Philosophy & Technology最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
The Argument Web: an Online Ecosystem of Tools, Systems and Services for Argumentation. 论辩网:论辩工具、系统和服务的在线生态系统。
Philosophy & Technology Pub Date : 2017-01-01 Epub Date: 2017-05-11 DOI: 10.1007/s13347-017-0260-8
Chris Reed, Katarzyna Budzynska, Rory Duthie, Mathilde Janier, Barbara Konat, John Lawrence, Alison Pease, Mark Snaith
{"title":"The Argument Web: an Online Ecosystem of Tools, Systems and Services for Argumentation.","authors":"Chris Reed,&nbsp;Katarzyna Budzynska,&nbsp;Rory Duthie,&nbsp;Mathilde Janier,&nbsp;Barbara Konat,&nbsp;John Lawrence,&nbsp;Alison Pease,&nbsp;Mark Snaith","doi":"10.1007/s13347-017-0260-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0260-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Argument Web is maturing as both a platform built upon a synthesis of many contemporary theories of argumentation in philosophy and also as an ecosystem in which various applications and application components are contributed by different research groups around the world. It already hosts the largest publicly accessible corpora of argumentation and has the largest number of interoperable and cross compatible tools for the analysis, navigation and evaluation of arguments across a broad range of domains, languages and activity types. Such interoperability is key in allowing innovative combinations of tool and data reuse that can further catalyse the development of the field of computational argumentation. The aim of this paper is to summarise the key foundations, the recent advances and the goals of the Argument Web, with a particular focus on demonstrating the relevance to, and roots in, philosophical argumentation theory.</p>","PeriodicalId":513391,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Technology","volume":"30 2","pages":"137-160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s13347-017-0260-8","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"37615139","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 30
Natural Selection, Childrearing, and the Ethics of Marriage (and Divorce): Building a Case for the Neuroenhancement of Human Relationships. 《自然选择、养育子女和婚姻(和离婚)的伦理:建立人际关系神经增强的案例》。
Philosophy & Technology Pub Date : 2012-12-01 Epub Date: 2012-07-05 DOI: 10.1007/s13347-012-0081-8
Brian D Earp, Anders Sandberg, