The paper provides some introductory comments and a preliminary translation of Avicenna’s Burhān, IV, 2. I shall first set the stage by outlining the structure of the book (sec. 1). I will then briefly introduce (sec. 2) a number of notions that are dealt with in the first treatise of the Burhān (e.g. definition, description). Burhān, IV, 2 is split into two parts: the first focuses mainly on Aristotle’s An. Post., B, 4, whereas the second covers some of the (...) topics of B, 5 and B, 6. Accordingly, sec. 3 will be devoted to a cursory presentation of Aristotle’s arguments in An. Post., B, 4 along with a more detailed discussion of its Avicennan counterpart, focusing on the indemonstrability of definition; sec. 4, finally, will be a presentation of the second part of the chapter, concerning the relationship between definition and division. An English translation of the entire chapter is appended to the paper and is accompanied by some notes. (shrink)

The indispensability of the ‘postulate of practical reason with regard to Right’ to Kant's property argument in the Rechtslehre is now widely recognized. However, most commentators continue to focus their attention on the relation between the postulate and the deduction of the concept of intelligible possession. The nature of this relation remains a matter of dispute in part because the precise position of the postulate within chapter one of the Rechtslehre remains undecided. Given this, it is perhaps not surprising that (...) the related question has been neglected, as to why Kant should characterize the postulate of Right as a postulate of practical reason. Yet the fact that he does so is of some significance – especially if one recalls the definition in the Critique of Practical Reason of postulates of practical reason as practically necessary but theoretically indemonstrable propositions. What is of interest about this definition is not just the fact that it designates postulates as practically necessary and as theoretically indemonstrable at the same time – even more intriguing is the intimated relation between practical necessity and theoretical indemonstrability. Kant does not think the postulates' theoretical indemonstrability morally insignificant. To the contrary, their moral significance for us appears to be a function, in part, of their theoretical indemonstrability. (shrink)

The paper delves into manuscript sources connected with various disputations held at Prague University from around 1390 to 1420 and singles out a set of hitherto unknown quaestiones dealing with the nature of the human intellect and its relation to the body. Prague disputations from around 1400 arguably offer a unique vantage point on late medieval anthropological issues, since they encompass an entanglement of numerous doctrinal influences from Buridanian De anima commentaries to John Wyclif’s theories. The paper delineates several conceptual (...) tensions regarding the nature of the intellect, e.g., between materialism (entailed by the emphasis on the intellect’s inherence in the body) and personal immortality. It presents several strategies Prague masters employed to overcome these tensions. For example, an anonymous participant of the 1409 quodlibet develops the Buridanian distinction between the rationally demonstrable materialist tendency and the indemonstrable “catholic truth” about the intellect both inhering in and separable from the body. On the other hand, Wyclif’s adherents (Jacob of Mies and another anonymous master) postulate an immortal spirit hypostatically united to each human being beside the human soul educed from the potency of the matter. Yet, the boundaries between the doctrinal standpoints in question seem permeable, whereby a rigid definition of antagonistic groups in late medieval Prague intellectual milieu (e.g., Buridanians vs Wycliffites) is rendered ineffective. (shrink)

Since Mates’ seminal Stoic Logic there has been uncertainty and debate about how to treat the term anapodeiktos when used of Stoic syllogisms. This paper argues that the customary translation of anapodeiktos by ‘indemonstrable’ is accurate, and it explains why this is so. At the heart of the explanation is an argument that, contrary to what is commonly assumed, indemonstrability is rooted in the generic account of the Stoic epistemic notion of demonstration. Some minor insights into Stoic logic ensue.

The problem of definition of knowledge has been discussed in the tradi-tion of kalām and philosophy. Especially with the inclusion of logic definition theory in the discipline of kalām, the definitions put forward were criticized by later thinkers. Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī (d. 722/1322), who was included in this discussion, which was mainly shaped around the question of whether knowledge is necessary (ḍarūrī) or acquired (kasbī), wrote the ideal definition and features in al-Meārif and commentary of Avicenna’s al-Ishārāt (...) wa altanbīhāt. In addition, Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī examined the problem of whether knowledge can be defined and -like Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210)- argued that the meaning of knowledge is very clear. In this context, Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī, who criticizes the definition of knowledge put forward by the Peripatetic tradition in particular Avicenna (d. 428/1037), determined the ont and non-existent definitions of knowledge and criticized them. This study deals with how the ideal definition theory, which Avicenna founded, was handled by Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī and the problem of definition of knowledge according to Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī. In addition, with this article, it has been argued that Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī did not define knowledge. In this direction, at the beginning of the article, the discussions on the definition of knowledge in the pre-Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī kalām tradition and the sides of the issue were examined. Then, in this article, in which the characteristics of the ideal definition according to Shams al-Dīn al-Samarqandī are determined, it is also examined whether he defines knowledge or not. (shrink)

