Professor Honderich presents his account of consciousness boldly and informally, and his presentation merits a response in similar terms. I conceive of this response as simply the first move in a conversation, in the course of which misunderstandings might be removed and, just possibly, criticisms sharpened, and positions modified. I want to concentrate on two questions that his very interesting paper prompts me to ask. The first question is; what exactly is the thesis about consciousness that Professor Honderich is proposing? (...) The second question is; what are the main reasons he has for his proposal and are they persuasive? Although there are two questions, I shall mix considerations of them together in a way which I hope it is possible to follow. (shrink)

This text gives business students a sense that problems of business policy can be resolved, in part, by ideas from philosophy, social theory, and law. It enables students to view ethical principles as a response to an evolving set of problems related to harmonizing values in a pluralistic society.

Fish proposes that we need to elucidate what 'disjunctivism' stands for, and he also proposes that it stands for the rejection of a principle about the nature of experience that he calls the decisiveness principle. The present paper argues that his first proposal is reasonable, but then argues, in Section II, that his positive suggestion does not draw the line between disjunctivism and non-disjunctivism in the right place. In Section III, it is argued that disjunctivism is a thesis about the (...) special nature of perceptual experience, and the thesis as elucidated here is then distinguished from and related to certain other ideas about perception, namely, direct realism and also McDowell's epistemological disjunctivism. (shrink)

There are a number of concepts of common-sense morality, what one must do, what one ought to do, the supererogatory, the minimum that duty allows, the morally optional and the morally indifferent, that philosophers have been hard-pressed to represent in an integrated conceptual framework. Indeed, many philosophers have despaired at the attempt and concluded that only a fragment of these concepts belong to that fundamental sphere of morality that is the central focus of the ethicist. For example, the traditional scheme, (...) with its triad of the obligatory, the forbidden and the permissible, pigeonholes all actions into three mutually exclusive and exhaustive classes: those which are obligatory, those which are forbidden and those which are optional. Hence, at best, it can represent exactly two of the six aforementioned concepts. For from the standpoint of this scheme, what one must do and what one ought to do can't be distinguished and hence they can't both be represented. Although the morally optional can be represented, the supererogatory, one of its subclasses, cannot be represented. Furthermore, the morally indifferent, another subclass of the optional--one which is obviously disjoint from the supererogatory--cannot be represented. Finally, the minimum that duty allows finds no distinctive place in the traditional scheme. Thus, on the face of it, the traditional scheme is radically incomplete. ;I present, motivate and defend a new conceptual scheme for common-sense morality in which these concepts are represented and systematically integrated. An intuitively motivated semantic framework underpinning this conceptual scheme is also presented. Such a scheme, along with the associated semantic framework, is motivated by reflecting on the supererogationist's objections to utilitarianism and to the traditional scheme. But in addition, a new integrated network of linguistic motivations for this conceptual scheme is uncovered, one which is completely independent of supererogationistic considerations. Hence, these two separate sources of evidence for the centrality of this new scheme to our pre-theoretic thinking corroborate one another--thus jointly boosting the evidence beyond the mere sum of their separate evidential values. (shrink)

In chapter 3 of Individuals, entitled ‘Persons’, Strawson argues against dualism and the no-ownership theory, and proposes instead that our concept of a person is a primitive concept. In this paper, it is argued that the basic questions that frame Strawson’s discussion, and some of his main arguments and claims, are dubious. A general diagnosis of the source of these problems is proposed. It is argued that despite these problems Strawson gives an accurate and very insightful description of the way (...) we think about ourselves, which should form the starting point for more speculative accounts of ourselves. (shrink)

The Pasadena game invented by Nover and Hájek raises a number of challenges for decision theory. The basic problem is how the game should be evaluated: it has no expectation and hence no well-defined value. Easwaran has shown that the Pasadena game does have a weak expectation, raising the possibility that we can eliminate the value gap by requiring agents to value gambles at their weak expectations. In this paper, I first prove a negative result: there are gambles like the (...) Pasadena game that do not even have a weak expectation. Hence, problematic value gaps remain even if decision theory is extended to take in weak expectations. There is a further challenge: the existence of a ‘value gap’ in the Pasadena game seems to make decision theory inapplicable in a number of cases where the right choice is obvious. The positive contribution of the paper is a theory of ‘relative utilities’, an extension of decision theory that lets us make comparative judgements even among gambles that have no well-defined value. (shrink)

