Arguing about Free Will

I explore some issues in the logics and dialectics of practical modalities connected with the Consequence Argument (CA) considered as the best argument for the incompatibility of free will and determinism. According to Lewis (1981) in one of the possible senses of (in)ability, the argument is not valid; however, understood in the other of its possible senses, the argument is not sound. This verdict is based on the assessment of the modal version of the argument, where the crucial notion is power necessity (“no choice” operator), while Lewis analyses the version where the central notion is the locution “cannot render false.”Lewis accepts closure of the relevant (in)ability operator under entailment but not closure under implication. His strategy has a seemingly strange corollary: a free predetermined agent is able (in a strong, causal sense) to falsity the conjunction of history and law. I compare a Moorean position with respect to radical skepticism and knowledge closure with ability closure and propose to explain Lewis’s strategy in the framework of his Moorean stance.

Arithmetic, enumerative induction and size bias

Number theory abounds with conjectures asserting that every natural number has some arithmetic property. An example is Goldbach’s Conjecture, which states that every even number greater than 2 is the sum of two primes. Enumerative inductive evidence for such conjectures usually consists of small cases. In the absence of supporting reasons, mathematicians mistrust such evidence for arithmetical generalisations, more so than most other forms of non-deductive evidence. Some philosophers have also expressed scepticism about the value of enumerative inductive evidence in arithmetic. But why? Perhaps the best argument is that known instances of an arithmetical conjecture are almost always small: they appear at the start of the natural number sequence. Evidence of this kind consequently suffers from size bias. My essay shows that this sort of scepticism comes in many different flavours, raises some challenges for them all, and explores their respective responses.

A CRITICAL REVIEW OF GOVERNANCE IN THE DIGITAL ERA: A DEVELOPING NATION’S PERSPECTIVE

‗The best argument against democracy is a five- minute conversation with the average voter‘ is a famous quote by Winston Churchill. The statement also indicates the success or failure in any form of government depends primarily on voters and not on parties or politicians. The sustenance of a government in a democratic set up and in the age of anti-incumbency is viable only if it has the mandate. The current government in the territory of India is thriving despite a strong effort by the opposition to come together and stand against the government. The last two Lok Sabha elections held in 2014 and 2019 in India has been exemplary from the perspective that it has largely been Bhartiya Janata Party versus all other political parties, unlike the previous election where there has been contest between ruling and opposition parties. This paper aims to review the functioning of the incumbent government in last five years from manifesto till its implementation. The paper also aims to review the different policies launched by the government and their outcome. The paper will also examine how the government took some landmark decisions that witnessed mass protest and may prove fatal in times to come.

The Semiotics of Humiliation

Being almost inseparable from human being, ‘Humiliation’ and ‘dignity’ must be considered as much more universal substance. Its counterpart must be regarded as having the same level of universality. However, is the fact that the form of both ‘dignity’ and ‘humiliation’ differ so much around the world, that the two terms probably represent the best argument for that there are big differences between cultures and nations. Since the experience of humiliation does not necessary result in an immediate feeling of being humiliated. Thus one of the core challenges is to find the solution of how ‘humiliation’ on the one hand represents something universal and on the other hand is the best argument for non-universality in the world. In this sense, the essay seems to be much easier to say something about the cause for humiliation instead of its effect on the victim. Yet, this essay attempts to point out how these terms might be understood in attempt at making them meaningful in itself and fruitful for empirical investigation.

Internal Perspectivism and Empathy in Ismail Kadare’s Novels in the Communist and Post-Communist Period

This paper compares the literary work of the Albanian writer Ismail Kadare in the communist and post-communist periods, pointing out the stylistic traits that have made his work resistant to the communist rule. In a political context which managed to disfigure literature as a tool of the daily interests of politics, Kadare succeeded in protecting language from an Orwellian absolute repression. During the communist period, Kadare broke out not only of the Albanian political isolation but also of the stylistic limits and literary incapability of Socialist Realism. Yet, scholars such as the eminent Balkan historian Noel Malcolm (1997) have condemned Kadare for opportunistic relation with the regime, and this opinion emerged every time the writer was announced as candidate for the Nobel Prize. The paper argues that Kadare’s narrative style characterized by lack of authoritarianism is the best argument which refutes this condemnation. The stylistic features of his prose are analysed through linguistic indicators such as agency, transitivity, passivation, animacy, free direct and indirect discourse, intensifiers, deictics, thematization, and cohesion. This study points out the internal perspectivism in Kadare’s prose written during the communist period and identifies metafiction and inter-subjective focalization in his post-communist novels.

Greimas par Ricœur, histoire d’une longue amitié

Ricœur’s meeting with Greimas was not an ephemeral event but a discussion that spanned more than thirty years. Anne Henault traces the different stages of what Ricœur called his “love fight” with Greimas, perfectly illustrated in the poem by René Char: “Loyal opponents.” The qualities of the philosopher emerges in dialogue, the concern to advance reasoning in a rigorous way but also the effort to give to the speaker “the chance of his best argument.” Anne Henault recounts the labeling of structuralism as an “enemy” and the conquest of a “friendship” as mutually demanding but based on genuine intellectual convergences.

The Best Argument Wins

Deliberation encourages participants to reason with one another chapter 6 details how cultural biases often impede such reasoning. Cultural predispositions are an indication of people’s beliefs along two dimensions: hierarchical-egalitarian and individualism-collectivism. The first relates to whether government should regulate individual behavior and the second to whether government should provide a social safety net. US political parties and subsequent policies map onto these dimensions, with Republicans more likely to identify as hierarchical individualists and Democrats more likely to identify as egalitarian collectivists. As outlined here, deliberative processes, such as the CIR and Deliberative Polling, ask participants to overcome their cultural predispositions in the interest of reaching the best decision possible. Deliberation can produce such results, particularly when the available evidence clearly favors specific policy proposals. On values-based questions, however, deliberative participants may ultimately rely on their cultural cognitions to reach decisions.

Learning from What Color Experiences Are Good For

Color is an incredibly controversial topic. Here is a sample of views taken seriously: colors are dispositions to look coloured; colors are physical properties of surfaces or of light; colors are properties of certain mental states, which get projected onto the surfaces of objects or onto reflected or transmitted light; colors are an illusion; colors are sui generis. One hopes to break the impasse by finding a compelling starting point—one drawing on obvious points that are common ground—which naturally evolves into the theory of color one likes. I start with remarks about the utility of having mental states with a phenomenology, remarks which are, I urge, non-controversial. I develop them into the theory of color I favor. According to it, colors are properties of objects as objective as their shapes. The final section explains how the theory handles the best argument for subjectivism about color.