본 논문은 『수사학』 2권에 나타난 감정에 관한 정의(definition)가 가지는 역할과 양상에 관한 연구이다. 이러한 연구는 파토스적 설득의 실현 기반이 되는 감정의 인지성의 측면에서 진행되었다. 감정에 있어서의 인지주의는 감정을 감정으로 만드는 ‘본질적 요소가 무엇인가’라는 물음에 믿음(belief)이나 판단(judgement) 등의 사고적인 부분, 즉 인지적 요소로 답하는 것이다. 때문에 어떠한 사실에 대하여 가지게 되는 판단과 믿음이라는 사고의 영역은 느낌과 욕구보다 더 근본적이며, 판단과 믿음의 차이는 서로 다른 감정의 차이를 구별하는 기준이 된다. 아리스토텔레스는 『수사학』 2권에서 성격(ēthos), 감정(pathos), 논증(logos)을 통해 상대방을 설득하는 것을 목표로 연설 (...) 상황에서 일으켜야 할 감정들을 분석하고 있다. 그의 분석은 인지주의적 입장을 피력하는 것에 초점을 두지는 않았다. 그러나 아리스토텔레스의 감정에 대한 정의(definition) 부분은 그의 인지주의적 입장을 2가지 양상으로 분명히 드러내고 있다. 첫째는 원인 · 이유를 보여주는 양상이다. 아리스토텔레스는 감정에 대한 정의에서 각 감정들이 일어나는 ‘원인 · 이유’를 명시하거나 유추 가능하도록 서술함으로써 각 감정들의 인지적 요소를 상정하고 있다. 둘째는 감정을 개별화하는 양상이다. 아리스토텔레스의 정의는 감정의 ‘본질’을 규정함으로써 감정들 사이의 차이를 드러내고, 각 감정들을 개별화하게 된다. 결국 그의 정의는 감정의 인지성을 바탕으로 현대 연구자들이 문제시되는 감정의 본질을 검토하며, 각 감정들을 개별화하도록 하는 기초가 되었다. 결론적으로 감정에 대한 정의는 원인 · 이유를 보여주며, 감정을 개별화하는 2가지 양상으로 아리스토텔레스의 인지주의적 견해를 입증하고 있는 것이다. (shrink)

According to an influential view, asserting a proposition involves undertaking some “commitment” to the truth of that proposition. But accounts of what it is for someone to be committed to the truth of a proposition are often vague or imprecise, and are rarely put to work to define assertion. This article aims to fill this gap. It offers a precise characterisation of assertoric commitment, and applies it to define assertion. On the proposed view, acquiring commitment is not sufficient for asserting: (...) To assert, commitment must be acquired by explicitly presenting a proposition as true. (shrink)

In the Stoic view a definition is a representation of a peculiar characteristic that is neither too wide nor too narrow and has necessary or reciprocal force and is a statement of analysis matchingly expressed. That is, a peculiar characteristic is convertible and coextensive with the definiendum. Many scholars hold that for the Stoics a defining characteristic is not only a feature that is co-extensive with the definiendum but is also essential. We do not find any conclusive evidence for (...) this claim. The Stoics nowhere say that a defining feature is not only peculiar but also essential. They also sometimes offer more than one definition of a thing and this goes against the Aristotelian position that since a thing has single essence, there can only be one definition in the ideal sense. Further, the Platonic/Aristotelian tradition views a definition as being mainly concerned with relations between universals. But for the Stoics universals are mental constructs, individuals alone are real, and definitions are ultimately about individuals. (shrink)

