The concept of a good life is usually assumed by philosophers to be equivalent to that of well-being, or perhaps of a morally good life, and hence has received little attention as a potentially distinct subject matter. In a series of experiments participants were presented with vignettes involving socially sanctioned wrongdoing toward outgroup members. Findings indicated that, for a large majority, judgments of bad character strongly reduce ascriptions of the good life, while having no impact at all on ascriptions of (...) happiness or well-being. Taken together with earlier findings these results suggest that the lay concept of a good life is clearly distinct from those of happiness, well-being, or morality, likely encompassing both morality and well-being, and perhaps other values as well: whatever matters in a person’s life. Importantly, morality appears not to play a fundamental role in either happiness or well-being among the folk. (shrink)

The focus of AI ethics has recently shifted towards the question of whether and how the use of AI technologies can promote sustainability. This new research question involves discerning the sustainability of AI itself and evaluating AI as a tool to achieve sustainable objectives. This article aims to examine the justifications that one might employ to advocate for promoting sustainable AI. Specifically, it concentrates on a dimension of often disregarded reasons — reasons of “meaning” or “meaningfulness” — as discussed more (...) recently in the “meaning in life” literature of analytic ethics. To proceed, the article first elucidates the working definitions of “sustainable AI” and “meaning in life”, while also setting the criteria for evaluating the plausibility of these reasons. Subsequently, it presents and scrutinises three arguments for the claim that one has reasons to care about sustainable AI from a perspective of meaning: the Meaning-conferring-action Argument, the Afterlife Argument, and the Harm Argument. In conclusion, this article asserts that only the Harm Argument presents a viable line of reasoning. However, it also outlines the presuppositions of this argument and the additional steps necessary to make it compelling. (shrink)

The paper argues that cognitive states of biological systems are inherently temporal. Three adequacy conditions for neuronal models of representation are vindicated: the compositionality of meaning, the compositionality of content, and the co-variation with content. Classicist and connectionist approaches are discussed and rejected. Based on recent neurobiological data, oscillatory networks are introduced as a third alternative. A mathematical description in a Hilbert space framework is developed. The states of this structure can be regarded as conceptual representations satisfying the three conditions.

Evidence on the coherence between emotion and facial expression in adults from laboratory experiments is reviewed. High coherence has been found in several studies between amusement and smiling; low to moderate coherence between other positive emotions and smiling. The available evidence for surprise and disgust suggests that these emotions are accompanied by their “traditional” facial expressions, and even components of these expressions, only in a minority of cases. Evidence concerning sadness, anger, and fear is very limited. For sadness, one study (...) suggests that high emotion–expression coherence may exist in specific situations, whereas for anger and fear, the evidence points to low coherence. Insufficient emotion intensity and inhibition of facial expressions seem unable to account for the observed dissociations between emotion and facial expression. (shrink)

The notion of reduction continues to play a key role in philosophy of mind and philosophy of cognitive science. Supporters of reductionism claim that psychological properties or explanations reduce to neural properties or explanations, while antireductionists claim that such reductions are not possible. In this book, I apply recent developments in philosophy of science, particularly the mechanistic explanation paradigm and the interventionist theory of causation, to reassess the traditional approaches to reduction in philosophy of mind. I then elaborate and defend (...) a pluralistic framework for philosophy of mind, and show how reductionist ideas can be incorporated into it. This leads to a novel synthesis of pluralism and reductionism that I call pluralistic physicalism. (shrink)

Most work addressing clinical workers' professional responsibilities concerns the norms of conduct within established professional–patient relationships, but such responsibilities may extend beyond the clinical context. We explore health workers' professional responsibilities in such “informal” encounters through the example of a doctor witnessing the misdiagnosis and mistreatment of a serious long-term condition in a television documentary, arguing that neither internalist approaches to professional responsibility nor externalist ones provide sufficiently clear guidance in such situations. We propose that a mix of both approaches, (...) emphasizing the noncomplacency and practical wisdom of virtue ethics, but grounding the normative authority of virtue in an external source, is able to engage with the health worker's responsibilities in such situations to the individual, the health care system, and the population at large. (shrink)

In his ambitious Schelling's Late Philosophy in Confrontation with Hegel, Peter Dews sets out to reconstruct the fundamental difference between Schelling and Hegel on the basis of two related claims. The first, historical claim is that both are dealing with ‘our current historical situation’, which Dews identifies with ‘modernity’ (Dews 2023: 10). The second, systematic claim is that their mature systematic thinking is characterized by what he calls throughout the book, with reference to a canonical paper by Dieter Henrich (Henrich (...) 1976), their respective Grundoperationen (‘basic operations’). He then walks the reader through major positions that Schelling developed over the course of his philosophical career in order to demonstrate how Schelling arrives at a specific genealogical account of modernity. On this account, modernity is understood as a formation of consciousness, which is supposedly not subject to the Hegelian type of dialectic which, according to Dews, is driven by a rationalism so comprehensive that the very notion of unwarranted constraints on the agency of human beings or of the oppressive shaping of their consciousness has no place. (Dews 2023: 16). (shrink)

