In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:506 BOOK REVIEWS Contingency and Freedom: Lectura I 39. By JOHN DUNS Scorus. Introduction, translation, and commentary by A. Vos, H. Veldhuis, A.H. Looman-Graaskamp, E. Dekker, and N. W. den Bok. Vol. 42 of The New Synthese Historical Library. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1994. Pp. viii+ 205. $97.00 (cloth). In this volume, the John Duns Scotus Research Group under the direction of Professor Antonie Vos at Utrecht University has provided scholars (...) of medieval philosophy and theology with an accurate and readable English translation of John Duns Scotus's earliest treatment of divine foreknowledge and future contingents. Interweaving the Latin text of Scotus's Lectura with their translation, the translators provide a very useful commentary on Scotus's text on the facing pages. The Lectura, as the introduction to the volume rightly notes, is the written version of Scotus's first lectures at Oxford on Peter Lombard's Sentences and, despite its early date, it reveals the extent to which the central ideas of Scotus's thought were already in place. Furthermore, although many of the Subtle Doctor's characteristic doctrines are mentioned herein, pride of place is given, both in the introduction and in the commentary accompanying the text, to Scotus's outstanding contribution to the medieval discussion of divine foreknowledge: his substantial revision of the modal notions of necessity, possibility, and contingency. The text translated in this volume is the entirety of Scotus's commentary on distinction thirty-nine ofthe first book of the Lombard's Sentences, the customary place in medieval theological commentaries for raising questions about the reality of future contingents, their knowability, and the compatibility of future contingency with divine foreknowledge. In his commentary, Scotus raises five questions in connection with distinction thirty-nine: 1) whether God has determinate knowledge of things according to every aspect of their existence, including the future; 2) whether God has infallible knowledge of things according to every aspect of their existence; 3) whether God has immutable knowledge; 4) whether God necessarily knows every changeable aspect of things; and 5) whether the contingency of things is compatible with God's knowledge. Prompted by these questions, Scotus reviews traditional explanations of God's infallibility and immutability as well as contemporary accounts of how the future is knowable. Regarding the former, Scotus first introduces an explanation, similar in its outlines to that found in St. Bonaventure's Commentary on the Sentences and St. Thomas's Summa theologiae, of the infallibility of God's knowledge b,ased on the preeminence and lucidity of the Divine Ideas. According to this explanation, the Divine Ideas are so comprehensive and so distinctive that they allow any mind aware of them to perceive the most intimate and subtle connections between things as well as the things themselves; yet the things known through the Ideas need not be necessary since the mode of the cognition does not necessarily reflect the mode of the BOOK REVIEWS 507 things known through it. Scotus's main objection to this explanation is that it does not adequately account for how God could know contingent things since the truth of contingent things is not, by definition, contained in the notions of the simple terms, to which the Divine Ideas are often likened, composing a contingent proposition; indeed, if the truth of contingent things were contained in the notions of the simple terms composing the propositions that express them, the truth of contingent things would not be contingent but necessary. The failure of this explanation is traceable, in Scotus's view, to an insufficient appreciation for the role of the Divine Will in the production of created things. As to the matter of how the future is knowable, the Subtle Doctor reviews Aquinas's theory that God's eternity is present to all times. Scotus rejects this theory on the ground that, among other difficulties, God cannot cause something new in the future since the future, qua present, is already laid out before God as something that is caused. Hence, unless the theory can accommodate the possibility of God causing something twice, God's causal role in the future is nugatory. In other words, the notion of the past and the future being somehow... (shrink)

An accurate analysis of the text shows that the small treatises have a logical structure and a style which is in all aspects unspinozistic. The main points of difference are : a formalistic interpretation of mathematics‚ the opposition between mathematics and physics‚ slavish cartesianism‚ the presence of numerous pleonasms‚ carelessness of expression‚ parade of learning‚ prolixity‚ attention for irrelevant qualities of authors quoted‚ educational purpose. Together with De Vet’s demonstration that the author of SRR and RK is still alive in (...) 1693 (see Tijdschr. v. Filosofie 45‚ 1983) these arguments force us‚ to consign Spinoza’s authorship‚ recently still defended by Petry a.o.‚ to the realm of fancy. (shrink)

