Justification

2017 ◽  
pp. 78-93
Keyword(s):  
General Question ◽  
General Criterion ◽  
Do So

At this stage, the author claims to have established that weapons designers are obliged to justify their work and do so with reference to the historical circumstances in which the products of this work are to be located. How are they to do this? This chapter addresses that general question. To this end, the idea of justification is elucidated, and then ways in which weapons designers can try to construct justifications are considered. Three candidates emerge to be examined in detail in the remaining chapters. However, a general criterion which any such justification must satisfy is identified, and in view of the difficulty, if not impossibility, of this being achieved, the author suggests that the prospects of justification seem remote.

Conceptions of the Self

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J. Ivanhoe
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
The Self ◽  
General Question ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
Do So

This chapter explores the general question of what it is to have a notion of the self and surveys a range of contemporary accounts of what the self might be. It challenges the widely yet uncritically held “hyper-individualist” conception of the self and argues that how one conceives of the self is strongly underdetermined by empirical evidence or conceptual constraints. It presents neo-Confucian conceptions of the self as an example of a traditional expression of the oneness hypothesis and shows how one can develop more relational and interdependent conceptions of the self, inspired by and partly modeled on such a view, that are not inconsistent with the best science of the day. It shows there is nothing incoherent or irrational in living in light of such conceptions, and the happy consequences to both self and other of choosing to live such a life offer good reasons to do so.

Rejoinder to Oppenheim's “Comment”

1971 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 1117-1118
Author(s):  
Donald VanDeVeer
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
General Criterion ◽  
A Posteriori ◽  
Cognitive Significance ◽  
The Road ◽  
Noam Chomsky ◽  
Carl Hempel ◽  
The One ◽  
Cognitive Meaning ◽  
Do So

I do not think that Professor Oppenheim and I are any nearer agreement, but perhaps the various forks in the road are clearer. I will try to be as fair, as clear, and to the point as Oppenheim has been. I will consider most, but not all, of his replies and will do so in the order he has followed.Oppenheim concedes that he is relying upon the principle that a sentence is cognitively significant if and only if (briefly) it is logically significant or empirically testable, and he claims that this principle is generally accepted by contemporary philosophers of science. I do not think it is generally accepted; indeed, on the page after the one quoted by Oppenheim, Carl Hempel states that he feels “less confident” that such a criterion can establish “sharp dividing lines” between “those sentences which do have cognitive significance and those which do not.” The proper estimate of the current situation is, I think, that whether a general criterion of “cognitive” meaning can be had, and if so, just what it is—are notoriously unsettled questions. If any estimate is correct, it is that among philosophers of language there is widespread suspicion of the neat distinctions between analytic/synthetic, a priori/a posteriori, cognitively meaningful/meaningless which prevailed prior to and during the 1950's. The work of W. V. O. Quine and Noam Chomsky has only muddied the waters further.

A Counter-Protest

1904 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 336-336
Author(s):  
A. Furtwängler
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Work ◽  
General Question ◽  
Honorary Membership ◽  
Bronze Statue ◽  
Do So

Dr. Charles Waldstein, in his article entitled ‘The Bronze Statue from Cerigotto and the Study of Style,’ which appeared in vol. xxiv, pp. 129–134 of this Journal, published a protest against the methods and results of my research.If I reply to Dr. Waldstein's statements by a counter-protest, I do so only in deference to the high scientific position occupied by this Journal, the organ of a Society which has conferred on me the distinction of honorary membership. As to the general question of Dr. Waldstein's scientific work, on which the value of his criticism depends, I have already expressed my opinion in my notice of his ‘Argive Heraeum’ written for the Berliner philologische Wochenschrift, July 1904.

INTRODUCTION

2000 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-245
Author(s):  
William R. Fowler
Keyword(s):  
Special Section ◽  
General Question ◽  
Central Mexico ◽  
The West ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Archaeological Materials ◽  
City States ◽  
City State ◽  
The City ◽  
Do So

This issue's special section is the first of a two-part series on recent research conducted at the Aztec city-state of Otumba and the neighboring polities of Tepeapulco to the east and Teotihuacan to the west. Otumba is an extremely important site for the archaeological study of the Late Aztec period because, as Thomas H. Charlton, Deborah L. Nichols, and Cynthia L. Otis Charlton point out in their introduction, it is one of the few places in the Valley of Mexico where late pre-Columbian remains are not obscured by post-Hispanic occupation. Research directed by Charlton at Otumba began in the early 1960s and continued in the late 1980s under the direction of Charlton and Nichols, followed by laboratory and technical analyses of the archaeological materials as well as ecological and ethnohistoric studies. Charlton and his collaborators have amassed a prodigious amount of data, which allows them to address a wide range of issues revolving around the general question of the processes involved in the origins and development of the city-state in central Mexico during the Early and Middle Postclassic periods. They do so within a theoretical context that engages the two most prevalent general models proposed to account for the rise of Postclassic city-states in central Mexico.

