The why, the how, and the what of mental processes

Let us ask the following questions concerning any given mental process: (i) which are the reasons for its being, (ii) which are the ostensible characteristics of its evolution, (iii) which is the inner essence of the process, its identity, its suchness, and (iv) which are the relations between such why, how, and what. Sometimes these questions can be answered to our complete satisfaction: when somebody asks “Why did you eat the pie?” and the answer is “Because I was hungry” the exchange can at a neutral level be considered complete. But when one reflects further into the more profound reasons of anything that happens, then it is impossible to say if a good explanation can always be given concerning such why. Obvious answers to daily questions may satisfy our unreflecting curiosity, but not our deeper inquisitiveness.

The art of human rights : enriching the life of the law school through drawings and other visual resource

In the life of the Law School, focus on the “visual” can operate at three different levels: learning, teaching, and examining (legal concepts). My main interest in this paper is to explore the latter level, “examining”, broadly considered so as to encompass evaluation in general. Furthermore, that interest is pinned down here to the area of constitutional rights and human rights in general, even though the conclusions reached can (and should) likely be extrapolated to other areas of the law... In effect, the first logical step regarding the relevance of the visual approach has to do with using it yourself when you study —assuming that you came to the conclusion that you are a “visual learner”. As you know, VARK theorists propose a quadripartite classification of learners. The acronym VARK stands for Visual, Aural, Read/write, and Kinesthetic sensory modalities that are used for learning information. This model was designed in the late 80s by Neil Fleming and it has received some acceptance and a lot of attention...