We apply an online optimization process based on machine learning to the production of Bose-Einstein condensates. BEC is typically created with an exponential evaporation ramp that is optimal for ergodic dynamics with two-body s-wave interactions and no other loss rates, but likely sub-optimal for real experiments. Through repeated machine-controlled scientific experimentation and observations our ’learner’ discovers an optimal evaporation ramp for BEC production. In contrast to previous work, our learner uses a Gaussian process to develop a statistical model of the (...) relationship between the parameters it controls and the quality of the BEC produced. We demonstrate that the Gaussian process machine learner is able to discover a ramp that produces high quality BECs in 10 times fewer iterations than a previously used online optimization technique. Furthermore, we show the internal model developed can be used to determine which parameters are essential in BEC creation and which are unimportant, providing insight into the optimization process of the system. (shrink)

Aus bekannten Versuchsergebnissen und Naturbeobachtungen lÄsst sich ein Mechanismus der ontogenetischen Evolution und Involution ableiten, der mit den unten stehenden vier GrundsÄtzen gekennzeichnet werden kann. Es wird dabei als anerkannt vorausgesetzt, dass die Entwicklung der Lebewesen auf genotypischen Potenzen beruht, die nach Einwirkung bestimmter Umweltreize bestimmte phÄnotypische Effekte bewirken. Es wird als “phylogenetischer Auslesefaktor” einer genotypischen Potenz derjenige Faktor der Äusseren oder inneren Umwelt bezeichnet, an den in der Phylogenese die Anpassung erfolgt ist. Der phylogenetische Auslesefaktor einer genotypischen Potenz wird (...) in der Ontogenese als genaktivierender Manifestationsreiz für den entsprechenden phÄnotypischen Effekt rekapituliert. Nach dem Ende des genaktivierenden Manifestationsreizes nimmt der von diesem Reiz abhÄngige Aktivierungszustand der genotypischen Potenz in charakteristischer Weise ab, und entsprechend bildet sich der von diesem Genaktivierungszustand abhÄngige phÄnotypische Effekt zurück; infolgedessen wird der phÄnotypische Effekt je nach der verschiedenen ReizabhÄngigkeit des Genaktivierungszustandes manifest als reizabhÄngige Modifikation, als vorübergehend reizunabhÄngige Dauermodifikation oder als fortgepflanzte vorübergehend reizunabhÄngige Dauermodifikation. Bei der ontogenetischen Evolution ist im Bereich der inneren Umwelt der phÄnotypische Effekt einer Entwicklungsstufe als rekapitulierter phylogenetischer Auslesefaktor der genotypischen Potenz der nÄchsten Entwicklungsstufe auch der genaktivierende Manifestationsreiz für den phÄnotypischen Effekt der nÄchsten Entwicklungsstufe . Bei Beendigung der ontogenetischen Evolution mit PhÄn x ist im Bereich der inneren Umwelt PhÄn x−1 der phylogenetische Auslesefaktor für Gen x−1 und wird als der genaktivierende Manifestationsreiz für PhÄn x rekapituliert. Mit der Manifestation von PhÄn x verschwindet PhÄn x−1 und damit auch der von ihm ausgehende genaktivierende Manifestationsreiz für PhÄn x ; infolgedessen beginnt die ontogenetische Involution von PhÄn x nach Massgabe der StabilitÄt des Aktivierungsgrades von Gen x−1.The development of living individuals is due to genotypical potencies, which lead to certain phenotypical effects after the influence of certain stimuli of the environment. The factor of the exogenous or endogenous environment to which adaptation has occurred during the phylogenesis is defined as the phylogenetical selectionfactor.A mechanism of ontogenetical evolution and involution is deduced from known experimental results and observations. This mechanism can be characterized by the following four main principles. The phylogenetical selectionfactor of a genotypical potency is recapitulated during ontogenesis as the gene-activating stimulus for the manifestation of the corresponding phenotypical effect. After the cessation of the gene-activating stimulus the activation of the genotypical potency declines in a characteristic manner. And according to it the phenotypical effect being dependent on this condition of gene-activation is involuted. This means that a phenotypical effect is manifest as stimulus dependent modification, as a temporary stimulus independent modification or as a temporary stimulus independent modification which is transmitted from generation to generation. During the ontogenetical evolution the phenotypical effect in a certain step of the development in the sphere of the endogenous environment is the manifestation stimulus activating the gene for the phenotypical effect of the following developmental step , since Phene n or Substrate n is the recapitulated selectionfactor for the genotypical potency of this step . When the ontogenetical evolution ends with the appearance of Phene n , Phene x−1 is the phylogenetical selectionfactor for Gene x−1 in the endogenous environment and is recapitulated as the gene-activating stimulus for the manifestation of Phene x . By the manifestation of Phene x Phene x−1 vanishes and thus the manifestationstimulus for Phene x . Consequently the ontogenetical involution of Phene x begins according to the degree of instability of the activated condition of Gene x−1. (shrink)

