Mobile health (mHealth) apps for self-monitoring increasingly gain relevance for public health. As a mobile technology, they promote individual participation in health monitoring with the aim of disease prevention and the mitigation of health risks. In this paper, I argue that users of mHealth apps must engage in value trade-offs concerning their fundamental dimensions of well-being when using mobile health apps for the self-monitoring of health parameters. I particularly focus on trade-offs regarding the user’s self-determination as well as their capacity (...) to form personal attachments. Depending on the user’s level of advantage or disadvantage, value trade-offs can pose a threat to the users’ sufficient fulfillment of the dimensions of well-being. As such, value trade-offs can entrench existing structural injustices and prevent disadvantaged users to benefit from this technology. I argue that value trade-offs are, to some, a type of injustice that can drive disadvantaged users away from a sufficiency threshold of well-being, risk users to fall below the threshold, or have an accumulative effect on different dimensions of the user’s well-being. (shrink)

Rapport de la conférence scientifique "Jan Amos KomensKi et les problèmes de la pédagogie contemporaine" (Institut pédagogique de l'Université de Poznan, 19-20 novembre 1970). Série d'articles concernant la théorie du pédagogue sur les plus importants problèmes de la pédagogie contemporaine.

The majority of studies on absorptive capacity (AC) underscore the importance of absorbing technological knowledge from other firms to create economic value. However, to preserve moral legitimacy and create social value, firms must also discern and adapt to (shifts in) societal values. A comparative case study of eight firms in the food industry reveals how organizations prioritize and operationalize the societal value health in product innovation while navigating inter- and intravalue conflicts. The value-sensitive framework induced in this article extends AC (...) by explaining how technically savvy, economic value–creating firms diverge in their receptivity, articulation, and reflexivity of societal values. (shrink)

One of the central explananda in the debate on social cognition is the interpretation of other people in terms of reasons for action. There is a growing dissatisfaction among participants in the debate concerning the descriptive adequacy of the traditional belief-desire model of action interpretation. Applying this model as an explanatory model at the subpersonal level threatens to leave the original explanandum largely unarticulated. Against this background we show how Brandom’s deontic scorekeeping model can be used as a valuable descriptive (...) tool for making folk psychology explicit. Following Brandom’s non-formalist and non-mentalistic account of reason discourse, we suggest that the process of making sense of others is best captured as proceeding from a ‘factive’ baseline. According to this picture the ascription of beliefs and desires is not the default interpretation strategy, but rather the result of prior scaffolding of the agent’s deontic score. We close by discussing Brandom’s model in the light of empirical findings on the ontogeny of reason attribution. (shrink)

In this paper, we take issue with the belief–desire model of second- and third-person action interpretation as it is presented by both theory theories and cognitivist versions of simulation theory. These accounts take action interpretation to consist in the (tacit) attribution of proper belief–desire pairs that mirror the structure of formally valid practical inferences. We argue that the belief–desire model rests on the unwarranted assumption that the interpreter can only reach the agent's practical context of action through inference. This assumption (...) betrays a deep-seated bias toward disengaged, observational interpretation strategies. On our alternative picture, the interpreter can start off on the assumption of a shared practical context and proceed to reason discourse in those cases in which this assumption runs aground. Following Brandom's non-formalist account of reason discourse, we suggest that interpreting other people's actions in terms of reasons is not a matter of following the principles of formally valid practical syllogisms, but of endorsing practical material inferences that are correct in virtue of a shared practical world. (shrink)

In this article we take issue with theory theory and simulation theory accounts of folk psychology committed to (i) the belief-desire (BD) model and (ii) the assumption of universality (AU). Recent studies cast doubt on the compatibility of these commitments because they reveal considerable cross-cultural differences in folk psychologies. We present both theory theory and simulation theory with the following dilemma: either (i) keep the BD-model as an account of the surface properties of specific explicit folk psychologies and give up (...) AU in light of the cross-cultural evidence; or (ii) defend AU with respect to core capacities underlying different culture-specific folk psychologies, and explain why the BD-model will be genuinely explanatory at this level. (shrink)

