scholarly journals Reinventing Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong

Author(s):  
Michael Ridge

I offer new arguments for an unorthodox reading of J. L. Mackie’s Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong, one on which Mackie does not think all substantive moral claims are false, but allows that a proper subset of them are true. Further, those that are true should be understood in terms of a “hybrid theory”. The proposed reading is one on which Mackie is a conceptual pruner, arguing that we should prune away error-ridden moral claims but hold onto those already free of error. This reading is very different from the standard ones found in the literature. I build on recent work by Moberger and argue that this reading is better corroborated by close attention to the way in which Mackie argues at length that terms like “good” and “ought” are systematically context-sensitive, as well as by considerable additional textual evidence. This reading, however, faces an important challenge—to explain in what sense, if any, morality retains its “normativity” on the proposed reading. I argue that this challenge can be met, at least given some of Mackie’s further assumptions about the nature of rationality.

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 498-516
Author(s):  
Neil O'Sullivan

Of the hundreds of Greek common nouns and adjectives preserved in our MSS of Cicero, about three dozen are found written in the Latin alphabet as well as in the Greek. So we find, alongside συμπάθεια, also sympathia, and ἱστορικός as well as historicus. This sort of variation has been termed alphabet-switching; it has received little attention in connection with Cicero, even though it is relevant to subjects of current interest such as his bilingualism and the role of code-switching and loanwords in his works. Rather than addressing these issues directly, this discussion sets out information about the way in which the words are written in our surviving MSS of Cicero and takes further some recent work on the presentation of Greek words in Latin texts. It argues that, for the most part, coherent patterns and explanations can be found in the alphabetic choices exhibited by them, or at least by the earliest of them when there is conflict in the paradosis, and that this coherence is evidence for a generally reliable transmission of Cicero's original choices. While a lack of coherence might indicate unreliable transmission, or even an indifference on Cicero's part, a consistent pattern can only really be explained as an accurate record of coherent alphabet choice made by Cicero when writing Greek words.


2004 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 95-105
Author(s):  
Margaret Harvey

It is often forgotten that the medieval Church imposed public penance and reconciliation by law. The discipline was administered by the church courts, among which one of the most important, because it acted at local level, was that of the archdeacon. In the later Middle Ages and certainly by 1435, the priors of Durham were archdeacons in all the churches appropriated to the monastery. The priors had established their rights in Durham County by the early fourteenth century and in Northumberland slightly later. Although the origins of this peculiar jurisdiction were long ago unravelled by Barlow, there is no full account of how it worked in practice. Yet it is not difficult from the Durham archives to elicit a coherent account, with examples, of the way penance and ecclesiastical justice were administered from day to day in the Durham area in this period. The picture that emerges from these documents, though not in itself unusual, is nevertheless valuable and affords an extraordinary degree of detail which is missing from other places, where the evidence no longer exists. This study should complement the recent work by Larry Poos for Lincoln and Wisbech, drawing attention to an institution which would reward further research. It is only possible here to outline what the court did and how and why it was used.


1912 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 45-53
Author(s):  
J. A. Fuller-Maitland