Claude Bernard a réservé à la contre-épreuve un rôle fondamental dans le raisonnement expérimental. Il a soutenu que la seule preuve qu'un phénomène joue le rôle de cause par rapport à un autre, c'est qu'en supprimant le premier on fait cesser le second. Cependant, la contre-épreuve expérimentale n'en reste pas moins une expérimentation; la structure logique des deux, preuve et contre-épreuve, est la même. Or, si la preuve exige la contre-épreuve, la dernière à son tour exige la première comme sa (...) contre-épreuve. On arrive ainsi à une suite infinie d'expérimentations dont chaque membre se rapporte à l'autre comme soit à sa preuve, soit à sa contre-épreuve. Cependant, ce travail expérimental, qui s'arrête dans sa réalité à un moment choisi, il est vrai, plus ou moins arbitrairement, se poursuit dans la pensée de l'expérimentateur passant ainsi des résultats individuels à leur généralisation. Au sein du raisonnement expérimental il y a donc un raisonnement analogique et c'est le „sentiment du déterminisme“ et la pensée causale qu'il implique plutôt que le nombre des preuves et contre-épreuves qui surgissent comme les seuls critères de la vérité expérimentale.Claude Bernard ascribed to the counter-proof a fundamental role in his experimental method and the reasoning on which the method rests. He saw the only proof of the causal nature of a given phenomenon in the fact that the effect fails to appear after elimination of the alleged cause. However, the experimental counter-proof still remains an experiment; the logical structure of both proof and counter-proof, is the same; it is true that the proof calls for a counter-proof; but the latter in its turn calls for the proof as for its counter-proof. One thus arives at an infinite chain of experiments, each link referring to each other as to its proof or counter-proof. This experimental work, nevertheless, comes to its end, though at a moment still chosen more or less arbitrarily; the work continues however in the thought of the experimenter, thus passing from individual results to generalization. There is embodied in the experimental method and in experimental thought a reasoning by analogy. The “sense of determinism” and the causal thought on which this sense rests rather than the number of proofs and counter-proofs emerge as the ultimate criteria of experimental truth.Claude Bernard hat dem experimentellen Gegenbeweis eine hervorragende Stellung in seiner experimentellen Methode und dem ihr zugrundeliegenden Denkvorgang eingeräumt. Seiner Überzeugung nach ist der einzige Beweis der ursächlichen Natur eines Faktors darin zu suchen, dass die Wirkung ausbleibt, wenn man den als Ursache angeschuldigten Faktor ausschaltet. Indessen ist auch der experimentelle Gegenbeweis nichts anderes und nicht mehr als ein Experiment. Beide, Experiment und Gegenexperiment, haben die gleiche logische Struktur. Wenn demnach jedes Experiment den Gegenbeweis verlangt, so bedarf auch der Gegenbeweis seinerseits des Beweises als seines Gegenbeweises. So gelangt man schliesslich zu einer unendlichen Kette von Experimenten, deren jedes Glied sich zu jedem anderen wie zu seinem Beweis oder Gegenbeweis verhält. Diese experimentelle Arbeit wird aber in einem mehr oder weniger willkürlich gewählten Augenblick abgebrochen; sie wird indessen in Gedanken vom Experimentalforscher fortgesetzt, der auf diese Weise schliesslich von den Einzelresultaten zu ihrer Verallgemeinerung schreitet. Innerhalb der experimentellen Methode trifft man also auf ein Denken nach Analogie. DerBernard-sche „Kausal sinn“ und das diesem zurgrundeliegende kausale Denken, nicht aber die Anzahl der experimentellen Beweise und Gegenbeweise sind es, welche die letzten Kriterien der experimentellen Wahrheit enthalten. (shrink)