Natur, Kultur und Technik – diese drei Begriffe konstituieren ein mannigfaltiges, komplexes Beziehungsgeflecht, in dessen Zentrum der Mensch und sein Handeln stehen. Wie wollen wir mit technologischen Innovationen und natürlichen Ressourcen umgehen? Lassen sich vermeintliche Gegensätze und Widersprüche auflösen? Und welche kulturelle Praxis kann uns dabei helfen? Fragen wie diese liegen an der Schnittstelle verschiedener Fachdisziplinen. Für die philosophische Reflexion sind sie daher in besonderer Weise fruchtbar. Die Autorinnen und Autoren dieses Bandes thematisieren unterschiedliche Aspekte des Dreigespanns Natur, Kultur und (...) Technik, darunter Bildung, Ernährung, Ethik, Evolution, Nachhaltigkeit, Normsetzung, Umweltmanagement und Willensfreiheit. Sie demonstrieren in ihren Beiträgen ein lebendiges interdisziplinäres Denken, wie es zum Selbstverständnis von APHIN, dem wissenschaftlichen und gemeinnützigen Arbeitskreis philosophierender Ingenieure und Naturwissenschaftler, gehört. (shrink)

Arithmetic is one of the foundations of our educational systems, but what exactly is it? Numbers are everywhere in our modern societies, but what is our knowledge of numbers really about? This book provides a philosophical account of arithmetical knowledge that is based on the state-of-the-art empirical studies of numerical cognition. It explains how humans have developed arithmetic from humble origins to its modern status as an almost universally possessed knowledge and skill. Central to the account is the realisation that, (...) while arithmetic is a human creation, the development of arithmetic is constrained by our evolutionarily developed cognitive architecture. Arithmetic is a sophisticated cultural development, but it is ultimately based on abilities with numerosities that we already possess as infants and share with many non-human animals. Therefore, arithmetic is not purely conventional, an arbitrary game akin to chess. Instead, arithmetic is deeply connected to our basic cognitive capacities. (shrink)

Humans face many game problems that are too large for the whole game tree to be used in their deliberations about action, and very little is understood about how they cope in such scenarios. However, when a human player’s chosen strategy is conditioned on her limited perspective of how the game might progress, then it should be possible to manipulate her into changing her planned move by mentioning a possible outcome of an alternative move. This paper demonstrates that human players (...) can be manipulated this way: in the game The Settlers of Catan, where negotiation is only a small part of what one must do to win the game thereby generating uncertainty about which outcomes to the negotiation are good and which are bad, the likelihood that a player accepts a trade offer that deviates from their declared preferred strategy is higher if it is accompanied by a description of what that trade offer can lead to. (shrink)

In our text, we follow the traces of a (1) paradox, (2) an ambivalence and (3) a dialectic that constitute digitalized public spheres and discuss the resulting tensions in discourse-ethical and political-theoretical perspectives using the blocking of Donald J. Trump’s Twitter account as an example. Starting from this, we determine the conditions of constitution of the digital public sphere and locate the dynamics of its development in the dialectical tension between private and public: The fact that the two other relations (...) of autonomy and heteronomy, intensification and polarization come to such a head is based on an insufficient socialization of all those means of production that produce the current digital public sphere. Using the example of Donald J. Trump’s recently suspended Twitter account and with a view to Habermas’s discourse ethics, we illustrate the extent to which Trump’s partly racist and conspiracy-theoretical post violates discourse ethics standards and is also highly problematic with regard to the political; however, banishment from a part of the digital public sphere is certainly not an act that should be incumbent on a private company. From this, we conclude that the normative potentials of digital public spheres can only be vol. (shrink)

The objective of explainable artificial intelligence systems designed for clinical decision support (XAI-CDSS) is to enhance physicians’ diagnostic performance, confidence and trust through the implementation of interpretable methods, thus providing for a superior epistemic positioning, a robust foundation for critical reflection and trustworthiness in times of heightened technological dependence. However, recent studies have revealed shortcomings in achieving these goals, questioning the widespread endorsement of XAI by medical professionals, ethicists and policy-makers alike. Based on a surgical use case, this article challenges (...) generalising calls for XAI-CDSS and emphasises the significance of time-sensitive clinical environments which frequently preclude adequate consideration of system explanations. Therefore, XAI-CDSS may not be able to meet expectations of augmenting clinical decision-making in specific circumstances where time is of the essence. This article, by employing a principled ethical balancing methodology, highlights several fallacies associated with XAI deployment in time-sensitive clinical situations and recommends XAI endorsement only where scientific evidence or stakeholder assessments do not contradict such deployment in specific target settings. (shrink)

