Interactions entail a tangled mix of emotional states that emerge between the people who are communicating. Being capable of comprehending these states help us to adapt to our partner’s needs enhancing the interaction. In the same fashion, we believe that robots capable of such skills would be better integrated in society. Hence, this paper tackles the internal state that focuses on the unfolding of any social exchange: Comfortability. It explores whether a humanoid robot can have an impact on humans Comfortability (...) and explores the way people might behave. To this aim, the iCub robot interviewed 29 non-HRI researchers for a real column of the IIT Opentalk online magazine. During the interview the robot complimented, ignored, interrupted, and insulted the participant with the intention of making them feel opposite Comfortability levels. The results concluded that a humanoid robot can affect people’s Comfortability highlighting that not everyone perceives, assimilates, and reacts to the same situations in the same way. The findings suggest that self-reports and Valence/Arousal estimations are not reliable measures to determine someone’s Comfortability and that external factors (e.g., attitude towards robots or the robot’s perception) might affect it. On top of that, a list of 28 visual features associated with low Comfortability levels is included, providing support to keep unraveling Comfortability in further studies. (shrink)

In their “social contextual view” of emotional mimicry, authors Hess and Fischer (2022) put forward emotional mimicry as a social regulator, considering it a social act, bound to certain affiliative contexts or goals. In this commentary, we argue that the core function of mimicry is to ease predicting conspecifics’ behaviours and the environment, and that as a consequence, this often smoothens social interactions. Accordingly, we make three main points. First, we argue that there is no good reason to believe that (...) the mimicry of negative expressions is fundamentally different than the mimicry of positive or ambiguous or autonomic expressions. Second, we give examples of empirical evidence that mimicry is not always a social act. Third, we show that mimicry has primary benefits for the mimicker. As such, we will briefly summarise and elaborate on the relevant findings in these respects, and propose a comparative, multi-method and ecologically valid approach which can explain the multifaceted character of the phenomenon. (shrink)

In this concluding reflection, the editors of this special issue reflect on the significance that Heidegger has had for French philosophy, precisely because of the creative and critical engagement of many of the original thinkers demonstrated above. It is not insignificant that Christian thinkers were drawn to Heidegger, seeing promise in his expansion of philosophical questioning, above all an enrichment of the idea of truth. However it is equally important to recognize that Heidegger’s native Christian roots were stripped of their (...) animating spirit, the question of God and the revelation of the Hebraic scriptures. It is thus notable that the criticisms from this conference originating from the side of faith frequently appeal to the Scriptures as they argue that there are truths which Heidegger himself simply does not seem to see. (shrink)

Organized by Richard Kearney and Joseph S. O’Leary, the 1979 Colloquium Heidegger et la question de Dieu was of critical importance for the development of phenomenology of religion in France. This special issue introduces the event and its ensuing publication to the English-speaking world. The editors’ historical and thematic contextualizing essay is followed by contributions from six leading philosophers. Richard Kearney sets the stage by updating his original foreword, while Jean-Yves Lacoste presents the central moments in the history of Heidegger’s (...) complicated relationship to Christian thinking. Paul Ricoeur’s “Introductory Note” delivers a well-known challenge to Heidegger in a piece whose brevity belies its impact. Finally, three participants of the 1979 Colloquium, Joseph S. O’Leary, Jean Greisch, and Jean-Luc Marion, reflect back on the significance of this event and its role in developing their own groundbreaking work. The special issue closes with a brief reflection on where we find ourselves in philosophy today. (shrink)

Religion has a serious impact on our world. Most people in the world consider themselves to be religious or those to whom religion has a significant impact. It also helps to determine the type of culture that forms political and economic views. In an individual dimension, religion affects human communication. Although it can be viewed as a means by which society controls its members, it is more than just a social and managerial phenomenon. Religion is a human attempt to achieve (...) spirituality. It is our attempt to gain and maintain the meaning of our destination in the world, which sometimes seems pointless. (shrink)