Privatsprache, von N. Garver.--Der Zugang zu Wittgensteins Spätphilsophie, von S. Cavell.--Ausgewählte Bibliographie der Schriften über Ludwig Wittgenstein, zusammengestellt von Ulrich Steinvorth (p. 157-[171]).

This text was prepared for presentation in Nagoya, Japan, in 2010. Its aim was to explore a dialogue with Asians toward a cosmopolitan sociology. Beginning from the idea of entangled modernities which threaten their own foundations, Ulrich Beck advocated a complete conceptual innovation of sociology in order to better comprehend the fundamental fragility and mutability of societal dynamics shaped by the globalization of capital and risks today. More specifically, he proposed a cosmopolitan turn of sociology: first, by criticizing methodological (...) nationalism; second, by introducing the concept of cosmopolitization; third, by re-mapping social inequalities; fourth, by discussing risk society in the context of East Asian development; and fifth and finally, by proposing a cosmopolitan vision. Along this line, Beck attempted an overview of the researches done on second modern transformation in East Asia and suggested that an active dialogue may be possible when Asians begin to see the West from their perspectives rather than being caught in the Euro-centric and West-hegemonic presuppositions. (shrink)

Darwin’s explanation of biological speciation in terms of variation and natural selection has revolutionised biological thought. However, while his principle of natural selection, the fitness principle, has shaped biology until the present, its interpretation changed more than once during the almost 150 years of its history. The most striking change of the status of the principle is that, in the middle of the 20th century, it transmutated from an often disputed, groundbreaking insight into a tautology. Moreover, not only the interpretation (...) of the fitness principle, but the whole body of biological knowledge was subjected to significant modifications. In this paper, I relate modifications of the fitness principle to those of the respective body of biological knowledge. This body of knowledge is conceived as a Quinean web of belief. After an exposition of Darwin’s conception of the principle, which equated fitness with adaptedness to the environment, several of its changes are analysed with respect to different webs of biological knowledge. It is concluded that the different interpretations and the reshaping of the fitness principle are rational responses to the modified systems of background knowledge, which saved the coherence of the web of biological knowledge in each single case. (shrink)

Brandom’s philosophical programme can be seen as a reversion of the traditional order of explanation in semantics. Whereas traditional semantic theories start with a grip on a notion like truth or reference, Brandom argues that it is also possible to begin with an analysis of the speech acts of what one is doing by making a claim in order to explain representational notions like truth and objectivity. Evaluating the explanatory values of Brandom’s theory, it therefore is necessary to ask to (...) what extent Brandom’s analysis of our linguistic practices is able to explain what other theories start with. That is, can linguistic practices in Brandom’s sense give an account of why we are capable of referring to language-external objects? And can they make evident why we take truth and falsity not to depend upon our beliefs or claims but upon an extra-linguistic reality? After a short discussion of Brandom’s answer to the first question, I argue that Brandom’s answer to the second is not sufficient and that it does not seem to be possible to give a sufficient answer within his theory. (shrink)

Traditional philosophy is no longer viable,‭ ‬relevant and acceptable.‭ ‬It might be possible to continue doing philosophizing in traditional ways.‭ ‬It is possible to continue fabricating fictional realities in the manner of the Pre-Socratics,‭ ‬Spinoza,‭ ‬Leibniz,‭ ‬Husserl,‭ ‬Hegel,‭ ‬Plato,‭ ‬et al.‭ ‬It is possible to devise pictures of realities and depictions of‭ ‬human consciousness and cognition like Descartes or in the Kantian manner. -/- One of the major issues with traditional philosophy is its lack of self-awareness,‭ ‬the absence of meta-cognition.‭ (...) ‬This lack of meta-cognition of traditional philosophers leads to the creation of all sorts of questionable phenomena and fake problems. -/- Traditional philosophy,‭ ‬metaphysics,‭ ‬ontology,‭ ‬epistemology,‭ ‬ethics,‭ ‬philosophy of sciences,‭ ‬religion,‭ ‬arts,‭ ‬etc are little more than the possibilities,‭ ‬limits and restrictions enabled and allowed by the philosopher's methodology,‭ ‬techniques and tools.‭ -/- It is most likely possible to envisage a project to devise a collection or synthesis of‭ ‬many alternative realities by means of the insights and theories of theoretical physics,‭ ‬mathematics,‭ ‬bio-chemistry,‭ ‬biology and other sciences,‭ ‬the depictions produced by the arts and pictures of realities presented by the humanities.‭ ‬If such a system of pictures of reality is philosophically relevant and meaningful is however another matter. -/- The original,‭ ‬creative thinking philosopher constitutes alternattive or new realities by his philosophizing.‭ ‬This philosophizing employs and resembles aspects and stages of the processes of theorizing. -/- The real goal of philosophizing is to increase ever greater wisdom.‭ ‬Not merely wisdom in an abstract sense,‭ ‬but different kinds of practical and applied wisdom in all areas of human,‭ ‬everyday existence.‭ ‬In other words,‭ ‬like spirituality and mysticism philosophizing attempts to embody or incarnate wisdom.‭ ‬While mysticism or the mystical paths and aspects of religions aspire to unity experience,‭ ‬to become one with THE ONE,‭ ‬to become the ONE,‭ ‬REAL SELF,‭ ‬to realize the Buddha mind or to be united or‭ '‬married‭' ‬to the Beloved of Sufism. (shrink)

