The Fitting-Attitude Analysis Revised

‘The Fitting-Attitude Analysis Revised’ is devoted to a challenge to the fitting-attitude analysis (FA analysis) that arises from the logical consequence argument (outlined in Chap. 7). This argument shows that the version of FA analysis defended in this work has the unwelcome consequence that whatever is good for someone is also, necessarily, non-relationally good. However, as the discussion evinces, an advocate of FA analysis can meet this challenge. In effect, what is needed is a modification of the standard way of formulating the FA analysis of final impersonal value. Combining this revised FA version of final impersonal value with a novel way of understanding final non-relational value provides a plausible way to handle the logical consequence argument. The chapter also discusses three related issues. (i) It outlines a reductio of the standard version of final goodness; (ii) it explains why combining a normative and an attitudinal approach does not, in the end, serve the needs of the FA advocate. Finally, it (iii) introduces a kind of case in which we would intuitively agree that something is good for person a, but which, intuitively, is such that few or no one would think they had a reason to favour what was considered good for a (except a). Such examples allegedly showcase why the book’s proposed analysis is incorrect. Eventually, it is explained why this kind of case does not have this implication.

Parallel gridded simulation framework for DSSAT-CSM (version 4.7.5.21) using MPI and NetCDF

The Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer Cropping Systems Model (DSSAT-CSM) is a widely used crop modeling system that has been integrated into large-scale modeling frameworks. Existing frameworks generate spatially explicit simulated outputs at grid points through an inefficient process of translation from binary spatially referenced inputs to point-specific text input files, followed by translation and aggregation back from point-specific text output files to binary spatially referenced outputs. The main objective of this paper was to document the design and implementation of a parallel gridded simulation framework for DSSAT-CSM. A secondary objective was to provide preliminary analysis of execution time and scaling of the new parallel gridded framework. The parallel gridded framework includes improved code for model-internal data transfer, gridded input–output with the Network Common Data Form (NetCDF) library, and parallelization of simulations using the Message Passing Interface (MPI). Validation simulations with the DSSAT-CSM-CROPSIM-CERES-Wheat model revealed subtle discrepancies in simulated yield due to the rounding of soil parameters in the input routines of the standard DSSAT-CSM. Utilizing NetCDF for direct input–output produced a 3.7- to 4-fold reduction in execution time compared to R- and text-based input–output. Parallelization improved execution time for both versions with between 12.2- (standard version) and 13.4-fold (parallel gridded version) speed-up when comparing 1 to 16 compute cores. Estimates of parallelization of computation ranged between 99.2 % (standard version) and 97.3 % (parallel gridded version), indicating potential for scaling to higher numbers of compute cores.

Interpersonal Epistemic Entitlements

This chapter argues that the nature of our epistemic entitlement to rely on certain belief-forming processes—perception, memory, reasoning, and perhaps others—is not restricted to one’s own belief-forming processes. It argues as well that we can have access to the outputs of others’ processes, in the form of their assertions. These two points support the conclusion that epistemic entitlements are “interpersonal.” It then proceeds to argue that this opens the way for a non-standard version of anti-reductionism in the epistemology of testimony, and a more “extended” epistemology—one that calls into question the epistemic significance that has traditionally been ascribed to the boundaries separating individual subjects.

Qualification of the repeated single offence: the case of hooliganism

In this scientific article is addressed the issue of qualifying the crime of hooliganism when it occurs in the position of repeated crime. It is argued that in order to be incident the aggravating circumstantial sign enshrined in letter a) paragraph (2) art. 287 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova it is not imperative that the perpetrator has previously committed an act of hooliganism in the standard version. The repeated single offense is a legal fiction. The offenses committed (forming the repeated offense) de facto represent a multiple offences, while de jure, artificially, form the content of a single offense. In any case, the repeated crime bears enormous similarities to the multiple offences (a form of the plurality of offences), deriving from the latter legal category. Repeated crime does not constitute a deviation from criminal recidivism (the other form of plurality of offenses). Repeated crime is not a form of plurality of crimes.

The debatable identity in Isaiah 62:5

In Isaiah 62:5, there are three major translations of who will marry ‘you’ or ‘Zion’ based on the immediate context (Is 62:1). Firstly, the most common reading is ‘your sons’ (Amplified Bible [AB], American Standard Version [ASV], Berean Study Bible [BSB], Catholic Public Domain Version [CPDV], Douay-Rheims Bible [DRB], English Standard Version [ESV], King James Version [KJV], New International Version [NIV], New American Standard Bible [NASB], Smith’s Literal Translation [SLT], World English Bible [WEB]). Secondly, the scholars reading preference is ‘your builder’, which refers to ‘God’ based on Psalms 147:2. This reading is adopted by Coverdale Bible of 1535, New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) and Good New Bible (GNT). Lastly, although the translation ‘builders’ is the least favourable reading, LSV and YLT use this reading. This research, therefore, attempts to argue for ‘your sons’ translation as the original reading through textual criticism as the methodology.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: This article is a combination of textual criticism studies with translations.