The reovirus cell attachment protein σ1 is a lollipopshaped structure with the fibrous tail anchored to the virion. Since it interacts with the cell receptor, σ1 is a major determinant of reovirus infectivity and tissue tropism. Studies on its structure‐function relationships have been facilitated by the fact that protein σ1 produced in any expression system is capable of binding to cell receptors. The use of site‐specific and deletion mutants has led to the identification and characterization of its virion anchorage and (...) receptor binding domains. Studies on the oligomeric status of σ1 have revealed that σ1 is a homotrimer and that two independent trimerization events at different loci (the N‐ and C‐terminal halves, respectively) of the protein, are involved in its generation. This also accounts for a clearly demonstrable dominant negative effect by a mutant subunit in a wild‐type/mutant σ1 heterotrimer. Current efforts are focused on the involvement of chaperones in the generation of σ1 and on events that take place upon σ1 binding to the cell receptor. Protein σ1 has therefore become an excellent model system for the study of both virus attachment and protein oligomerization and folding mechanisms. (shrink)

Lack of knowledge about the effects of herbs in pastures and the frequency of their use by today's organic farmers has limited the development of new methods to improve animal health compatible with organic farming principles. Understanding farmers' agricultural practices is an early step in a participatory research process. With this in mind, we conducted a two-tiered, semi-structured survey of Danish organic farmers with dairy cattle to begin documenting their practices. Out of 350 farmers, 255 completed a mailed questionnaire – (...) a response rate of 73%. Of these participating farmers, 66 (26%) confirmed their use of herbs in pastures. Caraway was sown at an average rate of 500 g of seed per hectare by 60 (91%). Of these, 32 used solely caraway, while 7 used it in combination with parsley. Twenty-one used caraway together with herbs other than parsley. Six used one or more herbs, not including caraway, such as chicory, chervil, dill, fenugreek, great burnet, and salad burnet. Further details concerning cultivation, convictions, observed effects, and information sources were obtained through telephone interviews. The results of this study would indicate that more research in this field is called for. (shrink)

Niniejszy artykuł podejmuje dwie zasadnicze kwestie. Pierwsza to zagadnienie recepcji filozofii Schellinga w Polsce po drugiej wojnie światowej. Druga to pytanie, w jaki sposób należy rozumieć abstrakcje filozoficzne Schellinga. Za podstawę interpretacji przyjęto kontekstualne rozumienie filozofii, na jakim opierał się w swoich badaniach Ryszard Panasiuk. Z tych dwóch założeń podstawowych wynika struktura artykułu: część pierwsza dotyczy sposobu, w jaki ideologia marksistowsko-leninowska, wychodząc z klasowo-dialektycznego i „partyjnego” rozumienia filozofii, uznała idealizm filozoficzny za wroga. Punktem odniesienia będzie koncepcja Georga Lukácsa „Die Zerstörung (...) der Vernunft” oraz wykładnia filozofii Schellinga jako irracjonalizmu. Część druga skupia się na tym, dlaczego zaprzestano badań nad Schellingiem oraz idealizmem po drugiej wojnie światowej, oraz w jakich warunkach i kiedy pojawiły się pierwsze opracowania monograficzne. Część trzecia jest historyczno-krytyczną i kontekstualną interpretacją filozofii przyrody Schellinga. Filozofię Schellinga można rozumieć jako nową antropologię, integralnie łączącą człowieka i przyrodę. W tym sensie jest ona antytezą racjonalistycznego redukcjonizmu. (shrink)

The paper contains introductory remarks and is conceived of as a part of a larger project. First of all decisions are made as to the choice of an adequate concept of philosophy (which does not exclude other concepts of this field of interest). Among others philosophy as a very general domain of considerations is contrasted to logic and mathematics. Methods for philosophy are described in the way the natural sciences do it: methods are schemes for repeatable actions which in similar (...) circumstances result in similar or identical outcomes irrespective of the philosopher's (the performer's) views. Philosophers very often neglect repeatability and similarity of effects. Kazimierz Twardowski's method of the elimination of contradiction (cf. his paper „On the so-called relative truths”) is put forward as a paragon of further important methods of philosophy. (shrink)

This topically organized, interdisciplinary anthology provides competing perspective on the claim that western culture faces a moral crisis. Using clearly written, accessible essays by well-known authors in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities, the book introduces students to a variety of perspectives on the current cultural debate about values that percolates beneath the surface of most of our social and political controversies.