Institutionalized and internalized, competence intersubjectivity contain many user-illusions and an imaginary or manifest image of reality, including of themselves (Dennett and Sellars),. This can be contrasted we a comprehension or comprehensive, understanding intersubjectivity. It is possible and perhaps even necessary to transform or replace the competence intersubjectivity to a comprehension or understanding (scientific, Dennett and Sellars) image of reality and themselves.Ethics and morality and studies of ethics and morality deal with the reality of competence intersubjectivity (by means of socio-cultural practices (...) that are derived from, based on an created by means of this restrictive, misleading, unreal, illusory, unrealistic intersubjectivity and the life-worlds associated with it) and human life-worlds constituted on the basis of and in terms of this intersubjectivity. This is why I am a nihilist, a libertarian, at least a minarchist or rather an anarchist and epistemologically a sceptic. Kant’s things in themselves are similar to Dennett and Searle’s notions of manifest and scientific image. With my addition that we are socialized and internalize the competent, know how to do it, institutionalized manifest, everyday intersubjectivity, instead of the comprehension, insights and understanding knowing that, scientific intersubjectivity of all scientific disciplines. This piece can be read as independent as comments on meta-ethics, or it can be read as a chapter in my Book ‘Intersubjectivity (continued)’, or it can be read as an introduction to my thoughts on philosophy and more specifically Intersubjectivity as – Determining the nature of philosophy Determining the nature of the subject-matter of philosophy, sociology, social psychology, aspects of cognitive sciences, ethics, epistemology, etc, Determining the nature of philosophical methodology and approaches. (shrink)

Mit dieser Edition wird erstmals ein Vorlesungszyklus aus Helmuth Plessners wissenschaftlichem Nachlaß der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich gemacht. Das klar und übersichtlich gegliederte Kolleg "Elemente der Metaphysik" präsentiert in leicht verständlicher Sprache und gut nachvollziehbarer Gedankenentfaltung die Grundzüge von Plessners Anthropologie, die dieser in seinem nur schwer rezipierbaren Hauptwerk, den "Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch" von 1928, entwickelt hatte, und stellt sie in einen umfassenden philosophischen Kontext. Die Vorlesung umfaßt drei Hauptteile: Im 1. Teil, der "Metaphysik des Bewußtseins", zeigt Plessner, daß (...) der klassische bewußtseinsphilosophische Ansatz zur Beantwortung zentraler metaphysischer Probleme nicht in der Lage ist. Die entscheidende Frage nach dem Sein des Bewußtseins ist - wie Plessner nachweist - im Rahmen der Bewußtseinsproblematik, wie sie von der neuzeitlichen Philosophie seit Descartes entfaltet wurde, nicht zu beantworten. Die Bewußtseinsphilosophie muß daher - so Plessners Grundthese - durch einen lebensphilosophischen Ansatz überwunden werden. Dieser Übergang zur Problematik des Lebens und die breite Ausführung des neuen philosophischen Zugriffs steht im Mittelpunkt des 2. Teils ("Metaphysik des Lebens"). Plessner unternimmt hier vor allem den Versuch, das Wesen des Lebens durch das Verhältnis des Körpers zu seiner Grenze zu bestimmen und hält fest, daß solche Körper, die ihre Grenzen realisiert haben, "Positionaliät" besitzen. Dieser Begriff der Positionalität wird zum Zentralbegriff von Plessners Biophilosophie, die im Fortgang dieses Teils der Vorlesung ausführlich dargestellt wird. Im Zentrum der Darlegung, die Plessner im engen, kritischen Kontakt mit der biologischen Forschung hält, steht u.a. die Beziehung von Organismus und Umwelt, die Organisationsformen des Lebens (Pflanze und Tier), die Struktur der tierischen Umwelt, die Bestimmung des Bewußtseins, das Verhältnis von Bewußtsein und körperlichem Sein und das Problem des Gedächtnisses. Im abschließenden 3. Teil ("Der Mensch") skizziert Plessner die Grundzüge seiner philosophischen Anthropologie, wobei er den Menschen als dasjenige Lebewesen bestimmt, das - in Abhebung vom Tier, dem eine zentrische Organisationsform zukommt - eine "exzentrische Positionalität" besitzt, und das in einem dreifachen Bezug zur Außenwelt, zur Innenwelt und zur Mitwelt steht. Die besondere Bedeutung dieser Vorlesung liegt einerseits in ihrem Charakter als leicht nachvollziehbare Hinführung zu Plessners Philosophie des Lebendigen. Andererseits enthält sie neue Inhalte - insbesondere im 1. und 2. Teil - und trägt dadurch zur Erweiterung unserer Kenntnis von Plessners Philosophie bei. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Zeitschrift für kritische Sozialtheorie und Philosophie Jahrgang: 4 Heft: 1-2 Seiten: 49-85.