There are no fewer than twelve complete works of Sebastian Bach to which the name Toccata is applied, and in nearly all cases the title seems to have come from the composer himself. It is always worth while to trace, if we can, the reasons which led a great man to choose one name rather than another for his creations; and in the case of Bach, I think we are justified in supposing that the names he gave were not purely arbitrary, but were chosen for some good reason. Certain modern composers, notably Brahms, have shown a strange indifference to the effect wrought by a well-chosen name for their music. His later works for pianoforte, often grouped under the heading of “Fantasias,” are divided into “Intermezzi” and “‘Capricci” according to whether they are slow movements or fast. But Bach, with his methodical habits, never showed that kind of almost perverse nonchalance in regard to the names his works were to bear. Remember the “Partitas,” and how each of the six introductory movements had a different designation from all the rest. As a matter of fact, there is not much indication of any inner variety of structure among the six, for all are preludial in general character, and it is evidently only a whim of the composer to give the six different titles. One of these, the sixth by the way, is styled “Toccata,” but has none of the distinguishing marks which, I hope to persuade you, Bach had in his mind when he used the title for independent compositions. Mr. Albert Schweitzer in his exceedingly valuable book on Bach (I am speaking of the recent work in two volumes, translated from the French by Mr. Ernest Newman) says that these Toccatas might just as well have been called Sonatas, or by any other name. Here I cannot agree with him, and the main object of my remarks on the present occasion.is to examine into the structure and style of the pieces, and see if we cannot discern some characteristic common to them all, and not shared by any other compositions of Bach.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-86
Author(s):  
Ogochukwu Constance Ngige ◽  
Oludele Awodele ◽  
Oluwatobi Balogun

Artificial intelligence (AI) has continued to disrupt the way tasks are being carried out, finding its way into almost all facets of human existence, and advancing the development of human society. The AI revolution has made huge and significant inroad into diverse industries like health, energy, transport, retail, advertising, et cetera. AI has been found to assist in carrying out tasks more quickly and efficiently too. Tasks which were hitherto difficult have been simplified significantly through the use of AI. Slow adoption in judiciary has however been reported, compared to other sectors. A lot of factors have been attributed to this, with AI bias being an issue of concern. Decisions emanating from courts have a significant impact on an individual’s private and professional life. It is thus imperative to identify and deal with bias in any judicial AI system in order to avoid delivering a prejudiced and inaccurate decision, thereby possibly intensifying the existing disparities in the society. This paper therefore surveys judicial artificial intelligence bias, paying close attention to types and sources of AI bias in judiciary. The paper also studies the trust-worthy AI, the qualities of a trust-worthy artificial intelligence system and the expectations of users as it is being deployed to the judiciary, and concludes with recommendations in order to mitigate the AI bias in Judiciary.


2021 ◽  
pp. 171-186
Author(s):  
Una Stojnić

This chapter draws theoretical conclusions and outlines directions for future developments. It summarizes the key theoretical and philosophical upshots of the account developed in the book and discusses further extensions of this framework. It discusses how the account can be applied to model context-sensitivity of situated utterances, in a way that can offer insights into puzzles concerning disagreement in discourse and communication under ignorance, which have plagued standard accounts of context and content. Further, it outlines the way the account is to be extended and applied to various types of context-sensitive items, including relational expressions, gradable adjectives, and domain restriction.


2020 ◽  
pp. 83-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasmina Jraissati

It is agreed that colour categorization is context sensitive, and that context plays a role in why colour categories are the way they are. Yet, the way context is supposed to influence colour categorization is never spelled out in the literature, the focus of which has mostly been to identify mechanisms at play in colour categorization, either perceptual and cognitive or, alternatively, linguistic. This chapter steers away from the wealthy categorization literature, and takes a different starting point by asking the preliminary question of how we categorize colour in our everyday interactions. The answer to this question makes important use of the notion of colour space and subspace. It leads to a unified framework that makes room for context sensitivity, while also accounting for colour categorization.


2020 ◽  
Vol 87 ◽  
pp. 169-180
Author(s):  
Julia Driver

AbstractIris Murdoch believes that unselfing is required for virtue, as it takes us out of our egoistic preoccupations, and connects us to the Good in the world. Love is a form of unselfing, illustrating how close attention to another, and the way they really are, again, takes us out of a narrow focus on the self. Though this view of love runs counter to a view that those in love often overlook flaws in their loved ones, or at least down-play them, I argue that it is compatible with Murdoch's view that love can overlook some flaws, ones that do not speak to the loved one's true self. Unselfing requires that we don't engage in selfish delusion, but a softer view of our loved ones is permitted.