Cette traduction d'un fragment du livre de L. Brunschvicg, expert et critique reconnu de la philosophie de Descartes, et de sa part un tentative de créer une synthèse de la pensée carthésienne si complexe et si conflictuelle intérieurement. Descartes y est présenté comme savant, mathématician et philosophe dont la contribution a l'évolution de la pensée philosophique européenne de la crise (qui s'est traduit par la confrontation entre l'aristotélisme et la naturalisme modern) est devenue aujourd’hui l'héritage de tout l'humanité. Brunschvicg décrit (...) l'etendue et les conséquences de cette revolution mathématique et philosophique après une étude approfondie de toutes les plus grandes œuvres de Descartes et sa correspondence. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The Mind of Charles Hartshorne: A Critical Examination by Donald Wayne Viney and George W. ShieldsLeon NiemoczynskiThe Mind of Charles Hartshorne: A Critical Examination. Donald Wayne Viney and George W. Shields. Anoka, MN: Process Century Press, 2020. 584 pp. $40.00 cloth.Over the past decade process philosophy has undergone a significant renaissance most notably due to the towering presence of the thought of Alfred North Whitehead in that tradition. (...) Charles Hartshorne by manner of contrast has not had such a towering presence. Part of the reason this is the case is due to a paucity of introductory literature on the thought of Charles Hartshorne—literature that might contribute to a “starter kit” so to speak in mastering Hartshorne’s massive oeuvre. The Mind of Charles Hartshorne: A Critical Examination by Donald Wayne Viney and George W. Shields, both former students of Hartshorne and experts in process philosophy themselves, have authored a welcome contribution to an introductory literature that will most certainly elevate awareness of Hartshorne’s importance to its rightful place alongside that of Whitehead. The book is successful in its aims of “giving a reasonably comprehensive account of Hartshorne’s philosophy with an eye of presenting his best arguments...” (the “correcting what we see as misunderstandings of his views appearing in the critical literature” part may have been best left out) and “updating Hartshorne scholarship” (viii). There are ten chapters in total, appendix essays, the aforementioned bibliography, endnotes, and name and subject indexes.The Preface situates the mind of Charles Hartshorne as spanning the twentieth century and engaging metaphysics even when it was unfashionable to do so. Hartshorne thought about a wide-ranging and diverse range of subjects in both philosophy and science, aesthetics, metaphysics, applied philosophy, and theology. He never questioned modern science or evolution and believed that while metaphysics and empirical science have different methods each ensures its own way to objectivity. One learns that Hartshorne’s process metaphysics is also called “neo-classical” philosophy or speculative philosophy. His thought “gave full weight to the dynamic, relational, processive temporal and creative, affective dimensions of the universe” (vi). Hartshorne was known as much for his “panentheism,” or view that God transcends nature but also may be found immanently within it, as he was for his critique of traditional or scholastic classical theology—especially in his logic of theism where he recreates a modal version of the ontological argument. [End Page 94]Chapter 1, “The Career and Personality of Charles Hartshorne,” discusses just that. What seemed most important to me was the discussion of Hartshorne’s formative background of reading novels and poetry by Emerson, Melville, or Camus as a way of intensely living, his studying under William Ernest Hocking, and his Sheldon Traveling Fellowship where he studied for a time with Husserl and read and reviewed Heidegger. Probably the most important biographical details are that Hartshorne was given the assignment of editing the Peirce papers along with Paul Weiss as a Research Fellow while at Harvard University and he also met and graded for Whitehead, who along with C.S. Peirce, would become the twin pillars of all his thinking as a “Peircean and Whiteheadian” (11). From Peirce, we learn that Hartshorne took “possibility is best conceived of as a continuum with no least member” and from Whitehead, “actuality is discrete and discontinuous (atomistic), composed of momentary flashes of experiences” (11). For Hartshorne process and relativity are metaphysically basic.Chapter 2 begins with Hartshorne’s idea that, “Nature comes to us as constituted by feelings, not as constituted by lifeless, insentient matter” (28). Reality has an affective tone in which there is a layered complexity of feeling and social relation. In other words, contra Locke or Hume, feeling is objectively part of an objective affective continuum and is not nominalistically “painted on bare sense impressions” (46). Such might be described as a doctrine of “panexperientialism”— “the view that the basic constituents of reality are flashes of experience” (46). Experience and feeling stretch in their continuity to meet the bounds of nature. Chapter two continues with a wonderful discussion of Hartshorne’s aesthetics: “beauty is the mean between extremes” (48).Chapter 3 provides a... (shrink)