Self-assembly of supermolecular species directed by hydrogen bonding and aromatic π-π stacking interactions

A new Cu(II) trimers, [Cu3(dcp)2(H2O)8]. 4DMF, with the ligand 3,5-pyrazoledicarboxylic acid monohydrate (H3dcp) has been prepared by solvent method. Its solid-state structure has been characterized by elemental analysis, thermal analysis (TGA and DSC), and single crystal X-ray diffraction. X-ray crystallographic studies reveal that this complex has extended 1-D,2-D and 3-D supramolecular architectures directed by weak interactions (hydrogen bond and aromatic π-π stacking interaction) leading to a sandwich solid-state structure.

The role of self-knowledge in aristotelian friendship

This paper discusses the capital role that friendship plays in moral self-knowledge within Aristotelian Ethics. It focuses on the different ways in which a friend may shed light on the understanding of our behavior. Great attention is paid to the accounts of certain commentators (especially, of Richard Kraut and Anthony Kenny) on this subject. The paper tries to provide a conciliatory interpretation between views on self-knowledge that are, only in appearance, irreconcilable.

NĀGĀRJUNA AND SCHELLING: OUTLINES OF A DIALOGUE ON SELF, WORLD, AND VIEWPOINTS

ABSTRACT The paper intends to build a dialogue between Nāgārjuna and Schelling on Self, world, and standpoints, taking as main references Nāgārjuna's The Fundamental Verses of the Middle Way and Schelling's Philosophical Letters on Dogmatism and Criticism. Whereas Nāgārjuna criticizes the substantialization of beings by resorting to the discourse of the dependent co-origination in order to overcome suffering, Schelling, on his turn, refutes the fanaticism based on dogmatism's tenets in favor of the criticism interpreted according to its spirit, and not according to its letter, in order to emancipate humanity. Starting with a succint contextualization of the Eastern and Western philosophical discourse, proceeding further to discuss the philosophies of both thinkers, the paper is concluded by assessing their theories.

IS SELF-DECEPTION PRETENSE?

I assess Tamar Gendler's (2007) account of self-deception according to which its characteristic state is not belief, but imaginative pretense. After giving an overview of the literature and presenting the conceptual puzzles engendered by the notion of self-deception, I introduce Gendler's account, which emerges as a rival to practically all extant accounts of self-deception. I object to it by first arguing that her argument for abandoning belief as the characteristic state of self-deception conflates the state of belief and the process of belief-formation when interpreting David Velleman's (2000) thesis that belief is an essentially truth-directed attitude. I then call attention to the fact that Velleman's argument for the identity of motivational role between belief and imagining, on which Gendler's argument for self-deception as pretense depends, conflates two senses of 'motivational role'-a stronger but implausible sense and a weaker but explanatorily irrelevant sense. Finally, I introduce Neil Van Leeuwen's (2009) argument to the effect that belief is the practical ground of all non-belief cognitive attitudes in circum-stances wherein the latter prompt action. I apply this framework to Gendler's account to ultimately show that imaginative pretense fails to explain the existence of voluntary actions which result from self-deception.