The first section of this book surveys the development of Islamic philosophy though an examination of the definitions for substance, cause and matter. These important philosophical terms were defined by each new generation of philosophers. The definitions show an awareness of Greek philosophy, but also take metaphysical thought into an Islamic matrix. In the second section the author translates Ibn Sina's Kitab al-hudud and puts the tenth-century philosopher in his proper geopolitical sphere. Questions of Ibn Sina' connection with the East (...) as well as medieval scholastic philosophy are considered. Teaching Islamic philosophy outside of the Arabic-speaking world has been handicapped by a lack of primary texts in translation and studies of basic concepts. This book makes the foundation of this field more accessible to students and a general readership. By translating this little-known but pivotal text into readable English, Kennedy-Day has opened a door for a wider range of readers. (shrink)

The traditional definition per genus et differentiam is argued to be cognitively grounded in perception and in order to avoid needless argument, definitions are stipulated to assert boundaries. An analysis of the notion of perspective shows that a boundary is a composite of two distinctions: similarity that includes and difference that excludes. The concept is applied to the type-token distinction and percepts are shown to be the result of a comparison between a token as representing some phenomenon and a (...) type as representing the kind of object the phenomenon might be. The Principle of Connection is proposed as the mental architecture that gives rise to percepts. The value of a percept is shown to be one of Identical, Similar, Different or Contrary and its perceptual aspects represent the cognitive schema of Essence, Quality, Quantity and Relation. The two notions of similarity and difference are claimed to constitute the necessary and sufficient conditions for definitions. Accordingly, the qualitative elements of a definition signify the genus as representing the similarity of the defined entity in terms of others of its kind and the quantitative elements signify the differentia as representing the difference it has from everything else. Paying proper attention to both qualitative and quantitative aspects will enable formulation of definitions that are ‘good’. (shrink)

The official definition of ‘pain’ by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) hasn’t seen much revision since its publication in 1979. There have been various criticisms of the definition in the literature from different quarters: that the definition implies a dubious metaphysical dualism, that it requires a strong form of consciousness as well as linguistic abilities, that it excludes many vulnerable groups that are otherwise perfectly capable of experiencing pain, that it has therefore unacceptable (...) practical as well as ethical consequences, that it is unhelpful to the health-care professional as an operational definition, that it is too narrow, and many others. In my view, most of these criticisms depend on misunderstandings or on uncharitable interpretations. My aim is to go over the definition, clarify some potential ambiguities, and argue that these criticisms don’t cut much ice. At the end, I will present a few slightly reworded versions of the definition that I claim are more felicitous and capture the original intended meaning by the members of the taxonomic committee in a much better and transparent way that avoids all the major extant criticisms in the literature. (Written for interdisciplinary audiences.). (shrink)

In Posterior Analytics 71b9 12, we find Aristotle’s definition of scientific knowledge. The definiens is taken to have only two informative parts: scientific knowledge must be knowledge of the cause and its object must be necessary. However, there is also a contrast between the definiendum and a sophistic way of knowing, which is marked by the expression “kata sumbebekos”. Not much attention has been paid to this contrast. In this paper, I discuss Aristotle’s definition paying due attention to (...) this contrast and to the way it interacts with the two conditions presented in the definiens. I claim that the “necessity” condition ammounts to explanatory appropriateness of the cause. (shrink)

Frege’s Caesar problem is best understood as a multidimensional problem that touches on semantical, epistemological as well as metaphysical issues. The aim of this paper is to shed light on a dimension that has been largely ignored in the literature. It is argued that Frege’s own presentation of the problem strongly suggests that the problem consists primarily in providing the concept of number with a ‘sharp delimitation’. The demand for the ‘completeness of definitions’ was already made by Frege in Grundlagen (...) and not just in his mature period, as is generally assumed. It derives from the Euclidean goal of Grundlagen to transform the arithmetic of his time into an ‘exact science’ in the proper sense. The metaphysical problem as well as the epistemological and the semantical problem that are involved in the Caesar problem only arise because the concept of number is not sharply delimited. The latter problem must therefore be regarded as the fundamental one. Moreover, it can be shown that Frege’s definition of number presupposes that all concepts of his system are sharply delimited. This explains why he considered the solution of the Caesar problem as an integral part of his logical foundation of arithmetic. (shrink)