Der Beitrag nähert sich dem Phänomen des Luxus und seiner sehr unterschiedlichen, in Teilen auch unvereinbaren Deutungen. Ziel ist es nicht, eine bestimmte Konzeption als die überlegene oder letztendlich richtige herauszustellen, sondern die Vielfalt der Zugänge aufzufächern. Diese umfassen dezidiert kulturkritische bis kulturpessimistische Deutungen, scharfe Kontrastierungen von Luxus und Askese oder kapitalismuskritische Einsätze. Näher betrachtet werden Peter Sloterdijks historisch-anthropologische Hypothese, der zufolge der auf eine sehr spezifische Weise verstandene Luxus eine zentrale Bedingung für die Menschwerdung des homo sapiens ist; das (...) u.a. von Thorstein Veblen vertretene soziologische Standardmodell, das Luxus funktional als Mittel zum Zweck fasst; Werner Sombarts Versuch, Luxus als Motor der Entwicklung kapitalistischer Gesellschaften zu rekonstruieren; schließlich Lambert Wiesings Phänomenologie des Luxus, die ihrerseits ganz eigene Wege beschreitet. (shrink)

Auf der Suche nach objektiver Wahrheit wurde in den Wissenschaften das Prinzip der Relationalitat popular: Gegenstandsbereiche gleich welcher Art werden als reine Beziehungsgeflechte beschrieben, nach dem Vorbild der Mathematik (diese Notwendigkeit entstand nicht zuletzt durch die Relativitatstheorie). Um Reales theoretisch zu erfassen, etwa um Dinge zahlen zu konnen, braucht man ein Identitatsprinzip fur Gegenstande. Das formal beste und einzig universelle ist die Identitat der Ununterscheidbaren. In Verbindung mit dem modernen Strukturalismus fuhrt dies aber zum geisterhaften Verschwinden realer Dinge in der (...) Beschreibung, wenn beziehungsmassig Symmetrie vorliegt. Objektive Beschreibungen erfassen also nur asymmetrische Strukturen korrekt. Manches Reale wird somit nicht objektiv erfasst.". (shrink)

Die von Kierkegaard zwischen Januar und September 1850 geführten NB-Journale enthalten autobiographische Notizen, philosophisch-theologische Reflexionen (etwa zur Hermeneutik) und Kommentare zu eigenen und fremden Werken (wobei das Spektrum der Lektüren von Hugo von St. Viktor bis zu Victor Hugo reicht). Die Texte ermöglichen so den Mitvollzug eines Denk- und Schreibprozesses, der nicht zuletzt Kierkegaards ständiger Selbstprüfung dient.

Perceptual dialectology is concerned with subjective, non-specialist, naive perspectives of German and the role they play in day-to-day social interaction. What do non-specialists in linguistics think about dialects and their speakers? What cognitive maps do they have of these dialects? What attitudes do they have towards the dialects and their speakers? Do non-specialists in linguistics associate particular features with the dialects or perceive them in a special way? The book contains the latest research findings on this subject.".

Ethik hat es weder nur mit Grundlagenfragen noch allein mit konkreten Anwendungsproblemen zu tun. Sie ist vielmehr zusatzlich durch vermittelnde Gliederungselemente und -systeme bestimmt. Dieser Thematik wurde bisher kaum die notwendige systematische Aufmerksamkeit geschenkt. Das Handbuch widmet sich den drei historisch wirkmachtigsten Gliederungsschlusseln angewandter Ethik: den Geboten (in Gestalt des Dekalogs), den (Kardinal-)Tugenden und den Pflichtenkreisen. Den Abschluss bildet die Frage, welche Gliederungssysteme den sich immer starker nach Sachbereichen differenzierenden ethischen Diskurs der Gegenwart bestimmen.

