ViralZone: recent updates to the virus knowledge resource.

ViralZone (http://viralzone.expasy.org) is a knowledge repository that allows users to learn about viruses including their virion structure, replication cycle and host-virus interactions. The information is divided into viral fact sheets that describe virion shape, molecular biology and epidemiology for each viral genus, with links to the corresponding annotated proteomes of UniProtKB. Each viral genus page contains detailed illustrations, text and PubMed references. This new update provides a linked view of viral molecular biology through 133 new viral ontology pages that describe common steps of viral replication cycles shared by several viral genera. This viral cell-cycle ontology is also represented in UniProtKB in the form of annotated keywords. In this way, users can navigate from the description of a replication-cycle event, to the viral genus concerned, and the associated UniProtKB protein records.

Measuring discrepancies between knowledge, preoccupation and fear of aids in populations.

A simple tool to quantify discrepancies between knowledge, preoccupation and fear regarding hiv and aids is presented. This tool is based on standard questions available in health surveys. Some results using recent Swiss data are presented, and the method is discussed.

Epistemological tensions between linguistic description and ordinary speakers' intuitive knowledge: examples from French verb morphology

In this article, I address epistemological questions regarding the status of linguistic rules and the pervasive--though seldom discussed--tension that arises between theory-driven object perception by linguists on the one hand, and ordinary speakers' possible intuitive knowledge on the other hand. Several issues will be discussed using examples from French verb morphology, based on the 6500 verbs from Le Petit Robert dictionary (2013).

Assessing the sociology of sport: On sport organizations and critical knowledge

The purpose of this contribution is to analyse the trajectory, the challenges and the future of the sociology of sport on three levels: the internal dynamic within the specific sub-field of the sociology of sport, its interactions with sociology and sport sciences, and its relation with sport organizations. The paper notes that the changes of the trajectory of the sociology of sport, first leaning on the profession of physical education teacher and then to sport sciences, as important consequences. Because most of the sociologists specialized in sport are working in sport sciences departments, the most important consequence is the dependency on sport sciences rather than on sociology. Compared to other fields of sociology, it means challenging other sciences for recognition. The paper argues that to face the threat of a marginalization within the field of sport science, the future of sociology of sport could be to fight for an external recognition. Applying sociology could spread critical views that are necessary to sport organizations. It could also give sociologists access to very interesting data, which can help producing good research, and give it a greater legitimacy within sport sciences. However, it is a risky strategy because of the necessity for the sociologists to stay critical both on sporting organization and on their own work.

Another Kind of Knowledge: Aristotle's Phronêsis from an Epistemological Point of View

In my thesis, I defend the idea that Aristotle's notion of phronêsis (practical wisdom) is best understood as a kind of practical knowledge. I interpret phronêsis as the knowledge we display when we make the correct decision to act. In a particular situation that demands a specific response, we have practical knowledge of what to do when we make the best decision possible. This interpretation of phronêsis involves that it is possible to evaluate our decisions epistemically, that is, to evaluate whether we really know what to do or not. Aristotle provides a tool for the evaluation of our decisions, which is a definite kind of argument and which the tradition has called the 'practical syllogism'. The practical syllogism stands as the explanation of our decisions or actions. We invoke it when we want to explain or justify why we act as we do. My claim is that the components of the practical syllogism enable one to evaluate not only the moral character of our actions, but also the epistemic strength of our decisions. Correspondingly, a decision is morally right, i.e. virtuous, if the agent considers the right moral principle to apply, and if he is aware of the relevant circumstances of the situation (moral evaluation). Moreover, a decision displays practical knowledge if the agent meets three conditions (epistemic evaluation): he must desire the moral principle for its own sake; he must have experience in spotting the relevant circumstances of the situation; and he must be able to closely connect these circumstances with the moral principle. This interpretation of phronêsis differs from other more traditional interpretations in the emphasis it puts on phronêsis as knowledge. Other interpretations focus more on the moral dimension on phronêsis, without taking its epistemic value seriously. By contrast, I raise seriously the question of what it takes to genuinely know what one should do in a particular situation. -- Dans ma thèse, je défends l'idée que la notion aristotélicienne de phronêsis (sagesse pratique) doit être interprétée comme connaissance pratique. Je comprends la phronêsis comme étant la connaissance que nous avons lorsque nous prenons une bonne décision. Dans une situation particulière qui demande une réponse précise, nous avons une connaissance pratique lorsque nous prenons la meilleure décision possible. Cette interprétation de la phronêsis implique qu'il est possible d'évaluer nos décisions de manière épistémique, c'est-à-dire, d'évaluer si nous savons vraiment ce qu'il faut faire ou non. Ma position est qu'Aristote fournit un outil pour évaluer épistémiquement nos décisions, qui consiste en un certain type d'argument et que la tradition a appelé le 'syllogisme pratique'. Le syllogisme pratique correspond à l'explication de nos décisions ou de nos actions. Nous invoquons un syllogisme pratique lorsque nous voulons expliquer ou justifier pourquoi nous agissons comme nous le faisons. Les éléments du syllogisme pratique permettent d'évaluer non seulement le caractère moral de nos actions, mais aussi la force épistémique de nos décisions. Par conséquent, une décision est moralement correcte, i.e. vertueuse, si l'agent considère le bon principe moral, et s'il est attentif aux circonstances pertinentes de la situation (évaluation morale). En outre, une décision inclut la connaissance pratique si l'agent remplit trois conditions (évaluation épistémique) : il doit désirer le principe moral pour lui-même, il doit avoir de l'expérience pour déceler les circonstances pertinentes, et il doit pouvoir lier intimement ces circonstances avec le principe moral. Cette interprétation de la phronêsis diffère d'autres interprétations plus traditionnelles par l'emphase mise sur la phronêsis en tant que connaissance. D'autres interprétations se concentrent plus sur la dimension morale de la phronêsis, sans se préoccuper sérieusement de sa valeur épistémique. Au contraire, je pose sérieusement la question des conditions nécessaires pour réellement savoir ce qu'il faut faire dans une situation donnée.

Swiss family physicians' perceptions and attitudes towards knowledge translation practices.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have been performed to understand the way family physicians apply knowledge from medical research in practice. However, very little is known concerning family physicians in Switzerland. In an environment in which information constantly accumulates, it is crucial to identify the major sources of scientific information that are used by family physicians to keep their medical knowledge up to date and barriers to use these sources. Our main objective was to examine medical knowledge translation (KT) practices of Swiss family physicians. METHODS: The population consisted of French- and German-speaking private practice physicians specialised in family medicine. We conducted four interviews and three focus groups (n = 25). The interview guides of the semi-structured interviews and focus groups focused on (a) ways and means used by physicians to keep updated with information relevant to clinical practice; (b) how they consider their role in translating knowledge into practice; (c) potential barriers to KT; (d) solutions proposed by physicians for effective KT. RESULTS: Family physicians find themselves rather ambivalent about the translation of knowledge based on scientific literature, but generally express much interest in KT. They often feel overwhelmed by "information floods" and perceive clinical practice guidelines and other supports to be of limited usefulness for their practice. They often combine various formal and informal information sources to keep their knowledge up to date. Swiss family physicians report considering themselves as artisans, caring for patients with complex needs. CONCLUSION: Improved performance of KT initiatives in family medicine should be tailored to actual needs and based on high quality evidence-based sources.