J. Wackernagel and E. Löfstedt have both drawn attention to Pindar's ‘Neigung, das Futurum zu setzen bei Verben, die eine jetzt vorhandene, aber auf zukünftiges Tun abzielende Willensrichtung ausdrücken’. But they regarded this as a purely grammatical phenomenon, and did not note that the Pindaric use is practically limited to statements of the type, ‘I shall sing, glorify, testify, etc.’. It was E. Bundy who first drew attention to the conventional nature of these futures and so ended years of misunderstanding. (...) So, for example, Wilamowitz considered that P. 1.75 represented an optative with while Slotty, following Breyer, thought that N. 9. 10 was an aorist subjunctive ‘auf Grund des pindarischen Sprachgebrauches’! Postgate, following Gildersleeve, thought that 0. 8. 57 represented though the contrary would appear to be more true, cf. 0. 13. 11: and also Hoekstra sees in the future ‘den Nebenbegriff des Konnens’. (shrink)

The source of all being cannot be envious. This is one of the basic ideas of Ancient philosophy and one of the central aspects of what A. Lovejoy has called the principle of plenitude. We may ask what kind of being is supposed to originate because of that most original generosity. This article presents some answers to this question – highlights in the history of the ideas from Ancient to Medieval thought – in order to give a close-up of the (...) last one. In Ancient philosophy ‘the other’ generously brought into being is the cosmos emanating from the One or Good. This emanation is as full or complete as it can be . The patres could not accept this ‘layered’ conception of the communication of being unless the crucial difference between God and world was taken into account. They looked for the other on two levels: the Son generated by the Father, the ‘fountain of the godhead’ and the ultimate source of all being, and the universe created by God and culminating in man made in God’s image. Moreover, the communication of being was increasingly considered as a communication not just of goodness , but of love . The fulfilment of this communication – the optimal realisation of the principle of plenitude – was located in the relations of the divine persons or in the creation and glorification of non-divine persons . There also seems to be a unique ‘in between’: Jesus Christ, God made man, supreme divine selfcommunication in a created being. The well-known Scotian notion of the absolute predestination of Christ claims that God, because of his love, wants to be loved. Out of this love, which is God’s most original motive, God was incarnated. So Scotus assumes that the incarnation – human nature taken into the unity of person with the divine nature – is the culmination of divine goodness communicating itself. Plenitude is attained in and through Christ. Thus the question is raised where the other as the final object of supreme generosity can be found: in the Trinity, in Jesus, or in creation ? The differences in view appear to depend on the respective analyses of the precise nature of the other required for the full communication of love . These analyses can be focussed on the concept of person . In this concept various aspects appear to be involved: independence, incommunicability , mindgiftedness , being-a-subject, and necessary existence. The body of this article is committed to the question whether Christ, or Christ’s human nature, can be the other intended by God’s love. I analyze Scotus’ christological concept of person . I will show, first, that in order to be able to respond to divine love the other has to be an individual, non-necessarily existing subject which is capable of knowing and willing . Second, I will investigate Scotus’ conception by asking, whether or not these aspects can, or cannot, be identified with various aspects involved in the specific constitution of person and nature in Christ. This investigation is grouped in two sets of issues: independence and some presuppositions of loving in response, and the neces-sity of the incarnation. My conclusion is that the other – a being having the aspects just mentioned – cannot be found inChrist . Moreover, since I think, like Scotus, that the other cannot be found in God either, the other must be located in creation. Consequently, the incarnation must be God’s well-chosen selfcommunication tothat human other: as an non-necessary offer of love capable of fulfilling man by calling for his non-necessary response. In this way the perspective of plenitude is not cancelled, but the communication of being motivated by generosity cannot fully be realised unless both divine and human freedom are involved. (shrink)

