Gradient Legal Personhood for AI Systems—Painting Continental Legal Shapes Made to Fit Analytical Molds

What I propose in the present article are some theoretical adjustments for a more coherent answer to the legal “status question” of artificial intelligence (AI) systems. I arrive at those by using the new “bundle theory” of legal personhood, together with its accompanying conceptual and methodological apparatus as a lens through which to look at a recent such answer inspired from German civil law and named Teilrechtsfähigkeit or partial legal capacity. I argue that partial legal capacity is a possible solution to the status question only if we understand legal personhood according to this new theory. Conversely, I argue that if indeed Teilrechtsfähigkeit lends itself to being applied to AI systems, then such flexibility further confirms the bundle theory paradigm shift. I then go on to further analyze and exploit the particularities of Teilrechtsfähigkeit to inform a reflection on the appropriate conceptual shape of legal personhood and suggest a slightly different answer from the bundle theory framework in what I term a “gradient theory” of legal personhood.

Panprotopsychism Instantiated

The problem of many-over-one asks how it can be that many properties are ever instantiated by one object. A putative solution might, for example, claim that the properties are appropriately bundled, or somehow tied to a bare particular. In this essay, the author argues that, surprisingly, an extant candidate solution to this problem is at the same time an independently developed candidate solution to the mind-body problem. Specifically, what is argued here to be the best version of the relata-specific bundle theory—the thesis that each instance of compresence has a special intrinsic nature in virtue of which it necessarily bundles its specific bundle-ees—is also a species of Russellian monism, labeled by David Chalmers as ‘constitutive Russellian panprotopsychism’. The upshot of this connection is significant for the metaphysics of the mind-body problem: a credible theory of property instantiation turns out to have a built-in account of how consciousness is grounded in certain (broadly) physical systems.

An improved saturation evaluation method of Chang 8 tight sandstone reservoir in Longdong West area of Ordos Basin, China

This study focus on saturation evaluation of Chang 8 tight sandstone reservoir in Longdong West area of Ordos Basin, China. An improved saturation calculation method was proposed based on the equivalent rock capillary bundle theory. Firstly, according to characteristics of reservoir pore structure and rock conductivity, the conductive space of reservoir rock is equivalent to the parallel conductive of micro capillary bundle representing the micro pores and the coarse capillary bundle representing the macro pores. Then, the variable cementation index(m) saturation model was deduced by using Poiseuille flow equation and Darcy's law. During the calculation of model parameters, the T2 spectrum data of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) was used to calculate the equivalent radius of reservoir micro pores and macro pores, which ensured the ability of model popularization and application. Finally, the proposed saturation calculation method is applied to reservoir evaluation of the study area, and compared with the classical Archie saturation model. The application effect shows that the calculated saturation from the proposed variable m model is much closer to the sealed coring data than that from classical Archie model, and the average relative error of saturation calculated by the variable m model is within 7%, which proves that the proposed saturation calculation method is applicable and effective.

G. E. Moore on Concepts and Judgment

In “The Nature of Judgment” (1899), G. E. Moore defends the strange thesis according to which “[i]t seems necessary… to regard the world as formed of concepts”. Philosophers have offered distinct understandings of this proposal, in particular of what Moorean concepts really are. In this article I discuss and reject three of them: one, according to which Moorean concepts are universals within the framework of a bundle theory of concrete particulars (Nelson, 1962; Baldwin, 1990); a second one, according to which Moorean concepts are particulars within a mereological framework of analysis (Bell, 1999); and a third one, according to which Moorean concepts are a sui generis category, resulting from his alleged rejection of the substance (particular)/attribute (universal) distinction (MacBride, 2018). I end by defending my own understanding, which highlights the openly Platonic stance of the young G. E. Moore.

The Bundle Theory Approach to Relational Quantum Mechanics

The present essay provides a new metaphysical interpretation of Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM) in terms of mereological bundle theory. The essential idea is to claim that a physical system in RQM can be defined as a mereological fusion of properties whose values may vary for different observers. Abandoning the Aristotelian tradition centered on the notion of substance, I claim that RQM embraces an ontology of properties that finds its roots in the heritage of David Hume. To this regard, defining what kind of concrete physical objects populate the world according to RQM, I argue that this theoretical framework can be made compatible with (i) a property-oriented ontology, in which the notion of object can be easily defined, and (ii) moderate structural realism, a philosophical position where relations and relata are both fundamental. Finally, I conclude that under this reading relational quantum mechanics should be included among the full-fledged realist interpretations of quantum theory.

La Bundle Theory y el desafío del carácter denso

The challenge of thick character consists in explaining the apparent fact that one object can be charactered in many ways. If we assume a trope bundle theory, we ought to answer in turn the two following questions: (P1) What are the requirements on a trope bundle theory if it is to adequately account for thick-character?; (P2) Is a trope bundle theory that meets those requirements preferable to rival theories? In order to address the above questions, the paper proceeds as follows. In the first section I cover two preliminary matters: I introduce the concept of thick-character and distinguish it from other related concepts. Then, I sketch several leading accounts of character and situate bundle theory among them. Also, I pick up (Q1) and argue that there are three requirements on a trope bundle theory if it is to adequately account for thick-character. Lastly, in the third section I pick up (Q2) and argue that the requirements spell trouble for trope bundle theory. This trouble, I argue, indicates that trope bundle theory—and hence bundle theory simpliciter—fails to better its chief rival, substance-attribute theory.

Particulares nus: uma defesa da teoria do substrato

The present work aims to present the debate of the bare particulars proposal and its critics. We seek here to discuss how the thesis of Bare Particulars is presented today by taking the works of proponents of this thesis. In the following we will present the most current criticisms that are raised upon the thesis and how these criticisms arise based on realism, and specifically from defenders of the bundle theory, that aim to discredit the study of any particular substratum. Finally, we will seek answers to the criticisms and how the defense of the thesis is presented, grounding also from the current literature. Based on the debate between the position of Bare Particulars and the bundle theory, we will seek to defend the theory of the substrate as the simplest way to highlight the identity of objects without incurring in the error of Leibniz’s Principle of Identity of Indiscernibles.

Uma abordagem reducionista ao problema da identidade dos indiscerníveis

I aim to defend the thesis that the truth of any proposition about the number of particulars that exist in the world is supervenient upon the truth of all propositions exclusively about universals (i.e., properties and relations). If this thesis is correct, all facts about the individuation of particulars are reducible to facts exclusively about universals, and there is no primitive individuation of particulars. I present two arguments against the possibility of this kind of primitive individuation. The first is that the possibility of primitively individuated particulars raises radical skeptical doubts about the number of particulars with which we are acquainted. The second is that primitively individuated particulars are theoretically redundant since the qualitative character of any possible world can be exhaustively described if we talk only about universals. The classical bundle theory is the most common variety of reductionism about the number of particulars, but I also want to defend that it is not the only possible variety. More specifically, I present an alternative according to which particulars are individuated by spatial relations. This alternative, in contrast to bundle theory, does not commit us to the controversial principle of the identity of indiscernibles, but it implies a transcendent conception of universals.