In the modern discussions about possibility of synthetic a priori propositions, the theory of definition has a fundamental importance, because the most definition’s theories hold that analytic judgments are involved by explicit definition . However, for Kant –first author who pointed out the distinction between analytic and synthetic propositions–many analytic judgments are made by analysis of concepts which need not first be established by definition. Moreover, for him not all a priori knowledge is analytic. The statement (...) that not all analytic judgment is derived from definition and possibility of synthetic a priori knowledge, indicates Kant didn’t believe, contrary to modern theories about analytic judgment, the definition is an essential ground of knowledge. (shrink)

"Socrates' Pursuit of Definitions" examines the manner in which Socrates pursues definitions in Plato's early definitional dialogues and advances the following claims. Socrates evaluates definitions (proposed by his interlocutors or himself) by considering their consistency with conditions of the identity of F (F-conditions) to which he is committed. In evaluating proposed definitions, Socrates seeks to determine their truth-value. Socrates evaluates the truth-value of a proposed definition by considering the consistency of the proposed definition with F-conditions that F he (...) believes to be true. (For instance, a proposed definition's inconsistency with one of these gives Socrates reason to believe that the definition is false.) Socrates' belief in the truth of a given F-condition to which he is committed may be based on self-evidence, its endoxic status, experience, or deduction from premises to which he is committed on the basis of any of the previous three. However, Socrates does not consider the epistemological grounds of his commitments to his F-conditions. This is part of a general avoidance of metaethical and ethical epistemological issues. Due to his avoidance of these, Socrates' pursuit of true definitions is theoretically naïve. However, Socrates recognizes a certain limitation to his manner of pursuing definitions. These results are applied to advancing the following further points. (1) Although Socrates has a distinctive manner or style of pursuing definitions, it is inappropriate to ascribe to him a method of doing so in the following sense. The concept of method implies a certain theoretical conception of procedure that Socrates lacks. Moreover, according to Socrates' own conceptual framework, only one who possessed the relevant τέχνη would have a method. (2) Furthermore, Socrates' manner of pursuing definitions is not elenctic just insofar as the word "elenchus" is interpreted to have adversarial connotations; that is inconsistent with Socrates' motives and interests. (3) Socrates' manner of pursuing definitions is consistent among the early definitional dialogues. More specifically, there is no "demise of the elenchus" in a set of transitional dialogues, as Vlastos describes it. First, Socrates' manner of pursuing definitions is not "elenctic" (in the sense described). And, second, the fact that Socrates himself proposes definitions in allegedly post-elenctic dialogues (that is, Lysis and Hippias Major) is consistent with his manner of pursuing definitions. (4) In the early definitional dialogues, Socrates does not have a theory of definition. In particular, he lacks a general theoretical ontology. Moreover, while his comments and implicit commitments entail beliefs about some conditions for a satisfactory definition (for example, that the definiens must be a uniquely identifying true verbal description), such conditions do not constitute a theory. (5) Although in other early dialogues and in other parts of the definitional dialogues Socrates may express concern over the psychological states and well-being of his interlocutors, in the process of pursuing definitions, Socrates' principal concern is the evaluation of definitions, not the psychologies or lives of his interlocutors. (6) Finally, Socrates is committed to the epistemological priority of definitional knowledge for pertinent non-definitional knowledge. This does present a methodological problem of the kind to which Geach first drew attention. Specifically, according to the manner in which Socrates pursues definitions, it is unclear how he can get from belief that p to knowledge that p. Although this problem is genuine, Socrates himself is not unaware of such limits of his approach. (shrink)

I discuss Aristotle's treatment of essence and definition in Metaphysics VII.4. I argue that it is coherent and perfectly in accord with its broader context. His discussion in VII.4 offers, on the one hand, minimal criteria for what counts as definition and essence for whatever kind of object, but also, on the other hand, stronger criteria for a primary sort of definition and essence—and thereby it serves the interest of book VII in pointing to the explanatory power (...) of the essence of composite substances. (shrink)

The most successful science on the Aristotelian model was geometry in the style of Euclid. As advocated in the Posterior Analytics, Euclid’s Elements laid out geometry as a structure of theorems deduced from definitions and axioms that were evident to reason. However, geometry deals with the category of quantity, whereas Aristotelian definitions are paradigmatically in the category of substance. This chapter argues that definitions in the category of quantity have fulfilled well the Aristotelian ideal of stating the essence of ‘what (...) a thing is’, in such a way as to support a superstructure of demonstrations about that thing. Euclid’s definition of circle is a prime example: it is philosophically satisfying and from the first theorem of the Elements proved itself very productive of theorems. As this chapter demonstrates, the definition of ratio was more difficult. Euclid stands at the end of a long search for a definition of ratio, one of the most central notions of mathematics, that is both philosophically satisfying and mathematically productive. The search was not wholly successful. (shrink)

In the insightful and searching paper of Mills and Beatty the following definition of ‘fitness’, as the term figures in the theory of natural selection, is offered:The [individual] fitness of an organism x in environment E equals n =dfn is the expected number of descendants which x will leave in E.

