65 research outputs found
Ontological dependence in a spacetime-world
Priority Monism (hereafter, âMonismâ), as defined by Jonathan Schaffer (Philos Rev 119:131â176, 2010), has a number of components. It is the view that: the cosmos exists; the cosmos is a maximal actual concrete object, of which all actual concrete objects are parts; the cosmos is basicâthere is no object upon which the cosmos depends, ontologically; ontological dependence is a primitive and unanalysable relation. In a recent attack, Lowe (Spinoza on monism. Palgave Macmillan, London, pp 92â122, 2012) has offered a series of arguments to show that Monism fails. He offers up four tranches of argument, with different focuses. These focal points are: (1) being a concrete object; (2) aggregation and dependence; (3) analyses of ontological dependence; (4) Schafferâs no-overlap principle. These are all technical notions, but each figures at the heart of a cluster of arguments that Lowe puts forward. To respond, I work through each tranche of argument in turn. Before that, in the first section, I offer a cursory statement of Monism, as Schaffer presents it in his 2010 paper, Monism: The Priority of the Whole. I then respond to each of Loweâs criticisms in turn, deploying material from Schafferâs 2009 paper Spacetime: the One Substance, as well as various pieces of conceptual machinery from Loweâs own works (The possibility of metaphysics. Clarendon, Oxford, 1998, 2010) to deflect Loweâs (Spinoza on monism. Palgave Macmillan, London, pp 92â122, 2012) attacks. In the process of defending Monism from Lowe (Spinoza on monism. Palgave Macmillan, London, pp 92â122, 2012), I end up offering some subtle refinements to Schafferâs (Philos Rev 119:131â176, 2010) view and explain how the resulting âhybridâ view fares in the wider dialectic
JIB-04 has broad-spectrum antiviral activity and inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication and coronavirus pathogenesis
Pathogenic coronaviruses are a major threat to global public health. Here, using a recombinant reporter virus-based compound screening approach, we identified small-molecule inhibitors that potently block the replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Among them, JIB-04 inhibited SARS-CoV-2 replication in Vero E6 cells with a 50% effective concentration of 695ânM, with a specificity index of greater than 1,000. JIB-04 showe
Neurological presentations of intravascular lymphoma (IVL): meta-analysis of 654 patients
QF2011: a protocol to study the effects of the Queensland flood on pregnant women, their pregnancies, and their children's early development
Longitudinal active living research to address physical inactivity and sedentary behaviour in children in transition from preadolescence to adolescence
Departing from the essential features of a high quality systematic review of psychotherapy: a response to ĂST (2014) and recommendations for improvement
Ost's (2014) systematic review and meta-analysis of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) has received wide attention. On the basis of his review, Ost argued that ACT research was not increasing in its quality and that, in contradiction to the views of Division 12 of the American Psychological Association(APA), ACT is ânot yet well-established for any disorderâ(2014, p. 105). We conducted a careful examination of the methods, approach, and data used in the meta-analysis. Based in part on examinations by the authors of the studies involved, which were then independently checked, 91 factual or interpretive errors were documented, touching upon 80% of the studies reviewed. Comparisons of Ost's quality ratings with independent teams rating the same studies with the same scale suggest that Ost's ratings were unreliable. In all of these areas (factual errors; interpretive errors; quality ratings) mistakes and differences were not random: Ost's data were dominantly more negative toward ACT. The seriousness, range, and distribution of errors, and a wider pattern of misinterpreting the purpose of studies and ignoring positive results, suggest that Ost's review should be set aside in future considerations of the evidence base for ACT. We argue that future published reviews and meta-analyses should rely upon diverse groups of scholars rather than a single individual; that resulting raw data should be made available for inspection and independent analysis; that well-crafted committees rather than individuals should design, apply and interpret quality criteria; that the intent of transdiagnostic studies need to be more seriously considered as the field shifts away from a purely syndromal approach; and that data that demonstrate theoretically consistent mediating processes should be given greater weight in evaluating specific interventions. Finally, in order to examine substantive progress since Ost's review, recent outcome and process evidence was briefly examined
Prospective Evaluation of New and Old Criteria to Discriminate Between Supraventricular and Ventricular Tachycardia in Implantable Defibrillators
- âŠ