Just do it? When to do what you judge you ought to do

While it is generally believed that justification is a fallible guide to the truth, there might be interesting exceptions to this general rule. In recent work on bridge-principles, an increasing number of authors have argued that truths about what a subject ought to do are truths we stand in some privileged epistemic relation to and that our justified normative beliefs are beliefs that will not lead us astray. If these bridge-principles hold, it suggests that justification might play an interesting role in our normative theories. In turn, this might help us understand the value of justification, a value that's notoriously difficult to understand if we think of justification as but a fallible means to a desired end. We will argue that these bridge-principles will be incredibly difficult to defend. While we do not think that normative facts necessarily stand in any interesting relationship to our justified beliefs about them, there might well be a way of defending the idea that our justified beliefs about what to do won't lead us astray. In turn, this might help us understand the value of justification, but this way of thinking about justification and its value comes with costs few would be willing to pay

Length of rambling in the AP plane (mean ± standard deviation) (mm) after training.

<p>Length of rambling in the AP plane (mean ± standard deviation) (mm) after training.</p

Length of COP in the ML plane (mean ± standard deviation) (mm) after training.

<p>Length of COP in the ML plane (mean ± standard deviation) (mm) after training.</p

Flow diagram for study design.

<p>Flow diagram for study design.</p

Length of COP in the AP plane (mean ± standard deviation) (mm) after training.

<p>Length of COP in the AP plane (mean ± standard deviation) (mm) after training.</p

Static Postural Stability in Women during and after Pregnancy: A Prospective Longitudinal Study

<div><p>This longitudinal study aimed to compare static postural stability in women between early pregnancy, advanced pregnancy, and at 2 and 6 months postpartum. Forty-five pregnant women were enrolled and 31 completed the protocol. Data were collected at 7–16 and 34–39 weeks gestation, and at 6–10 and 26–30 weeks postpartum. For each subject, the center of foot pressure path length and mean velocity (with directional subcomponents) were computed from 30-s long quiet-standing trials on a stationary force plate with eyes open or closed. The body mass, stance width, and sleep duration within 24 h before testing were also recorded. Static postural stability was not different between pregnancy and postpartum, except for the anterior posterior sway tested in the eyes-closed condition, which was significantly increased in late pregnancy compared to that at 2 and 6 months postpartum. Pregnant/postpartum women’s body mass weakly positively correlated with anterior-posterior sway in the eyes-closed condition and their stance width weakly positively correlated with the anterior-posterior sway in the eyes-open condition. No effect of sleep duration on postural sway was found. Our findings indicate that under visual deprivation conditions women in advanced pregnancy may have decreased static stability compared to their non-pregnant state.</p></div

Characteristics of 31 women in early (P1) and advanced (P2) pregnancy and at 2 (P3) and 6 (P4) months postpartum.^*

<p>* Data are shown as means ± SD. BMI–body mass index</p><p>Characteristics of 31 women in early (P1) and advanced (P2) pregnancy and at 2 (P3) and 6 (P4) months postpartum.^{<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0124207#t001fn001" target="_blank">*</a>}</p

Center of pressure measures reflecting spontaneous body sway during 30 s of quiet standing with the eyes open (EO) or closed (EC) in 31 women in early (P1) and advanced (P2) pregnancy and at 2 (P3) and 6 (P4) months postpartum.^*

<p>AP–anterior-posterior plane, ML–medial-lateral plane.</p><p>* Data are shown as means ± SD.</p><p>** Significantly decreased from P2 to P3 (p = 0.014) and from P2 to P4 (p = 0.017), Fisher’s LSD post-hoc; RM ANOVA: F_{3, 90} = 2.71, p = 0.049.</p><p>Center of pressure measures reflecting spontaneous body sway during 30 s of quiet standing with the eyes open (EO) or closed (EC) in 31 women in early (P1) and advanced (P2) pregnancy and at 2 (P3) and 6 (P4) months postpartum.^{<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0124207#t002fn002" target="_blank">*</a>}</p