The traditional definition per genus et differentiam is argued to be cognitively grounded in perception and in order to avoid needless argument, definitions are stipulated to assert boundaries. An analysis of the notion of perspective shows that a boundary is a composite of two distinctions: similarity that includes and difference that excludes. The concept is applied to the type-token distinction and percepts are shown to be the result of a comparison between a token as representing some phenomenon and a (...) type as representing the kind of object the phenomenon might be. The Principle of Connection is proposed as the mental architecture that gives rise to percepts. The value of a percept is shown to be one of Identical, Similar, Different or Contrary and its perceptual aspects represent the cognitive schema of Essence, Quality, Quantity and Relation. The two notions of similarity and difference are claimed to constitute the necessary and sufficient conditions for definitions. Accordingly, the qualitative elements of a definition signify the genus as representing the similarity of the defined entity in terms of others of its kind and the quantitative elements signify the differentia as representing the difference it has from everything else. Paying proper attention to both qualitative and quantitative aspects will enable formulation of definitions that are ‘good’. (shrink)

Few moral questions have greater bearing on the conduct of our everyday lives than questions about the morality of lying. These questions are also important for ethical theory. An important test of any theory of right and wrong is whether it gives an adequate account of the morality of lying. Conceptual questions about the nature of lying are prior to questions about the moral status of lying. Any theory about the moral status of lying presupposes an account of what lying (...) is. (shrink)

In this article, the results of conceptualization of the definition of mind as an object of interdisciplinary applied research are described. The purpose of the theoretical analysis is to generate a methodological discourse suitable for a functional understanding of the mind in the context of the problem of natural language processing as one of the components of developments in the field of artificial intelligence. The conceptual discourse was realized with the help of the author's method of structural-ontological analysis, and (...) developed in the mainstream of the system-methodological tradition of the school of G.P. Shchedrovitsky and intended for descriptive research of subject areas of interdisciplinary objects of scientific study. As a result of the structural and ontological analysis of the super-system, the relevant place and role of the directly studied system (mind) are determined, and its primary process and material are localized and structural and functional connections are described. At the basic level, the mind is conceptualized as an energy process unfolding in a spatio-temporal environment and accompanied by archetypal structuring of neural impulses into images. The genesis of the system is separately analyzed by constructing a structural-ontological matrix that reflects the initial stage of the development of the mind. The primary process is concretized with the help of hetero- and homeostatic dichotomy, and also the most significant features of the consistent transformation of the material of the system and its ascent to verbal morphology are described. The structural-ontological comparison of the functioning of the verbal intelligence with the preverbal level has been carried out. The transformation of neural impulses of needs into words, as verbal units fixing semiotic values is analyzed. Structural-ontological connections that determine the reactive and prospective characteristics of the functioning of the system are disclosed. The position of the chronological primacy of "semiotic readiness" for language with respect to the debut of the latter as an information-sign model of the environment is argued. The hypothesis of domination at the initial stage of the development of the mind of exopsychic functions over endopsychic ones is formulated. The theoretical substantiation of the hypothesis of the inevitability of the ontology of language in the functional understanding of the mind is given, corresponding structural and ontological arguments are given, including those based on the ideas about the information relationship between affects and needs, according to the views of P.V. Simonov. The arguments are presented in favor of the non-alternative methodology of A. Turing in studies of artificial intelligence. (shrink)

