In his account of probable reasoning, Poincare used the concept, or at least the language, of conventions. In particular, he claimed that the prior probabilities essential for inverse probable reasoning are determined conventionally. This paper investigates, in the light of Poincare's well known claim about the conventionality of metric geometry, what this could mean, and how it is related to other views about the determination of prior probabilities. Particular attention is paid to the similarities and differences between Poincare's conventionalism as (...) it applies to probabilities and de Finetti's subjectivism. The aim of the paper is to suggest that in accounts of the development of ideas about probable reasoning, particularly those customarily described as Bayesian, Poincare's discussion deserves more attention than it has so far received. (shrink)

This paper addresses whether universal, general education programs are enough to satisfy basic criteria of human rights, or whether comprehensive family planning programs, in conjunction with universal education programs, might also be morally required. Even before the Reagan administration instituted the ‘global gag rule’ at the 1984 conference in Mexico City, prohibiting funding to nongovernmental organizations that included providing information about abortion as a possible method of family planning, the moral acceptability of family planning programs has been called into question. (...) This paper makes a moral argument for family planning by appealing to both data and to theory: data about the efficacy of universal and comprehensive family planning education programs at reducing fertility and infant mortality, and theory about what is required for the establishment of autonomy. It reasons that universal educational programs are insufficient for the promotion of autonomy, and therefore argues on substantive autonomy grounds for comprehensive family planning programs in addition to universal education programs. (shrink)

La idea de que los delirios son creencias es apoyada por la observación de que los delirios, al igual que las creencias, son usados en el razonamiento. Sin embargo, los delirios tienen otras características que son difíciles de explicar por medio de una teoría doxástica —por ejemplo, los delirios persisten a pesar de la evidencia en su contra y algunas veces entran en conflicto con las acciones del agente (de maneras en que las creencias parecerían no hacerlo), dando lugar a (...) lo que se conoce como el fenómeno de la doble cuenta—. Estas características han motivado teorías no doxásticas, que argumentan que los delirios son otro tipo de fenómeno mental (e.g., imaginaciones o actos de habla vacíos). Mientras que las teorías no-doxásticas pueden explicar dichas características de los delirios—como su persistencia a pesar de la evidencia en su contra y el fenómeno de la doble cuenta— estas teorías tienen dificultades para explicar las características de los delirios que los hacen similares a las creencias. Nos encontramos entonces en un punto muerto en el que ni los enfoques doxásticos ni los no doxásticos pueden explicar todas las características de los delirios. En este artículo, propongo avanzar en este debate mostrando que la propuesta doxástica puede, después de todo, dar cuenta tanto de las características de los delirios que los hacen similares a las creencias como de sus demás características. Basándome en literatura reciente en epistemología, argumento que las creencias (racionales) puede estar motivadas por factores no evidenciales (e.g. pragmáticos o emocionales) y que estos factores sirven para explicar las características aparentemente desconcertantes de los delirios. También propongo que categorizar las creencias a través de dos compartimentos funcionales, el implícito y el explícito, nos ayuda a entender la interacción dinámica entre creencias delirantes y no delirantes. (shrink)

Simultaneous discovery in science has been a subject of close historical investigations, not only for assessing claims of priority, which occasionally generate controversy rather than consensus, but also for understanding the cultural and intellectual context of the time. Thomas S. Kuhn is a pioneer in the contextual study of simultaneous discovery, and his paper on the formulation of the first law of thermodynamics has already become a classic.

Drawing from the Boulding''s (1956) framework for general systems theory, the need to employ richer paradigm in the study of organizations (Pondy and Mitroff, 1979) is reiterated. It is argued that a better understanding of organizational ethical behavior is contingent upon viewing organizations as symbol processing systems of shared language and meanings. Further, it is proposed that organizations, like individuals, develop into collectivities of shared cognitions and rationale, over a period of time. The study adapts Kohlberg''s (1983) model of moral (...) development to examine if organizations can be viewed as passing through different stages of moral development depending on the type of moral reasoning employed to explain their behaviors in the face of ethical crises. Several cases raising questions about the ethics of corporate behavior were researched. An instrument entitled Organization Response Analysis was constructed using statements made by various spokespersons representing five of these organizations. The instrument was administered to 246 graduate and undergraduate students of business (N = 246). Results indicated a great degree of concurrence among respondents of differing genders, levels of education and work experience in determining the stages of moral development of organizations. Limitations of the current study and implications for future research and practice are discussed. (shrink)

After a chapter on the theory of the concrete universal, Milne discusses the moral and political views of Bradley, Bosanquet, Green, and Royce. Milne's view is that the social philosophy of Idealism is permanently valuable, the metaphysics not. The work of Bradley and Bosanquet, he argues, is weakened by unnoticed ambiguities in their conception of the concrete universal; Green's work, though more consistent, involves a fundamental error in the theory of knowledge; and there is doubt as to the consistency of (...) Royce's metaphysics with his ethics. We can develop a humanistic Idealism which will be free of the metaphysics of the Absolute and the conservative tendencies of that view, Milne says, and his expositions and criticisms of earlier views are part of his effort to do this. The theory of a scale of standards of rationality in activity, on which Milne rests his reconstruction, needs to be more clearly developed, but it is useful to have so sympathetic a discussion of this general point of view.--J. B. S. (shrink)