Understanding misunderstandings. Presuppositions and presumptions in doctor-patient chronic care consultations

Pragmatic presupposition is analyzed in this paper as grounded on an implicit reasoning process based on a set of presumptions, which can define cultural differences. The basic condition for making a presupposition can be represented as a reasoning criterion, namely reasonableness. Presuppositions, on this view, need to be reasonable, namely as the conclusion of an underlying presumptive reasoning that does not or may not contain contradictions with other presumptions, including the ordering of the hierarchy of presumptions. Presumptions are in turn analyzed considering their nature and their hierarchy, namely their object and their possible contextual backing, which eliminates some of their possible defaults. This analysis of presupposition brings to light the relationship between communicative infelicities or misunderstandings deriving from presuppositional failures and the underlying system of presumptions and presumptive reasoning. This approach can be applied to the investigation of communicative problems within the medical context, and more precisely the communication in diabetes cases

International Law Status of WTO Dispute Settlement Reports: Obligation to Comply or Option to Buy Out ?

In four further parts of this comment, I undertake to fulfill my obligation to present a more thorough analysis. In part II, I briefly introduce some of the different elements that would go into normal treaty interpretation related to the issue in question, such as which text should be part of the analysis and whether preparatory work or intent of the parties, including statements by some nation-state governmental officials made contemporaneously with the drafting of the treaty, should be considered. Likewise, I mention the importance of the forty seven years of GATT practice to the interpretive process, and I note that one way to sharpen the focus of treaty interpretation is to assess the relevance of a prediction of what the WTO Appellate Body would decide if the issue came before it. In part III, I take a detailed look at the various treaty text provisions. The texts themselves are contained in an appendix so that the reader can examine them in context, if he or she wishes. In part IV, I outline several of the important policies that support the view I am taking and that I believe to be enormously significant in suggesting that the Schwartz and Sykes approach is markedly deficient. Finally, in part V, I briefly summarize my conclusions and perceptions

Negotiate or Litigate? Effects of WTO Judicial Delegation on U.S. Trade Politics

Goldstein and Steinberg argue that the World Trade Organization Appellate Body has been able to use its authority to engage in judicial lawmaking to reduce trade barriers in ways that would not otherwise have been possible through negotiation. This lawmaking authority was not the result of a purposeful delegation; rather, it was an unintended byproduct of the creation of an underspecified set of rules and procedures. There is nevertheless a high rate of compliance with Appellate Body decisions because decentralized enforcement can induce domestic importers to lobby for trade liberalization. In the US, this judicial lawmaking may also allow the President to achieve trade policies that are more liberal than those desired by Congress, if compliance can be achieved by a regulatory change or by sole Executive action

Sovereignty - Modern: A New Approach to an Outdated Concept

This article, however, does not purport to cover all possible dimensions of sovereignty but, instead, focuses primarily on what might be thought of as the core of sovereignty - the monopoly of power dimension - although it will be clear that even this focus inevitably entails certain linkages and slop-over penumbra of the other sovereignty dimensions. This core dimension is examined in the context of its roles with respect to international law and institutions generally, and international relations and related disciplines such as economics. National government leaders and politicians, as well as special interest representatives, too often invoke the term sovereignty to forestall needed debate. Likewise, international elites often assume that international is better (thus downplaying the importance of sovereignty) and this is not always the better approach. What is needed is a close analysis of the policy framework that gets us away from these preconceived mantras”. The objective is to shed some light on these policy debates or, in some cases, policy dilemmas, and to describe some of the policy framework that needs to be addressed

A melting pot world of species : reply to Speziale et al.

Native plants and animals are a natural heritage threatened by one of the six greatest extinction events in Earth's history. Humans, through habitat transformation, exploitation, and species introductions, are driving this extinction event. To turn this tide, Speziale et al. (2014) suggest reducing human dependence on non-native species by increasing the use, harvest, planting, and raising of native species, thereby increasing their cultural and economic value. The search for new or under-appreciated uses of native species is laudable, especially if it helps protect them and contributes to local cultural diversity. Such efforts are arguably an inherent trait of human curiosity and entrepreneurship and are a central platform of popular movements such as slow foods and native gardening. However, Speziale et al.'s hypothesis - that using native species can protect them - is less simple than they suggest. We refute the idea of nativism that underpins Speziale et al.'s proposal and makes it poorly defensible and considered the unaddressed consequences of the proposal for people and for conservation

"Please, Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood" : The Role of Argumentation in a Sociology of Academic

Academic debates are so frequent and omnipresent in most disciplines, particularly the social sciences and humanities, it seems obvious that disagreements are bound to occur. The aim of this paper is to show that whereas the agent who perceives his/her contribution as being misunderstood locates the origin of the communication problem on the side of the receiver who “misinterpret