CONCEALED FRAME MADE OF LIGHT STEEL THIN-WALLED STRUCTURES IN MONOLITHIC FOAM CONCRETE

The use of buildings frame elements formed from thin-walled unclosed profiles located in a monolith-ic foam concrete array is considered. This technical solution provides a number of advantages in comparison with the standard version of metal frames, including increasing the overall stability of lightweight profiles

Enough is too much: the excessiveness objection to sufficientarianism

The standard version of sufficientarianism maintains that providing people with enough, or as close to enough as is possible, is lexically prior to other distributive goals. This article argues that this is excessive – more than distributive justice allows – in four distinct ways. These concern the magnitude of advantage, the number of beneficiaries, responsibility and desert, and above-threshold distribution. Sufficientarians can respond by accepting that providing enough unconditionally is more than distributive justice allows, instead balancing sufficiency against other considerations.

Parallel gridded simulation framework for DSSAT-CSM (version 4.7.5.21) using MPI and NetCDF

The Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer Cropping Systems Model (DSSAT-CSM) is a widely used crop modeling system that has been integrated into large-scale modeling frameworks. Existing frameworks generate spatially-explicit simulated outputs at grid points through an inefficient process of translation from binary, spatially-referenced inputs to point-specific text input files followed by translation and aggregation back from point-specific, text output files to binary, spatially-referenced outputs. The main objective of this paper was to document the design and implementation of a parallel gridded simulation framework for DSSAT-CSM. A secondary objective was to provide preliminary analysis of execution time and scaling of the new parallel gridded framework. The parallel gridded framework includes improved code for model-internal data transfer, gridded input/output with the Network Common Data Form (NetCDF) library, and parallelization of simulations using the Message Passing Interface (MPI). Validation simulations with the DSSAT-CSM-CROPSIM-CERES-Wheat model revealed subtle discrepancies in simulated yield due to the rounding of soil parameters in the input routines of the standard DSSAT-CSM. Utilizing NetCDF for direct input/output produced a 3.7- to 4-fold reduction in execution time compared to text-based input/output. Parallelization improved execution time for both versions with between 12.2- (standard version) and 13.4-fold (parallel gridded version) speedup when comparing 1 to 16 compute cores. Estimates of parallelization of computation ranged between 99.2 (standard version) and 97.3 percent (parallel gridded version) indicating potential for scaling to higher numbers of compute cores.

Is Voting for a Cartel a Sign of Cooperativeness?

This paper tests the hypothesis that a (partial) reason why cartels—collective but costly and non-binding price agreements—lead to higher prices in a Bertrand oligopoly could be because of a selection effect: decision-makers who are willing to form price agreements are more likely to be less competitive and pick higher prices in general. To test this hypothesis we run an experiment where participants play two consecutive Bertrand pricing games: first a standard version without the opportunity to form agreements; followed by a version where participants can vote whether to have a (costly) non-binding agreement as a group to pick the highest number. We find no statistically significant difference between the numbers picked in the first game by participants who vote for and against an agreement in the second game. We do confirm that having a non-binding agreement to cooperate leads to higher numbers being picked on average. Both participants who voted for and against the agreement increase the number they pick in situations with an agreement. However, this effect is bigger for participants who voted in favour.

What’s wrong with internalism?

Extant internalists are either accessibilists or mentalists. Accessibilists standardly claim that whenever p is justified, one is in a position to know this fact by reflection alone or else this fact has grounds that are accessible in this way. The argument for this claim assumes that one ought to believe p only if p is justified; that therefore, grounds for justification must be luminous; and that only facts accessible by reflection fit the bill. It founders already because too few conditions are luminous. A non-standard version of accessibilism avoids this problem by conceiving of the grounds for justification as facts about what one is in a position to know by reflection alone. The argument marshalled in its favour fails to show why they cannot be facts about what one is in a position to know by other means. Mentalists claim that whenever p is justified this fact is grounded in facts about one’s mental states. One argument contends that only mentalism can account for certain structural features of justification. It founders because the present account explains these features equally well. Another argument contends that only mentalism heeds our intuitions about sceptical cases. It founders because mental states can help to confer justification only if they are arrived at in certain ways—a fact not itself determined by such states. Accessibilism and mentalism lack sufficient support and incur costs internalists do better without. The present account delivers all the goods that internalists should wish for, without making justification an internal condition.