Ausgehend von historischen und sozialtheoretischen Befunden rekonstruieren wir zunächst in skizzenhafter Form, wie es zu einer Konstruktion von Behinderungen als Verkörperungen einer Mangelhaftigkeit anthropologischen Ausmaßes gekommen ist. In Anschluss hieran vertreten wir die These, dass Behinderung eine kulturelle Norm darstellt, die der Kultur selbst Grenzen setzt. Nicht der Mensch stellt das „eigentliche“ Mängelwesen dar, sondern die gesellschaftliche Kultur vorenthaltener oder eingeschränkter Teilhabe sowie die pädagogische Kultur mangelhafter Bildungsmaßnahmen. In ethischer Hinsicht begründen wir diese These von der Verantwortung gegenüber dem Anderen (...) her, dessen Andersheit wir als irreduzibel bzw. radikal fassen. Wir schließen mit einer kurzen Reflexion über die Frage, wie sich dieser veränderte Zugang zu Menschen mit Behinderungen bildungstheoretisch fassen lässt. (shrink)

Definition of the problem: In parallel with public and philosophical discussions, there is an ongoing debate about euthanasia in theological ethics. In this situation it is helpful to provide a systematic overview of the different arguments and judgements. Arguments: A short introduction is followed by a first part dealing with the definition of terms. The second and major part concerning normative arguments is subdivided into three steps: the level of principles, the more concrete level of actions and finally the level (...) of social consequences. The third part presents some reflections following the eudaimonistic ethical tradition (the ethics of a good life and death) focusing on the central question: how to find meaning in life when faced with suffering. Conclusion: It would be fruitful to intensify the ethical reflection both on the problems concerning the foundations of social life, especially the meaning of dignity, autonomy and inviolability of human life, and social consequences of a liberal practice of euthanasia. In this context ethicists are challenged to reflect on the different approaches to what is or can be a good life and a human death. (shrink)

Die neue deutsche Kierkegaard-Übersetzung beruht auf der dänischen Edition Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter, die seit 1994 im Søren Kierkegaard Forschungszentrum in Kopenhagen erstellt wird. Sie beginnt mit der Übersetzung der auf elf Bände angelegten Journale und Aufzeichnungen, aus denen bislang auf deutsch nur Auszüge auf einer philologisch teilweise unzuverlässigen Textgrundlage bekannt sind. Die dänische Ausgabe hat hier neue Maßstäbe in der Editionsphilologie gesetzt, indem etwa die von früheren Herausgebern aufgebrochenen ursprünglichen Texteinheiten wiederhergestellt und deren Eingriffe in die Manuskripte durch Verwendung von (...) Licht- und Elektronenmikroskopie von Kierkegaards eigenem Text unterschieden werden. Durch diese Technik lassen sich auch von Kierkegaard selbst unleserlich gemachte Eintragungen entziffern. Die räumliche Anordnung der Aufzeichnungen wird in einem aufwendigen zweispaltigen Druckbild annähernd wiedergegeben. Die einleitenden Editionsberichte geben Auskunft über Überlieferungsverhältnisse, Chronologie und Inhalt der Bände. Daneben bietet DSKE eine Fülle von Realkommentaren, die zusammen mit zahlreichen Abbildungen ein neues und tieferes Verständnis von Kierkegaards Gesamtwerk ermöglichen. (shrink)

The wide range of interpretations of aoristic and imperfective aspect in Ancient Greek cannot be attributed to unambiguous aspectual operators but suggest an analysis in terms of coercion in the spirit of de Swart (Nat Lang Linguist Theory 16:347–385, 1998). But since such an analysis cannot explain the Ancient Greek data, we combine Klein’s (Time in language, 1994) theory of tense and aspect with Egg’s (Flexible semantics for reinterpretation phenomena, 2005) aspectual coercion approach. Following Klein. (grammatical) aspect relates the runtime (...) of an eventuality and the current time of reference (topic time). We claim that these relations can trigger aspectual selection restrictions (and subsequent aspectual coercions) just like e.g. aspectually relevant temporal adverbials, and are furthermore susceptible to the Duration Principle of Egg (Flexible semantics for reinterpretation phenomena, 2005): Properties of eventualities must be compatible with respect to the duration they specify for an eventuality. The Duration Principle guides the selection between different feasible coercion operators in cases of aspectual coercion but can also trigger coercions of its own. We analyse the interpretations of aorist and imperfective as cases of coercion that avoid impending violations of aspectual selection restrictions or of the Duration Principle, which covers cases that are problematic for de Swart’s (Nat Lang Linguist Theory 16:347–385, 1998) analysis. (shrink)

This volume deals with the question of value-perception. It is discussed from different philosophical, psychiatric, theological, and anthropological perspectives. The leading hypothesis of all contributions is the realization that we live in a relational, dynamic world, in which we primarily percieve, and that to dissolve values from facts is fundamentally misleading, both in theory as in life."--Back cover.