Goodman's theorem states that intuitionistic arithmetic in all finite types plus full choice, HA + AC, is conservative over first-order intuitionistic arithmetic HA. We show that this result does not extend to various subsystems of HA, HA with restricted induction.

ArgumentThe article retraces the shifting conceptualizations of psychological trauma in experimental psychopathological research in the middle decades of the twentieth century in the United States. Among researchers studying so-called experimental neuroses in animal laboratories, trauma was an often-invoked category used to denote the clash of conflicting forces believed to lead to neurotic suffering. Experimental psychologists, however, soon grew skeptical of the traumatogenic model and ultimately came to reject neurosis as a disease entity. Both theoretical differences and practical circumstances, such as (...) the technical challenge of stabilizing neurotic symptoms in rats, led to this demise. Yet, despite their reservations, experimental psychologists continued to employ traumatic stimuli to produce psychopathological syndromes. In the 1960s, a new understanding of trauma evolved, which emphasized the loss of control experienced by traumatized animal subjects. These shifting ideas about trauma, I argue, reflect both varying experimental cultures, epistemic norms as well as changing societal concerns. (shrink)

This paper presents an experimental study of common consequence effects in binary choice, willingness-to-pay elicitation, and willingness-to-accept elicitation. We find strong evidence in favor of the fanning out hypothesis for both WTP and WTA. In contrast, the choice data do not show a clear pattern of violations in the absence of certainty effects. Our results underline the relevance of differences between pricing and choice tasks, and their implications for models of decision making under risk.

Biographical note: Thomas Alkemeyer (Dr. phil.) ist Professor für Soziologie und Sportsoziologie an der Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg. Ulrich Bröckling (Dr. phil.) ist Professor für Kultursoziologie an der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg. Tobias Peter (Dr. rer. pol.) ist wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am Institut für Soziologie der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg.

Proceeding from the principles of Euclidean geometry and absolute time a generalization of the classical theory of gravitation for high velocities is given. The new theory is applied to the redshift of spectral lines, the deviation of light passing the sun, and the secular motion of the perihelion of Mercury. A comparison with the results obtained from the theory of general relativity, though not beyond any doubt, seems to be favourable for the new theory, and to support the view, formerly (...) held by Driesch, Dingler, May, and other philosophers of science, that the foundations of classical physics need not be given up. (shrink)

occurs first. The biological debate is conducted largely on a theoretical level. In this paper, I undertake to locate
the reason for the difference in temporal ordering. The question is whether the difference depends on alternative
interpretations of empirical data, on differing views about evolutionary mechanisms, or on different conceptual
frameworks. It will turn out that the latter is the case and that discerning two different notions of novelty solves
the apparent contradiction. Both concepts may apply to different cases in evolution. To settle the (...) dispute by
judging whether any of both concepts is empty or not has to be recommitted to science. (shrink)

