In defence of Hume's historical method

A tradition among certain Hume scholars, best known as the ‘New Humeans’, proposes a novel reading of Hume’s work, and in particular of his conception of causality.2 The purpose of this paper is to conduct a similar move regarding Hume’s historical method. It is similar for two reasons: firstly, it is intended to reintegrate Hume’s theory into present-day debates on the nature of history; and secondly, the reading I propose is directed against the standard interpretation of Hume’s history. This interpretation claims that in spite of being a historian, Hume misunderstands the nature of both historical knowledge and the historical enterprise. In other words, the Humean methodology would be incompatible with a genuine historical practice. This censure is based upon three particular criticisms: (1) The criticism of ahistoricalism: Hume believes human nature is an unchangeable substratum, and thus cannot account for historical change. (2) The criticism of parochialism: Hume is trapped in his own historical province3, and thus understands other times in the light of his own. (3) The criticism of moral condescension: Hume presumes the same standard is applicable throughout history, and thus judges the past according to his own moral standard. I shall argue that these criticisms are the result of a misunderstanding of what Hume means to accomplish through his investigation of history and that moreover, he is aware of these pitfalls

Chandra detection of extended X-ray emission from the recurrent nova RS Ophiuchi

Radio, infrared, and optical observations of the 2006 eruption of the symbiotic recurrent nova RS Ophiuchi (RS Oph) showed that the explosion produced non-spherical ejecta. Some of this ejected material was in the form of bipolar jets to the east and west of the central source. Here we describe Xray observations taken with the Chandra X-ray Observatory one and a half years after the beginning of the outburst that reveal narrow, extended structure with a position angle of approximately 300 degrees (east of north). Although the orientation of the extended feature in the X-ray image is consistent with the readout direction of the CCD detector, extensive testing suggests that the feature is not an artifact. Assuming it is not an instrumental effect, the extended X-ray structure shows hot plasma stretching more than 1,900 AU from the central binary (taking a distance of 1.6 kpc). The X-ray emission is elongated in the northwest direction - in line with the extended infrared emission and some minor features in the published radio image. It is less consistent with the orientation of the radio jets and the main bipolar optical structure. Most of the photons in the extended X-ray structure have energies of less than 0.8 keV. If the extended X-ray feature was produced when the nova explosion occurred, then its 1".2 length as of 2007 August implies that it expanded at an average rate of more than 2 mas/d, which corresponds to a flow speed of greater than 6,000 km/s (d/1.6 kpc) in the plane of the sky. This expansion rate is similar to the earliest measured expansion rates for the radio jets.Comment: accepted in Ap

Self-Love and the Judicial Power to Appoint a Special Prosecutor Symposium on Special Prosecutions and the Role of the Independent Counsel

Judicial appointment of private attorneys as special prosecutors has occurred and is permitted to occur in a variety of contexts other than when the executive branch is faced with a potential or actual conflict of interest. Until recently, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and, of course, district courts within the Second Circuit, have interpreted Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to permit judicial appointment of a private attorney to prosecute conduct allegedly violative of a court order as criminal contempt. Courts have been most active in appointing private attorneys as special prosecutors in cases involving counterfeit trademark products. This discussion will focus on three major areas of disagreement between the Court and Justice Scalia in Young v. U.S. ex rel Vuitton et Fils: (1) the scope of the contempt power, (2) the role of the judge in contempt proceedings, and (3) the Court\u27s justification for its holding. At its core, the disagreement stems from the definition of judicial power embodied in article III of the Constitution. For Justice Scalia, the role of the prosecutor is inconsistent with the judge\u27s role as a neutral adjudicator. He believes neutrality is the essence of the judicial function and, thus, judicial power. The judicial power is the power to decide, in accordance with law, who should prevail in a case or controversy. \u27 This includes the power to act as a neutral adjudicator but does not include the power to prosecute

Generalized Trust in Taiwan and (as Evidence for) Hirschman’s doux commerce Thesis

Data from the World Values Survey shows that generalized trust in Mainland China—trust in out-group members—is very low, but generalized trust in Taiwan is much higher. The present article argues that positive interactions with out-group members in the context of Taiwan’s export-oriented economy fostered generalized trust—and so explains this difference. This line of argument provides evidence for Albert O. Hirschman’s doux commerce thesis, that market interaction can improve persons and even stabilize the social order. The present article defends this point by separating two theses that Hirschman combines under that label, a countervailing forces thesis and a doux commerce thesis narrowly understood. These theses offer different explanations (or mechanisms) for how commerce could have those positive effects. The data about Taiwanese trust practices provides evidence for the latter

Fossil Glasses Produced by Impact of Meteorites, Asteroids and Possibly Comets with the Planet Earth

In recent times one of the most intriguing mysteries of geology bas been the occurrence of aerodynamically-shaped glasses on five continents of the earth. These glasses under discussion are obviously not of fulgurite origin. Recent research indicates that these glasses known as tektites are ~he result of meteorite, asteroid, or possibly comet impact. Impact glasses, in general, differ from volcanic glasses in that they are lower in water content, have lower gallium and germanium contents, and are not necessarily in magmatically unstable continental areas

Attorney-Client Privilege, Ethical Rules, and the Impaired Criminal Defendant, The

Attorneys who represent possibly incompetent defendants charged with criminal conduct face difficult ethical issues, implicating professional duties of loyalty, zealous representation, and confidentiality-as an ethical question and as a matter of the law of evidence. The principles of agency underlying the attorney-client relationship are also implicated when the defendant\u27s capacity is in doubt. In the ordinary criminal case, the client has at least implicitly authorized his lawyer\u27s conduct. But if the defendant is impaired, the client may not have the mental capacity to authorize the attorney\u27s actions. Defense counsel representing the possibly incompetent criminal defendant will often be the only one with relevant information about her client\u27s incapacity. This information, related in confidence, may suggest that the client has difficulty in rationally understanding the charges against him and cannot assist his counsel. Under current rules, limited options are available to the defense attorney. She is required to alert the court to the possibility that her client is incompetent, but the attorney- client privilege, ethical rules, and the criminal defense attorney\u27s role, as presently understood, do not allow the attorney to disclose her client\u27s confidences. This prohibition results in trials or in guilty pleas by defendants who may not be competent to proceed, thus, violating due process. Such an outcome is contrary to the fundamental values of justice in our criminal adversary system. This Article argues that the importance of competence to the proper functioning of the adversary system requires that the criminal defense attorney be permitted to disclose client statements for the purpose of determining incompetence. Part II reviews Medina v. California, in which the Supreme Court suggested that a criminal defense attorney could testify about a client\u27s competency at competency hearings. Part III explores the legal standard of competency, its application to the criminal defendant, and the elusiveness of the concept of rationality. Part IV examines the attorney-client relationship. Part V discusses the attorney- client privilege and the ethical rules relative to competency proceedings. Finally, Part VI argues that an exception to the attorney-client privilege and the ethical rules is warranted in order to permit the criminal defense attorney to disclose client confidences which impact the client\u27s competence and explores the implications of this exception