In Spengler fand die Weimarer Republik früh politisch ihre Nemesis. Nationalkonservativ gesinnt, kritisierte er die Mängel der Demokratie und forderte das Engagement des Einzelnen im Sinne einer gesellschaftlichen Wertschöpfung. Als Intellektueller und Schriftsteller polarisiert er Öffentlichkeit und Medien im In- und Ausland bis in die Gegenwart hinein.

It is still a widespread assumption that metaphysics and ontology deal with roughly the same questions. They are supposed to be concerned with the fundamental nature of reality and to give an account of the meaning of 'existence' or 'being' in line with the broadest possible metaphysical assumptions. Against this, Markus Gabriel proposes a radical form of ontological pluralism that divorces ontology from metaphysics, understood as the most fundamental theory of absolutely everything. He argues that the concept of existence (...) is incompatible with the existence of the world and therefore proposes his innovative no-world-view. In the context of recent debates surrounding new realism and speculative realism, Gabriel also develops the outlines of a realist epistemological pluralism. His idea here is that there are different forms of knowledge that correspond to the plurality of fields of sense that must be acknowledged in order to avoid the trap of metaphysics. (shrink)

Recent research shows – somewhat astonishingly – that people are willing to ascribe moral blame to AI-driven systems when they cause harm [1]–[4]. In this paper, we explore the moral- psychological underpinnings of these findings. Our hypothesis was that the reason why people ascribe moral blame to AI systems is that they consider them capable of entertaining inculpating mental states (what is called mens rea in the law). To explore this hypothesis, we created a scenario in which an AI system (...) runs a risk of poisoning people by using a novel type of fertilizer. Manipulating the computational (or quasi-cognitive) abilities of the AI system in a between-subjects design, we tested whether people’s willingness to ascribe knowledge of a substantial risk of harm (i.e., recklessness) and blame to the AI system. Furthermore, we investigated whether the ascription of recklessness and blame to the AI system would influence the perceived blameworthiness of the system’s user (or owner). In an experiment with 347 participants, we found (i) that people are willing to ascribe blame to AI systems in contexts of recklessness, (ii) that blame ascriptions depend strongly on the willingness to attribute recklessness and (iii) that the latter, in turn, depends on the perceived “cognitive” capacities of the system. Furthermore, our results suggest (iv) that the higher the computational sophistication of the AI system, the more blame is shifted from the human user to the AI system. (shrink)

Most contemporary philosophers of action agree on the following claims. Firstly, the possibility of deviant or wayward causal chains poses a serious problem for the standard-causal theory of action. Secondly, we can distinguish between different kinds of deviant causal chains in the theory of action. In particular, we can distinguish between cases of basic and cases of consequential deviance. Thirdly, the problem of consequential deviance admits of a fairly straightforward solution, whereas the possibility of basic deviance constitutes a separate and (...) difficult problem that requires its own solution. I will argue that the problem of basic deviance is no more troublesome than the problem of consequential deviance, as a solution to the former is implicit in the standard solution to the latter. (shrink)

The recent controversy about misinformation has moved a question into the focus of the public eye that has occupied philosophers for decades: Under what conditions is it appropriate to assert a certain claim? When asserting a claim that x, must one know that x? Must x be true? Might it be normatively acceptable to assert whatever one believes? In the largest cross-cultural study to date (total n = 1,091) on the topic, findings from the United States, Germany, and Japan suggest (...) that, in order to claim that x, x need not be known, and it can be false. However, the data show, we do expect considerable epistemic responsibility on the speaker’s behalf: In order to appropriately assert a claim, the speaker must have good reasons to believe it. (shrink)

Are our beliefs justified only relatively to a specific culture or society? Is it possible to give reasons for the superiority of our scientific, epistemic methods? Markus Seidel sets out to answer these questions in his critique of epistemic relativism. Focusing on the work of the most prominent, explicitly relativist position in the sociology of scientific knowledge – so-called 'Edinburgh relativism' or the 'Strong Programme' –, he scrutinizes the key arguments for epistemic relativism from a philosophical perspective: underdetermination and (...) norm-circularity. His main negative result is that these arguments fall short of establishing epistemic relativism. -/- Despite arguing for epistemic absolutism, Seidel aims to provide an account of non-relative justification that nevertheless integrates the basic, correct intuition of the epistemic relativist. His main positive result is that the epistemic absolutist can very well accept the idea that people using different standards of justification can be equally justified in holding their beliefs: Rational disagreement, he maintains, is perfectly possible. -/- The book provides a detailed critique of relativism in the sociology of scientific knowledge and beyond. With its constructive part it aims at making conciliatory steps in a highly embittered discussion between sociology and philosophy of science. (shrink)