Response to Daniel A. Siedell\u27s Art and the Practice of Evangelical Faith-A Review Essay

Excerpt: My first response to Daniel A. Siedell\u27s review of my book Seeing: When Art and Faith Intersect was anger. I thought his treatment of my book was unfair. Even now, after some amount of time has elapsed, I still believe his analysis of my book ignored context, was unkind, misleading and inaccurate. My allotted space for response is, however, inadequate to the task of countering his assertions point for point

Beauty (Essay 8 of Seeing: When Art and Faith Intersect)

Excerpt: Beauty as a concept has given twentieth century writers, especially art critics and art historians, a great deal of difficulty. Why is this so?Answering would take several volumes--! will settle for less. The traditional idea of beauty has all the trappings of a universal concept. For Plato, one of the earliest and most prominent supporters of such universals, beauty, along with other concepts, had the mind of the creator as its source. For much of Christianity\u27s existence Plato\u27s idea of beauty was accepted--with some alterations. For one, the creator became Yahweh, creator of the universe. Secondly, though spiritual beauty might inhabit physical beauty, the reverse was not necessarily the case

The Eightfold Way: Why Analyticity, Apriority and Necessity are Independent

This paper concerns the three great modal dichotomies: (i) the necessary/contingent dichotomy; (ii) the a priori/empirical dichotomy; and (iii) the analytic/synthetic dichotomy. These can be combined to produce a tri-dichotomy of eight modal categories. The question as to which of the eight categories house statements and which do not is a pivotal battleground in the history of analytic philosophy, with key protagonists including Descartes, Hume, Kant, Kripke, Putnam and Kaplan. All parties to the debate have accepted that some categories are void. This paper defends the contrary view that all eight categories house statements—a position I dub ‘octopropositionalism’. Examples of statements belonging to all eight categories are given

On the Authenticity of De-Extinct Organisms, and the Genesis Argument

Are the methods of synthetic biology capable of recreating authentic living members of an extinct species? An analogy with the restoration of destroyed natural landscapes suggests not. The restored version of a natural landscape will typically lack much of the aesthetic value of the original landscape because of the different historical processes that created it—processes that involved human intentions and actions, rather than natural forces acting over millennia. By the same token, it would appear that synthetically recreated versions of extinct natural organisms will also be less aesthetically valuable than the originals; that they will be, in some strong sense, ‘inauthentic’, because of their peculiar history and mode of origin. I call this the ‘genesis argument’ against de-extinction. In this article I critically evaluate the genesis argument. I highlight an important disanalogy between living organisms and natural landscapes: viz., it is of the essence of the former, but not of the latter, to regularly reproduce and die. The process of iterated natural reproduction that sustains the continued existence of a species through time obviously does not undermine the authenticity of the species. I argue that the authenticity of a species will likewise be left intact by the kind of artificial copying of genes and traits that a de-extinction project entails. I conclude on this basis that the genesis argument is unsound

History, Culture, and Trade: A Dynamic Gravity Approach

What determines trade patterns? Habit persistence in consumer tastes and learning-by-doing in production imply that history and culture matter. Deriving a dynamic gravity equation from a simple model, it is shown that cultural similarity is a product of history, so that trade patterns are a function of bilateral GDP, current trade costs, and the past history of trade costs. Using a trade data set which spans from 1870 to 2000, I demonstrate that many gravity variables operate via lagged trade, that historical trade shocks matter, and that trade patterns are persistent, even across centuries.Dynamic Gravity Equation, Endogenous Preferences, Habit Persistence, Learning By-Doing.

Estimating the impact of currency unions on trade using a dynamic gravity framework

This paper revisits the early time series estimates of currency unions on trade from an historical perspective using a dynamic gravity equation and by conducting in-depth case studies of currency union breakups. The early large estimates were driven by omitted variables, as many currency union exits were coterminous with warfare, communist takeovers, coup d'etats, genocide, bloody wars of independence, various other geopolitical travesties, or were predated by trade collapses. Static gravity estimates are found to be sensitive to controlling for these omitted variables, while a dynamic gravity specification implies that currency unions do not increase trade.Currency Unions, Trade, Dynamic Gravity, Decolonization

History, culture, and trade: a dynamic gravity approach

What determines trade patterns? Habit persistence in consumer tastes and learning-by-doing in production imply that history and culture are key determinants. Deriving a dynamic gravity equation from a simple model, it is shown that cultural similarity is a product of history, so that trade patterns are a function of bilateral GDP, current trade costs, and the past history of trade costs. Using a trade data set which spans from 1870 to 2000, it is shown that many gravity variables operate via lagged trade, that historical trade shocks matter, and that trade patterns are persistent, even across centuries.Dynamic Gravity Equation, Endogenous Preferences, Habit Persistence, Learning- By-Doing

Does the solar system compute the laws of motion?

The counterfactual account of physical computation is simple and, for the most part, very attractive. However, it is usually thought to trivialize the notion of physical computation insofar as it implies ‘limited pancomputationalism’, this being the doctrine that every deterministic physical system computes some function. Should we bite the bullet and accept limited pancomputationalism, or reject the counterfactual account as untenable? Jack Copeland would have us do neither of the above. He attempts to thread a path between the two horns of the dilemma by buttressing the counterfactual account with extra conditions intended to block certain classes of deterministic physical systems from qualifying as physical computers. His theory is called the ‘algorithm execution account’. Here we show that the algorithm execution account entails limited pancomputationalism, despite Copeland’s argument to the contrary. We suggest, partly on this basis, that the counterfactual account should be accepted as it stands, pancomputationalist warts and all

The Inconceivable Popularity of Conceivability Arguments

Famous examples of conceivability arguments include (i) Descartes’ argument for mind-body dualism, (ii) Kripke's ‘modal argument’ against psychophysical identity theory, (iii) Chalmers’ ‘zombie argument’ against materialism, and (iv) modal versions of the ontological argument for theism. In this paper, we show that for any such conceivability argument, C, there is a corresponding ‘mirror argument’, M. M is deductively valid and has a conclusion that contradicts C's conclusion. Hence, a proponent of C—henceforth, a ‘conceivabilist’—can be warranted in holding that C's premises are conjointly true only if she can find fault with one of M's premises. But M's premises are modelled on a pair of C's premises. The same reasoning that supports the latter supports the former. For this reason, a conceivabilist can repudiate M's premises only on pain of severely undermining C's premises. We conclude on this basis that all conceivability arguments, including each of (i)–(iv), are fallacious

Diversity and Job Satisfaction: Reconciling Conflicting Theories and Findings

This is a multidisciplinary study on reconciling the conflicting theories and research concerning whether a person’s gender, race, or ethnicity affects his or her overall job satisfaction or degree of satisfaction with any element of the job. A disciplined baseline survey was performed. Statistical techniques, including a stepwise regression, were used to identify significant relationships. The findings and observations resolve what had appeared to be conflicting theories and research findings. The author concludes that in some instances, a legitimate correlation between gender, race, or ethnicity and job satisfaction or the degree of satisfaction with a particular job element may be found within a specific workplace or organization when there is a perceived inequality or injustice attributed to gender, race, or ethnicity; however, overall within the United States, gender, race, or ethnicity is not a reliable indicator or predictor of workers’ degree of satisfaction with any specific element of a job