The author first examines the usefulness of argument by analogy in moral discussions, the way argument by analogy works and three ways in which it can miscarry. He then uses this understanding of argument by analogy to see if the conceptionalists' position on the emergence of the value of life, on which rests their opposition to virtually all direct abortion, can be illumined and strengthened by analogies drawn from our other experiences of the emergence of value. The fact that no (...) such analogies can be located is presented as a significant, but not necessarily fatal obstacle to the understanding and the acceptance of the conceptionalist position. (shrink)

We should seek an ethic internal to marketing arising from marketing's societal function, rather than imposing some add-on ethic. This suggests that marketing should enhance the information and the freedom the potential customer brings to the market transaction. Defining and achieving this information and freedom is difficult, but marketers suggest that the market itself drives out major violators, a suggestion less persuasive concerning increasingly complex goods and services. Marketing also is tempted to appeal to our baser, darker side. These problems (...) are better addressed through self-regulation guided by a vision of advertising and business in the service of society, and by the marketer's own sense of integrity than through external regulation. (shrink)

The authors argue that the time is ripe for national and corporate leaders to move consciously towards the development of global ethics. This papers presents a model of global ethics, a rationale for the development of global ethics, and the implications of the model for research and practice.

What kind of thing are we? Paul Snowdon's answer is that we are animals, of a sort. This view--'animalism'--may seem obvious but on the whole philosophers have rejected it. Snowdon argues that animalism is a defensible way of thinking about ourselves. Its rejection rests on the tendency when doing philosophy to mistake fantasy for reality.

Ein eben erschienenes Buch „Der Typenbegriff im Lichte der neuen Logik“ (von C. Hempel und P. Oppenheim) wird zum Anlass genommen, methodologische Probleme der Verwendung von Typenbegriffen zu diskutieren. Drei verschiedene Arten von Attributen werden unterschieden : klassifizierende Merkmale, abstufbare Merkmale und Massgrössen. Abstuf- bare Begriffe können standardisiert werden. So entstandene Standards werden als Quasi-Typen bezeichnet. Echte Typen entstehen aus Merkmalkombinationen. Diese Kombinationen werden in einem Merkmalsraum vorgenommen mit Hilfe sogenannter Reduktionen. Drei Arten von Reduktionen werden unterschieden. Die für die (...) empirische Sozialforschung wichtigste Reduktion ist die pragmatische : sie fasst Klassen von Merkmalkombinationen so zusammen, wie es ein vorliegendes Erhebungsproblem erfordert. Im allgemeinen werden Typen intuitiv gebildet, und erst nachher wird die ihnen entsprechende Merkmalskombination aufgedeckt. Dieses Verfahren heisst Substruktion. An Beispielen wird seine Bedeutung für die Praxis dargestellt. Es wird betont, dass die typologischen Operationen (Reduktion, Substruktion und Transformationen) nichts darüber aussagen, was ein Typus ist und wie er gefunden wird. Sie weisen nur gewisse formale Eigenschaften auf, die allen typologischen Systemen gemeinsam sind.Un livre récemment paru „Le concept de type à la lumière de la nouvelle logique“ (de C. Hempel et P. Oppenheim : „Der Typenbegriff im Lichte der neuen Logik“ ) fournit Toccasion de discuter quelques-uns des problèmes que pose l'emploi des concepts de type. On distingue trois catégories de caractères : caractères classificatoires, caractères gradués et mesures de grandeur. Les concepts gradués peuvent être standardisés de telle manière que naissent des standards que l'on peut qualifier de quasi-types. Les types authentiques naissent par combinaison de caractères. Ces combinaisons s'opèrent dans un „lieu de caractères“ (Merkmalsraum) à l'aide d'un procédé nommé réduction. On distingue trois sortes de réduction. La réduction la plus importante pour la recherche sociale est la réduction pragmatique : elle embrasse des classes de caractères combinés en fonction des exigences d'une enquête donnée. En général, les types sont formés intuitivement, ensuite seulement on découvre la combinaison de caractères correspondante. Cette démarche s'appelle substruction. On en montre la signification pour la pratique dans une série d’exemples. On souligne que les opérations typologiques (réduction, substruction, transformations) ne nous permettent nullement de dire ce qu'est un type et comment il a été découvert. Elles indiquent seulement certains caractères formels qui sont communs à tous les systèmes typologiques. (shrink)