Impermissible Self‑Rationalizing Pessimism:In Defence of a Pragmatic Ethics of Belief

We present an argument against a standard evidentialist position on the ethics of belief. We argue that sometimes a person merits criticism for holding a belief even when that belief is well supported by her evidence in any relevant sense. We show how our argument advances the case for anti-evidentialism (pragmatism) in the light of other arguments presented in the recent literature, and respond to a set of possible evidentialist rejoinders

Om positivisme og objektivisme i samfundsvidenskaberne

”Positivisme” hører til de mest kontroversielle og mangetydige termer i moderne debatter om samfundsvidenskabelig metode. Bredt anvendte lærebøger er på én gang ofte uklare og voldsomt indbyrdes uenige angående positivismens metafysiske, erkendelsmæssige og ideologiske forpligtelser. Denne artikel leverer en receptionshistorisk behandling af positivismen fra dens dobbelte udspring i det 19. århundredes franske og tyske filosofi frem til i dag. Hermed kortlægges en række væsentlige historiske omforståelser og misforståelser som baggrund for nutidens begrebsforvirring. Det påvises efterfølgende, at forskellige positivistiske retningers forhold til videnskabelig objektivisme er en temmelig kompleks og varieret affære. Det er således ufrugtbart at behandle samfundsvidenskabelig positivisme og objektivisme under ét, sådan som det ofte gøres. ENGELSK ABSTRACT: Nikolaj Nottelmann: On positivism and objectivism in thesocial sciences “Positivism” ranks among the most controversial and polysemous terms in modern social scientific methodological discourses. Widely used textbooks in the social sciences are often unclear and mutually inconsistent in their mapping of positivism’s metaphysical, epistemological, and ideological commitments. This article offers a reception history, tracing positivism from its dual roots in 19th century French and German philosophy of science to the present day. The article points out several eventful historical reinterpretations and misinterpretations responsible for the current conceptual confusion. Then the article explains how various positivistic currents have very different and complex relations to scientific objectivism. Thus, despite common practice, it is unfruitful to treat social scientific positivism and objectivism under one heading. Keywords: Positivism; Objectivism; Phenomenalism; Logical Empiricism; Critical Theor

Einfluß von Vielteilchen-Effekten auf die Dynamik der kohärenten Intersubband-Polarisation in GaInAs/AlInAs-Quantentopfstrukturen

Thema dieser Arbeit ist die optische Anregung von Übergängen zwischen Leitungsband-Subbändern in Halbleiterheterostrukturen. Die dadurch induzierte kohärente Polarisationsstrahlung im Infrarotbereich zerfällt auf ultrakurzer Picosekunden-Zeitskala. Die Dynamik dieser Strahlung wird mit der numerischen Simulation eines Vierwellenmisch-Experiments analysiert. Im Experimentellen liegen die Vorteile dieser Art der Messung von Polarisation vor allem in der Vermeidung inhomogener Verbreiterung und der einfachen Bestimmung von Dephasierungszeiten. Es stellt sich heraus, dass das Wechselspiel zwischen direkten und Austausch-Coulomb-Beiträgen einen wesentlichen Einfluss auf die Polarisationsdynamik hat. Unter anderem treten Phänomene wie Quantenschwebungen und Photonenechos bei der zeitaufgelösten Intersubband-Polarisation auf

Weighing the costs: the epistemic dilemma of no-platforming.

Funder: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn (1040)'No-platforming'-the practice of denying someone the opportunity to express their opinion at certain venues because of the perceived abhorrent or misguided nature of their view(s)-is a hot topic. Several philosophers have advanced epistemic reasons for using the policy in certain cases. Here we introduce epistemic considerations against no-platforming that are relevant for the reflection on the cases at issue. We then contend that three recent epistemic arguments in favor of no-platforming fail to factor these considerations in and, as a result, offer neither a conclusive justification nor strong epistemic support for no-platforming in any of the relevant cases. Moreover, we argue that, taken together, our epistemic considerations against no-platforming and the three arguments for the policy suggest that no-platforming poses an epistemic dilemma (i.e., a difficult choice situation involving two equally undesirable options). While advocates and opponents of no-platforming alike have so far overlooked this dilemma, it should be addressed not only to prevent that actual no-platforming decisions create more epistemic harm than good, but also to put us into a better position to justify the policy when it is indeed warranted

Asymmetry pays: visual lateralization improves discrimination success in pigeons

AbstractFunctional cerebral asymmetries, once thought to be exclusively human, are now accepted to be a widespread principle of brain organization in vertebrates [1]. The prevalence of lateralization makes it likely that it has some major advantage. Until now, however, conclusive evidence has been lacking. To analyze the relation between the extent of cerebral asymmetry and the degree of performance in visual foraging, we studied grain–grit discrimination success in pigeons, a species with a left hemisphere dominance for visual object processing [2,3]. The birds performed the task under left-eye, right-eye or binocular seeing conditions. In most animals, right-eye seeing was superior to left-eye seeing performance, and binocular performance was higher than each monocular level. The absolute difference between left- and right-eye levels was defined as a measure for the degree of visual asymmetry. Animals with higher asymmetries were more successful in discriminating grain from grit under binocular conditions. This shows that an increase in visual asymmetry enhances success in visually guided foraging. Possibly, asymmetries of the pigeon’s visual system increase the computational speed of object recognition processes by concentrating them into one hemisphere while preventing the other side of the brain from initiating conflicting search sequences of its own