2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kashmiri Stec ◽  
Mike Huiskes

Abstract Meaning-making is a situated, multimodal process. Although most research has focused on conceptualization in individuals, recent work points to the way dynamic processes can affect both conceptualization and expression in multiple individuals (e.g. Özyürek 2002; Fusaroli and Tylén 2012; Narayan 2012). In light of this, we investigate the co-construction of referential space in dyadic multimodal communication. Referential space is the association of a referent with a particular spatial location (McNeill and Pedelty 1995). We focus on the multimodal means by which dyads collaboratively co-construct or co-use referential space, and use it to answer questions related to its use and stability in communication. Whereas previous work has focused on an individual's use of referential space (So et al. 2009), our data suggest that spatial locations are salient to both speakers and addressees: referents assigned to particular spatial locations can be mutually accessible to both participants, as well as stable across longer stretches of discourse.


PMLA ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 135 (1) ◽  
pp. 152-158
Author(s):  
Howard Rambsy II

Let's Cut to the Chase: African American Scholars Occupy the Margins of this Expansive Realm Known as Digital Humanities. Do well-intentioned people want more diversity in DH? Sure, they do. Do black folks participate in DH? Of course, we do. But we've witnessed far too many DH panels with no African American participants or with only one. We've paid close attention to where the major funding for DH goes. Or, we've carefully taken note of who the authors of DH-related articles, books, and bibliographies are. We've studied these things closely enough to realize who resides in prime DH real estate and who doesn't. We could speak defiantly about our marginal status the way Toni Morrison once did when she quipped, “I'm gonna stay out here on the margin, and let the center look for me” (87). Yaasss!At the same time, though, it's worth thinking about some of the reasons why African American scholars dwell on the margins of the DH field. The processes by which we pursue graduate study and become participants in the field of African American literary studies account for why we are slow or reluctant to embrace DH. There's also the matter of segregation—our persistent exclusion from projects and opportunities that are ostensibly open to all but invariably involve primarily white scholars. Immersion in the field of African American literary studies and conversations with senior and emergent scholars reveal some of the reasons why we stand so far from the center of the DH community.


1950 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-113
Author(s):  
Norman H. Baynes

In these days the compilation of a bibliography of the publications of recent years is an exasperating occupation: if a book or journal has not been destroyed by bombing, it will probably be out of print, and it is not easy to understand why so many obstacles are set in the way of a free commerce in books. The result has been that students have tended to limit themselves to recording the works published in their own country. Take, for example, the field of Byzantine studies: A. Grabar has reported on ‘La Byzantinologie française pendant la Guerre 1940–45”, Byzantion, 17 (1944–5), 431–8; Wilhelm Ensslin has written a valuable critical report on German work on Byzantine history for the years 1939–47, Byzantion, 17 (1946–8), 261–302, cf. Klio 33 (1940), 349–68, 35 (1942), 164–77; in Byzantinoslavica there has appeared a series of bibliographical reports: Grabar for France in 9 (1947), 126–32, Ostrogorsky and Radolchich for Yugoslavia, ibid., 133–42; Lebedev for Russia (1936 to 1946), ibid., 97–112; M. Paulova for Czechoslovakia, ibid., 144–7; Runciman for Turkey, ibid., 143–4; A. Elian for Roumania, ibid., 393–405; Anguélov and Dimitrov for Bulgaria, ibid., 355–78; Moravcsik for Hungary, ibid., 379–92; Charanis for the United States, ibid., 342–54; for the British Isles Hussey and Baynes, ibid., 113ñ26, while Soloviev has written on Byzantine work published in Yugoslavia (1937 to 1947) in Byzantion 17 (1946–8), 303–10 and Delvoye has reported on Travaux récents sur les Monuments byzantins de la Grèce (1938ñ47), ibid., 229–60 and has studied L'Ecole Française d'Athènes et les Etudes Byzantines, R.E.B., 6 (1948), 86–93.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document