The Wrong Sort of Answer

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 228-233
Author(s):  
David Chambers
Keyword(s):  
Wrong Sort

scholarly journals Agency and the Successive Structure of Time-Consciousness

Erkenntnis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camden Alexander McKenna
Keyword(s):  
Temporal Structure ◽  
Basic Structure ◽  
The Self ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Epistemic Status ◽  
Mental Attitude ◽  
Time Consciousness ◽  
Possibility Space ◽  
The Right ◽  
Wrong Sort

AbstractI argue for constraining the nomological possibility space of temporal experiences and endorsing the Succession Requirement for agents. The Succession Requirement holds that the basic structure of temporal experience must be successive for agentive subjects, at least in worlds that are law-like in the same way as ours. I aim to establish the Succession Requirement by showing non-successively experiencing agents are not possible for three main reasons, namely that they (1) fail to stand in the right sort of causal relationship to the outcomes of their actions, (2) exhibit the wrong sort of epistemic status for agency, and (3) lack the requisite agentive mental attitude of intentionality. I conclude that agency is incompatible with non-successive experience and therefore we should view the successive temporal structure of experience as a necessary condition for agency. I also suggest that the Succession Requirement may actually extend beyond my main focus on agency, offering preliminary considerations in favor of seeing successive experience as a precondition for selfhood as well. The consequences of the Succession Requirement are wide-ranging, and I discuss various implications for our understanding of agency, the self, time consciousness, and theology, among other things.

TOO MUCH OF THE WRONG SORT OF CAPITAL FLOW:

2017 ◽  
pp. 149-160
Keyword(s):  
Capital Flow ◽  
Wrong Sort

TOO MUCH OF THE WRONG SORT OF DEBT

2017 ◽  
pp. 61-73
Keyword(s):  
Wrong Sort

Teaching machines or what?

1962 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 351-355
Author(s):  
Margaret S. Matchett
Keyword(s):  
Mathematics Teaching ◽  
Programmed Learning ◽  
Teaching Of Mathematics ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Traditional Patterns ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
Teaching Machines ◽  
Wrong Sort

The widespread concern with the teaching of mathematics is coupled, as perhaps such concern is bound to be, with criticisms of present practices from numerous points of view. It is variously held that the wrong mathematics is being taught in the wrong way by the wrong teachers to classes of the wrong sort. Proposals for altering this state of affairs are as diverse as the criticisms. Among those who would radically change the traditional patterns of mathematics teaching are the advocates of some form of programmed learning.

A 'crisis' in water? The wrong sort of privatisation

1998 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 25-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Wrong Sort

"Jews of the Wrong Sort": D.H. Lawrence and Race

1999 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-223
Author(s):  
Ronald Granofsky
Keyword(s):  
Wrong Sort

Otto's criticisms of Schleiermacher

2009 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. D. SMITH
Keyword(s):  
Secondary Response ◽  
Religious Consciousness ◽  
Religious Feeling ◽  
Absolute Dependence ◽  
Wrong Sort

AbstractAn assessment is made of Rudolf Otto's criticisms of Friedrich Schleiermacher's claim that religious feeling is to be interpreted as essentially involving a feeling of absolute dependence. Otto's criticisms are divided into two kinds. The first suggest that a feeling a dependence, even an absolute one, is the wrong sort of feeling to locate at the heart of religious consciousness. It is argued that this criticism is based on misinterpretations of Schleiermacher's view, which is in fact much closer to Otto's than the latter appreciated. The second kind of criticism suggests that the feeling of absolute dependence cannot play the foundational role assigned to it by Schleiermacher, since it is itself a secondary response. It is argued not only that Otto provides no justification for this criticism, but that Otto's own position is incoherent unless Schleiermacher's view is accepted.

scholarly journals Darwin's dilemma: the realities of the Cambrian ‘explosion’

2006 ◽  
Vol 361 (1470) ◽  
pp. 1069-1083 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Conway Morris
Keyword(s):  
Fossil Record ◽  
Current Work ◽  
Cambrian Explosion ◽  
Molecular Clocks ◽  
Burgess Shale ◽  
Cause And Effect ◽  
Evolutionary Event ◽  
History Of ◽  
Wrong Sort

The Cambrian ‘explosion’ is widely regarded as one of the fulcrum points in the history of life, yet its origins and causes remain deeply controversial. New data from the fossil record, especially of Burgess Shale-type Lagerstätten, indicate, however, that the assembly of bodyplans is not only largely a Cambrian phenomenon, but can already be documented in fair detail. This speaks against a much more ancient origin of the metazoans, and current work is doing much to reconcile the apparent discrepancies between the fossil record, including the Ediacaran assemblages of latest Neoproterozoic age and molecular ‘clocks’. Hypotheses to explain the Cambrian ‘explosion’ continue to be generated, but the recurrent confusion of cause and effect suggests that the wrong sort of question is being asked. Here I propose that despite its step-like function this evolutionary event is the inevitable consequence of Earth and biospheric change.

The Argument Defended

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Stoljar
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Problem ◽  
Philosophical Problem ◽  
Boundary Problems ◽  
Wrong Sort

This chapter defends the argument of Chapter 3, optimistic argument 1 (OA1), by focusing on eight objections: 1) the successor objection: is there not a successor problem to any solved philosophical problem? 2) The impossible denial objection: isn’t it impossible to deny the boundary theses constitutive of boundary problems? (3) the negativity objection: isn’t any progress made of an objectionably negative sort? (4) the wrong problem objection: isn’t any progress made on the wrong sort of problem? (5) the standards objection: isn’t the case for progress based on overly easy standards? (6) the triviality objection: couldn’t any problem be represented as a boundary problem? (7) the wrong people objection: isn’t any progress made due to scientists rather than philosophers? (8) the reasoning objection: doesn’t the reference to ‘reasonably many’ problems mean that the overall reasoning is no good?

The Future of Broadcasting

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Mundy ◽  
Esmée Schilte
Keyword(s):  
High Frequency ◽  
Short Wave ◽  
Very High Frequency ◽  
Long Wave ◽  
The Future ◽  
Vantage Points ◽  
The Waves ◽  
Very High ◽  
Wrong Sort ◽  
The Way

At the end of the last century, a dictionary could confidently define broadcasting as the transmission of a signal for television or radio. Within a decade, every element of that definition had changed. Transmission had branched out from the cumbersome business of placing masts bearing receivers and transmitters at the highest vantage points across the countryside. A signal was no longer confined to the band waves that the air could carry — invisible streams snaking their way across the landscape: Ultra High Frequency (UHF) carrying television, as long as the hills weren’t in the way; Very High Frequency (VHF or FM)carrying wonderful quality sound, as long as the same hills were not joined by chimneys, bodies, the wrong sort of cloud or stonework; Long Wave, unstoppable by anything except distance, it seemed,carrying cricket and the shipping forecast across Europe and far out to sea; Medium Wave(AM), the carrier of choice for hosts of daytime local music stations and great for listening in the car, but hopeless when night fell and the waves went bouncing around the ionosphere bringing martial music from Albania where the football commentary should have been; and Short Wave — the touchiest of the wave bands, that made catching the words as hard as catching fish, but finally gave national broadcasters a global reach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document