scholarly journals Statistical Variance and Transpositional Analysis: A Commentary on Plazak (2016)

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 97
Author(s):  
Kris Shaffer
Keyword(s):  
Absolute Pitch ◽  
General Question ◽  
Corpus Study ◽  
Follow Up Study ◽  
Pitch Level ◽  
Do So ◽  
Statistical Variance

Joseph Plazak argues for a more nuanced representation of the environment in which listeners encounter music ― in particular, questioning the assumption that listeners who engage with music repeatedly do so at the same absolute pitch level. While I agree with Plazak's problematization of this assumption, as well as his advocacy of further investigation into it, Plazak's corpus study has two key methodological flaws. However, a follow-up study in line with Plazak's research could both address these flaws and the more general question that Plazak raises, to the benefit of our understanding of a number of foundational cognitive issues.

Holding replication studies to mainstream standards of evidence

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duane T. Wegener ◽  
Leandre R. Fabrigar
Keyword(s):  
Replication Studies ◽  
Replication Research ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Do So

AbstractReplications can make theoretical contributions, but are unlikely to do so if their findings are open to multiple interpretations (especially violations of psychometric invariance). Thus, just as studies demonstrating novel effects are often expected to empirically evaluate competing explanations, replications should be held to similar standards. Unfortunately, this is rarely done, thereby undermining the value of replication research.

Electron Microscopy of a Herpesvirus Isolated from Marek's Disease in Duck and Chicken Embryo Fibroblast Cultures

1968 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 222-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyvan Nazerian
Keyword(s):  
Inclusion Bodies ◽  
Chicken Embryo Fibroblast ◽  
Marek's Disease ◽  
Marek’S Disease ◽  
Duck Embryo Fibroblast ◽  
Multinucleated Cells ◽  
Viral Particles ◽  
Infected Cells ◽  
And Control ◽  
Do So

A herpes-like virus has been isolated from duck embryo fibroblast (DEF) cultures inoculated with blood from Marek's disease (MD) infected birds. Cultures which contained this virus produced MD in susceptible chickens while virus negative cultures and control cultures failed to do so. This and other circumstantial evidence including similarities in properties of the virus and the MD agent implicate this virus in the etiology of MD.Histochemical studies demonstrated the presence of DNA-staining intranuclear inclusion bodies in polykarocytes in infected cultures. Distinct nucleo-plasmic aggregates were also seen in sections of similar multinucleated cells examined with the electron microscope. These aggregates are probably the same as the inclusion bodies seen with the light microscope. Naked viral particles were observed in the nucleus of infected cells within or on the edges of the nucleoplasmic aggregates. These particles measured 95-100mμ, in diameter and rarely escaped into the cytoplasm or nuclear vesicles by budding through the nuclear membrane (Fig. 1). The enveloped particles (Fig. 2) formed in this manner measured 150-170mμ in diameter and always had a densely stained nucleoid. The virus in supernatant fluids consisted of naked capsids with 162 hollow, cylindrical capsomeres (Fig. 3). Enveloped particles were not seen in such preparations.

Debates in Dysphagia Management: How Do You Use Evidence-Based Practice in Your Dysphagia Patient Care?

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-123
Author(s):  
Jeri A. Logemann
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Method ◽  
Do So

Evidence-based practice requires astute clinicians to blend our best clinical judgment with the best available external evidence and the patient's own values and expectations. Sometimes, we value one more than another during clinical decision-making, though it is never wise to do so, and sometimes other factors that we are unaware of produce unanticipated clinical outcomes. Sometimes, we feel very strongly about one clinical method or another, and hopefully that belief is founded in evidence. Some beliefs, however, are not founded in evidence. The sound use of evidence is the best way to navigate the debates within our field of practice.

The Persnickety Pervasiveness of Rating Enhancement in Personality Assessment

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Alicia A. Stachowski ◽  
John T. Kulas
Keyword(s):  
Response Bias ◽  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Current Paper ◽  
Psychological Measurement ◽  
Shared Sets ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
Original Target ◽  
Target Profile ◽  
Do So ◽  
Normative Influences

Abstract. The current paper explores whether self and observer reports of personality are properly viewed through a contrasting lens (as opposed to a more consonant framework). Specifically, we challenge the assumption that self-reports are more susceptible to certain forms of response bias than are informant reports. We do so by examining whether selves and observers are similarly or differently drawn to socially desirable and/or normative influences in personality assessment. Targets rated their own personalities and recommended another person to also do so along shared sets of items diversely contaminated with socially desirable content. The recommended informant then invited a third individual to additionally make ratings of the original target. Profile correlations, analysis of variances (ANOVAs), and simple patterns of agreement/disagreement consistently converged on a strong normative effect paralleling item desirability, with all three rater types exhibiting a tendency to reject socially undesirable descriptors while also endorsing desirable indicators. These tendencies were, in fact, more prominent for informants than they were for self-raters. In their entirety, our results provide a note of caution regarding the strategy of using non-self informants as a comforting comparative benchmark within psychological measurement applications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document