Augustine's analysis and solution of the classical problem of free will and foreknowledge - as given in De libero arbitrio III 4-10 and De civitate Dei V 8-10 - stand out in their brevity and simplicity. His texts carry formulations which show an astonishing clarity not only in what they explicitly say, but also in what is implicitly said in them. Most recent discussions of Augustine's view, however, are unclear about this clarity, at least partly because they tend to a (...) deterministic position; they probably sense, unwillingly, that Augustine intends to rule that position out. In the discussions on the problem a dilemma seems to be unavoidable; one can only cling to one of its horns. Either God knows the future and then human volitions cannot be free , or the human will is free but then God cannot know its future volitions . In his analysis of this dilemma Augustine shows that both positions already presuppose an insight which cannot be taken for granted. The certainty of God's foreknowledge seems to entail that the object of his foreknowledge is necessary, but on close examination it does not. For it is sufficient to state: It is necessary that, if there is an object of God's foreknowledge, God knows it. Augustine's central sentences carefully formulate this kind of - implicative - necessity involved in prescience. Because of this 'necessity', he can consistently maintain that it is on the power of the will to sin or not to sin and yet, if a man will sin, God will know it, or if that man will not sin, God will know that. Thus the object of God's knowledge can be contingent, as in the case of future volitions, and still His foreknowledge can be certain. A deterministic interpretation of Augustine's analysis can be substantiated by the idea that God foreknows what the will itself will do, whereas his certainty is based on the supposition that the will is a natural cause of its volitions - just like the other causes in the cosmos. Although Augustine does not deal with this more specific aspect - he does not need to, because he showed that the certainty of God's knowledge can be guaranteed independent of the status of its object - we can conclude from his formulations that the will, as a cause of volitions, differs from a natural cause not only by producing them itself, but also by producing them in such a way that it can not-produce them. (shrink)

Dette kapitel fokuserer på ’etik og patientinddragelse’, men søger med afsæt i devisen ‘sapere aude’ også at skabe interesse for filosofi og etik blandt sygeplejestuderende. Kapitlet er en opfordring til sygeplejestuderende om at betjene sig af egen forstand og finde mod til at filosofere over problematikker i forbindelse med patientinddragelse frem for at falde tilbage i umyndighedens bekvemmelighed og vente på at andre træder til. Kapitlet starter med at se nærmere på, hvordan patientinddragelse italesættes i vor tid efterfulgt af en (...) kort eksposition af to af oplysningstidens vigtigste libera- le filosoffer, herunder pligtetikeren Immanuel Kant og nytteetikeren John Stuart Mill, hvis syn på henholdsvis autonomi og frihed influerer debatten om patientinddragelse. Efterfølgende præsenteres og diskuteres to eksempler, hvor patientinddragelse og etik er i rampelyset. Mere specifikt rettes fokus på 1) etik, patientinddragelse og den psykiatriske patient og 2) etik, patientinddragelse og unge mennesker. Eksemplerne er udvalgte med henblik på at belyse, hvad der kan komme på spil i sundhedsfaglige situationer udspændt mellem individuel frihed, herunder også ideen om autonomi; sygehusvæsenet, inklusive personale, som autoritær vi- dens-institution/aktør og det etiske, herunder ideen om ’det gode’ eller efterstræbelsesværdige. Afslutningsvis argumenteres der for, at sundhedsarbejdere med blik for etik og patientinddragelse kan udgøre en positiv kraft for den inddragede patient, men at det kræver, at denne vover at være vis. Afsnit: Resume Patientinddragelse i vor tid Autonomi, frihed og patientinddragelse Etik, patientinddragelse og den psykiatriske patient Etik, patientinddragelse og den unge Afslutning . (shrink)

Background: The importance of respecting patients and participants in clinical research is widely recognised. However, what it means to respect persons beyond recognising them as autonomous is unclear, and little is known about what patients find to be respectful. Objective: To understand patients’ conceptions of respect and what it means to be respected by medical providers. Design: Qualitative study from an academic cardiology clinic, using semistructured interviews with 18 survivors of sudden cardiac death. Results: Patients believed that respecting persons incorporates (...) the following major elements: empathy, care, autonomy, provision of information, recognition of individuality, dignity and attention to needs. Conclusions: Making patients feel respected, or valued as a person, is a multi-faceted task that involves more than recognising autonomy. While patients’ views of respect do not determine what respect means, these patients expressed important intuitions that may be of substantial conceptual relevance. (shrink)

Multiculturalism is an imprecise concept with a variety of different meanings, but no matter how multiculturalism is defined, nearly all of its advocates share the common objective of reconstructing Western society in order to protect minority cultural groups from intolerance.1 The multiculturalist coalition has been highly successful in this undertaking because members of the majority culture generally accept the moral diagnosis that their traditional way of life is backward, irrational, and inherently prone to various forms of prejudice. Adopting multiculturalism as (...) official state policy has thus significantly increased the moral authority of the managerial government to therapeutically control and alter…. (shrink)