In What Sense Are Emotions Evaluations?

Abstract: In this chapter, we first introduce the idea that emotions are evaluations. Next, we explore two approaches attempting to account for this idea in terms of attitudes that are alleged to become emotional when taking evaluative contents. According to the first approach, emotions are evaluative judgments. According to the second, emotions are perceptual experiences of evaluative properties. We explain why this theory remains unsatisfactory insofar as it shares with the evaluative judgement theory the idea that emotions are evaluations in virtue of their contents. We then outline an alternative – the attitudinal theory of emotions. It parts with current theorizing about the emotions in elucidating the fact that emotions are evaluations not in terms of what they represent, but in terms of the attitude subjects take towards what they represent. We explore what sorts of attitudes emotions are and claim that they are felt bodily attitudes.

The Power of Tolerance. A Debate

We invoke the ideal of tolerance in response to conflict, but what does it mean to answer conflict with a call for tolerance? Is tolerance a way of resolving conflicts or a means of sustaining them? Does it transform conflicts into productive tensions, or does it perpetuate underlying power relations? To what extent does tolerance hide its involvement with power and act as a form of depoliticization? Wendy Brown and Rainer Forst debate the uses and misuses of tolerance, an exchange that highlights the fundamental differences in their critical practice despite a number of political similarities. Both scholars address the normative premises, limits, and political implications of various conceptions of tolerance. Brown offers a genealogical critique of contemporary discourses on tolerance in Western liberal societies, focusing on their inherent ties to colonialism and imperialism, and Forst reconstructs an intellectual history of tolerance that attempts to redeem its political virtue in democratic societies. Brown and Forst work from different perspectives and traditions, yet they each remain wary of the subjection and abnegation embodied in toleration discourses, among other issues. The result is a dialogue rich in critical and conceptual reflections on power, justice, discourse, rationality, and identity.

Partiality, Agent-Relative Reasons, and the Individuals View

The paper offers a critical discussion of Simon Keller’s individuals view concerning the grounds of special obligations. It is argued that the view offers a misleading account of agent-relative reasons, which leads to problems with the arguments Keller offers for his view – the Kantian, consequentialist, particularistic argument. Furthermore, it argues that Keller’s argument from phenomenology suffers from not distinguishing between reasons for partiality and reasons from partiality. At best, it can be applied to reasons from partiality – reasons that agents have in virtue of standing in a relationship of partiality with some other person. Thus, the argument does not support the individuals view, as it is compatible with the other approaches Keller discusses. The paper suggests a modified relationship view to ground reasons of partiality.

Increased spread and replication efficiency of Listeria monocytogenes in organotypic brain-slices is related to multilocus variable number of tandem repeat analysis (MLVA) complex.

BACKGROUND Listeria (L.) monocytogenes causes fatal infections in many species including ruminants and humans. In ruminants, rhombencephalitis is the most prevalent form of listeriosis. Using multilocus variable number tandem repeat analysis (MLVA) we recently showed that L. monocytogenes isolates from ruminant rhombencephalitis cases are distributed over three genetic complexes (designated A, B and C). However, the majority of rhombencephalitis strains and virtually all those isolated from cattle cluster in MLVA complex A, indicating that strains of this complex may have increased neurotropism and neurovirulence. The aim of this study was to investigate whether ruminant rhombencephalitis strains have an increased ability to propagate in the bovine hippocampal brain-slice model and can be discriminated from strains of other sources. For this study, forty-seven strains were selected and assayed on brain-slice cultures, a bovine macrophage cell line (BoMac) and a human colorectal adenocarcinoma cell line (Caco-2). They were isolated from ruminant rhombencephalitis cases (n = 21) and other sources including the environment, food, human neurolisteriosis cases and ruminant/human non-encephalitic infection cases (n = 26). RESULTS All but one L. monocytogenes strain replicated in brain slices, irrespectively of the source of the isolate or MLVA complex. The replication of strains from MLVA complex A was increased in hippocampal brain-slice cultures compared to complex C. Immunofluorescence revealed that microglia are the main target cells for L. monocytogenes and that strains from MLVA complex A caused larger infection foci than strains from MLVA complex C. Additionally, they caused larger plaques in BoMac cells, but not CaCo-2 cells. CONCLUSIONS Our brain slice model data shows that all L. monocytogenes strains should be considered potentially neurovirulent. Secondly, encephalitis strains cannot be conclusively discriminated from non-encephalitis strains with the bovine organotypic brain slice model. The data indicates that MLVA complex A strains are particularly adept at establishing encephalitis possibly by virtue of their higher resistance to antibacterial defense mechanisms in microglia cells, the main target of L. monocytogenes.

Linguista sum... sed lingua non definio. Absence de définition de la langue et circularité de la construction structurale

This article analyzes the Jakobsonian classification of aphasias. It aims to show on the one hand the non-linguistic character of this classification and on the other hand its asymmetry, in spite of the fact that its author had conceived his structural construction as symmetrical. The non-linguistic character of Jakobson’s formulation is due to the absence of any definition of language, this absence being the main characteristic of Jakobsonian linguistics: concerning the aphasia problem, the Jakobsonian formulation is linguistic solely by virtue of its object, aphasia, which is already considered as a linguistic concern because it belongs to the field of « language », but which is not defined as such (as linguistic). As for asymmetry, it demonstrates first the circularity of the Jakobsonian representation of language (the duality between structure and functioning), and secondly the non-linguistic character – in the Saussurean sense of the term – of the aphasia problem. Thus it appears that breaking (in the sense of Gaston Bachelard) with idiom is the prerequisite of a scientific apprehension of language, and therefore of any interdisciplinarity, this being one of Jakobson’s favorite topics but one that this linguist failed to render fruitful because he did not offer a real definition of language.

Tugend, Recht und Moral: Tendenzen der Verantwortungszuschreibung

The attribution of responsibility in world society is increasingly a field of contestation. On the one hand, the perceptions of far-reaching causal and moral links between spatially and temporally distant events are ever more explicitly pronounced; on the other hand, the very complexity of these links often engenders a fragmentation of responsibility in law as well as in moral commitment. Identifying three competing conceptualisations of responsibility, namely a turn to virtue ethics, processes of juridification, and processes of moralisation, this article explores their different temporal and social dimensions, and the effects they each have on the relation between those held responsible and those affected by the situation that is to be accounted for.