Resumen: El estatuto teórico del concepto de la violencia escolar se ha resuelto parcialmente mediante el uso de definiciones. En el caso del campo científico chileno las definiciones de violencia escolar se formulan desde una episteme dualista, que establece la distinción entre lo escolar y lo no escolar, priorizan a un individuo abstracto, donde el espacio prima sobre el tiempo, las relaciones son causales y, en menor medida, de tipo covariación, constructiva de realidades y especular. El componente performativo es doble: (...) i) un modo de codificación y clasificaciones que estabilizan a un objeto que irrumpe en el campo científico y escolar; ii) producen una ausencia y exclusión de las relaciones y categorías posibles. No obstante, se observa que al interior de las propias definiciones se encuentran las semillas para un trabajo de transformación hacia epistemes no dualistas y complejas mediante las dimensiones de producción, reproducción y cruce de las violencias en la institución escolar según un enfoque tríadico. Esta reconstrucción se basa en un corpus de artículos indexados del campo de la educación sobre Chile entre los años 2001 a 2013.: The theoretical statute of the concept of school violence has been partly solved using definitions. In the case of the Chilean scientific field, the definitions of school violence are defined from a dualistic episteme that establishes the distinction between what is part of the school and what is not, that prioritizes an abstract subject, where space is more important than time, the relationships are of causal type and, to a lesser extent, of covariation type, that builds realities and that is speculative. The performative component has two aspects: i) a coding mode and classifications that stabilize an object that disrupts the scientific and school fields, and ii) produce a lack and exclusion of the relationships and potential categories. Nevertheless, it has been observed that there are some elements within the own definitions that could work for the transformation of dualistic and complex epistemes, through a dimension of production, reproduction, and the cross of different types of violence at school, following a triadic approach. This reconstruction is based on a corpus of articles from indexed journals about the Chilean educational field between 2001 and 2013. (shrink)

The professor of psychopathology Simon Baron-Cohen is well-known for his thesis that males are on average better at systematizing than empathizing and females are on average better at empathizing than systematizing. In this paper, I note an ambiguity in how he defines systematizing.

In just a century, the Pentecostal movement has become a numerical force in world Christianity and the largest movement in Protestantism. But there are many different movements recognised by scholars as ‘Pentecostalism’, and there is absolutely no uniformity among these movements. There is no single form of Pentecostalism, nor are there clear theological criteria by which it can be defined. Researchers wonder whether it is even possible to speak of global Pentecostalism as a single phenomenon. It is similarly impossible to (...) define what Pentecostalism is without understanding how the movement originated. Until recently, the historiography of the movement has been based on North American history, but recent research has increased the complexity of defining Pentecostalism. This paper examines the following scholarly approaches to defining Pentecostalism: phenomenological, historical, sociological, theological, and global perspective approaches. These approaches do not exclude each other, but are interdependent and complementary. As a result, it is shown that through the ‘global perspective’ approach Pentecostalism can be defined as a global network movement. From the historical and theological approaches, it is revealed that Pentecostalism cannot be seen as a movement with a clear beginning in the USA or elsewhere, nor as a movement based on one particular theology. It is a movement in constant flux, whose followers' spirituality is expressed in a constant search for an “experience of the Spirit” and spiritual gifts. It is a movement that took several years and several different formative ideas and events to emerge, a movement that from its inception has had a global character. It is therefore best thought of as an early 20th century Protestant global networking movement with an emphasis on the ‘experience of the Spirit’ and the application of spiritual gifts. (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to suggest a new interpretation to the Gettier problem by showing that the standard JTB definition of knowledge is not epistemologically incomplete, being at the same time formally incomplete. The Gettier problem is shown to emerge through the implicit self-application of the JTB definition of knowledge to prove its own incompleteness. A conclusion is drawn, which runs counter to the traditional view that the problem necessarily requires a conceptual amendment of the standard (...) defi nition, in spite of the formal incompleteness of the latter. The Gettier problem is construed to be related to the ancient Meno problem within a contemporary justifi cational discourse. (shrink)

Benefit-cost analysis is typically defined as an implementation of the potential Pareto criterion, which requires inclusion of any impact for which individuals have willingness to pay. This definition is incompatible with the exclusion of impacts such as rights and distributional concerns, for which individuals do have WTP. I propose a new definition: BCA should include only impacts for which consumer sovereignty should govern. This is because WTP implicitly preserves consumer sovereignty, and is thus only appropriate for ‘sovereignty-warranting’ impacts. (...) I compare the high cost of including non-sovereignty-warranting impacts to the relatively low cost of excluding sovereignty-warranting impacts. (shrink)