The temporality of intentions and actions in situations of social interaction can sometimes be paradoxical. I argue that in these situations it may sometimes be possible to conceive of individual acts that can, in a strong sense, be intended retroactively. This could happen when the relational patterns in social interaction literally alter the virtual structure of a participant's past corporeal intentions resulting in an odd experience of having intended something all along without knowing it. I propose that this possibility should (...) be interpreted as more than just a narrowly epistemic phenomenon. Examining this claim involves clarifying the enactive perspective on intentionality, which I do here. The enactive approach rejects the model of a causal relation between intention and action for one of an intrinsic qualitative relation between the two as facets of sense-making. I develop this idea and compare it with Merleau-Ponty's Fundierung model of the mutual relation between corporeal and reflexive intentionality to show that co-regulated moves/affections during social interaction may modulate both arcs of this relation, creating the possibility of a re-signification that alters not the actuality but the virtual tendencies that preceded the social act. (shrink)

A growing body of literature documents the important role played by moral outrage or moral anger in stakeholders’ reactions to cases of corporate social irresponsibility. Existing research focuses more on the consequences of moral outrage than a systematic analysis of how appraisals of irresponsible corporate behavior can lead to this emotional experience. In this paper, we develop and test, in two field studies, an extended model of moral outrage that identifies the cognitions that lead to, and are associated with, this (...) emotional experience. This research contributes to the existing literature on reactions to corporate social irresponsibility by explaining how observers’ evaluation of irresponsible corporate behavior leads to reactions of moral anger. The paper also helps clarify the difference between moral outrage and other types of anger and offers useful insights for managers who have to confront public outrage following cases of irresponsible corporate behavior. Finally, the analysis of the causes of stakeholders’ anger at irresponsible corporations opens important avenues for future research that are presented in the paper. (shrink)

There is a place in the Hegelian system where the notion of Objectivity is explicitly articulated. One entire section in the Science of Logic is entitled ‘Objectivity’, almost suggesting that that would be the appropriate place to unveil the question of the notion of objective thought. However, precisely that section, its content and its presence have always represented a problematic knot in the Hegelian logical system. The problem is two-fold: on the one hand, the categories of this section (Mechanism, Chemism (...) and Teleology) seem to refer to the realm of the Realphilosophie, and they seem not to respect the purity of logical thought. This makes the connection between such section and the remaining Hegelian system uncertain and questionable. On the other hand, the Objectivity section does not seem to present any character which determines its logical advancement over Subjectivity. This contribution focuses on the interpretation of the origin of this section and on the logical meaning that “objectivity” has in the Logic. This paper explores the roots of the problem attempting to undo a few of its theoretical knots via a particular interpretation of the Syllogism. The underlying thesis in this analysis is in fact that the section on Objectivity originates precisely in the internal dynamics of the Syllogism. The forms of self-reflection in the Syllogism justify the presence of the section Objectivity. In this context, Objectivity does not present itself with the characters of immediacy and externality that are normally attributed to it, but it expresses the result of the syllogistic process. The second fundamental aspect of this short analysis is that Mechanism, Chemism and Teleology as categories are not directly exported from the Realphilosophie. They are rather organizational forms in the relationships among concepts. Thus, they don’t figure as abstractions from the proper structures of nature and spirit. Rather, they express the relational structures reached by thought once the syllogism has been able to manifest a yet occult rational capacity of thought. (shrink)

We associate with any abstract logic L a family F(L) consisting, intuitively, of the limit ultrapowers which are complete extensions in the sense of L. For every countably generated [ω, ω]-compact logic L, our main applications are: (i) Elementary classes of L can be characterized in terms of $\equiv_L$ only. (ii) If U and B are countable models of a countable superstable theory without the finite cover property, then $\mathfrak{U} \equiv_L \mathfrak{B}$ . (iii) There exists the "largest" logic M such (...) that complete extensions in the sense of M and L are the same; moreover M is still [ω,ω]-compact and satisfies an interpolation property stronger than unrelativized ▵-closure. (iv) If L = L ωω(Q α ) , then $\operatorname{cf}(\omega_\alpha) > \omega$ and $\lambda^\omega for all $\lambda . We also prove that no proper extension of L ωω generated by monadic quantifiers is compact. This strengthens a theorem of Makowsky and Shelah. We solve a problem of Makowsky concerning L κλ -compact cardinals. We partially solve a problem of Makowsky and Shelah concerning the union of compact logics. (shrink)

In this article, I argue that the interpretation of Kant's a priori in Marburg neo-Kantianism involved a historiographical problem concerning the Platonic interpretation of the history of exact sci...

1. Filosofia in età antica -- 2. Filosofia in età medievale e rinascimentale -- 3. Filosofia in età moderna -- 4. Filosofia in età contemporanea.

Merging beliefs depends on the relative reliability of their sources. When this is information is absent, assuming equal reliability is unwarranted. The solution proposed in this article is that every reliability profile is possible, and only what holds according to all of them is accepted. Alternatively, one source is completely reliable, but which one is not specified. These two cases motivate two existing forms of merging: maxcons-based merging and disjunctive merging.

A consistency default is a propositional inference rule that asserts the consistency of a formula in its consequence. Consistency defaults allow for a straightforward encoding of domains in which it is explicitely known when something is possible. The logic of consistency defaults can be seen as a variant of cumulative default logic or as a generalization of justified default logic; it is also able to simulate Reiter default logic in the seminormal case. A semantical characterization of consistency defaults in terms (...) of processes and in terms of a fixpoint equation is given, as well as a normal form. (shrink)