Zusammenfassung Die bundesethischen Entwürfe in den USA sind weder in der Grundlagendebatte noch im Bereich der politischen Ethik imstande, eine konsistente theoretische Alternative zu vorhandenen Entwürfen in der evangelischen Ethik zu liefern. In der Grundlagendebatte beruht dies vor allem auf einer Vermengung der Bundesidee mit der Vertragsidee. Die amerikanischen Bundesethiker werden zwar nicht müde, den Vertrag als Instrument egoistischer Akteure zurückzuweisen. Allerdings übernehmen sie die Grundstruktur des Vertrages in ihre Konzeptionen des Bundes und verlegen so ein Rechtsinstitut zurück in den (...) Bereich moralischer Pflicht. Demgemäß sollen die aufgrund einer vertraglichen Übereinkunft bestehenden Rechtspflichten nun als einander geschuldete Verantwortung von den Mitgliedern des Bundes erbracht werden. Zugleich soll aber der Stiftungscharakter des Bundes bewahrt bleiben. Auf diese Weise kann nicht mehr eindeutig zwischen dem kontingenten Stifterhandeln Gottes in der Geschichte und einer vertraglichen Übereinkunft gleicher Partner unterschieden werden. Eine Folge dieser Vermengung ist die Vereinnahmung gesellschaftlicher Institutionen im Universalismus und Holismus des Bundes. Solche Vereinnahmung hängt zudem an der Art und Weise, wie in der Bundesethik das Quellenmaterial benutzt wird. Es empfiehlt sich hier ein verstärktes Quellenstudium, und insbesondere sollte an den Klassikern weitergearbeitet werden, die am Beginn der Neuzeit mit ihren Vertragsmodellen für einen epochalen Umbruch in Politik und Ethik sorgten. Auch bezüglich der pluralistischen Gesellschaft bietet das Bundeskonzept nur unzureichende Antworten. Wenn am Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts der christliche Symbolbestand die Gesamtgesellschaft auf bestimmte Handlungsnormen verpflichten soll, dann rechnen die Autoren mit einem alle Bereiche der Gesellschaft durchdringenden monistischen Ethos. Im historischen Paradebeispiel der puritanischen Gemeinschaften Neuenglands konnte dieses Ethos bereits nur noch repressiv hergestellt werden. In modernen demokratischen Gesellschaften, die ihre Bürger an das Recht binden und durch das Recht schützen, beruht jedoch jede »innerliche Beziehung« der Bürger zum Gemeinwesen auf Freiwilligkeit. Wird dagegen behauptet: » lt is of the nature of a republic that its citizens must Iove it, not merely obey it«, dann hängt diese Auffassung an einer unhinterfragten ontologischen Vorordnung der Gemeinschaft vor dem Individuum. Hier wäre vor dem Hintergrund faktisch bestehender Interessengegensätze der Gemeinwohlbegriff neu zu durchdenken. Vom deutschen Kontext her sollte eine Rezeption nicht nur der Begrifflichkeit jedoch vorsichtig erfolgen. Denn die Gemeinschaftsdiskurse in den USA haben sich immer innerhalb einer liberalen Gesellschaft vollzogen, während in Deutschland eine illiberale Gesellschaft dazu den Rahmen bildete. Im Rahmen der Wirtschaftsethik ist es plausibel, wenn die Vorstellung des Unternehmens als einem verantwortlichen Selbst weitergedacht wird. Im Zeitalter der Globalisierung wächst die Macht großer Unternehmen zusehends. Aber diese Entwicklung wird noch von keiner Theorie gedeckt, die das Unternehmen als verantwortliches moralisches Handlungssubjekt seiner Außenwelt gegenüber bestimmt. Es ist noch offen, ob das Bundeskonzept hier etwas zu leisten vermag, was in rechtlichen Regelsystemen nicht aufgehoben werden kann. Im Bereich einer Managementethik scheint das Bundeskonzept zudem äußerst hilfreich zu sein. Die organisationskulturellen Debatten in der Managementtheorie der letzten Jahre haben sich immer wieder mit den Problemen der Handlungskoordination in komplexen Organisationen befaßt. Zwar löst das Bundeskonzept nicht die Verantwortungs- und Entscheidungsdilemmata in komplexen Organisationen. Allerdings kann es beim Aufbau von Verantwortlichkeitsgefühl auf allen Ebenen der Organisationshierarchie helfen. Man darf sich nur nicht darüber hinwegtäuschen, daß das Bundeskonzept dann zu einem Instrumentarium des Managements wird. (shrink)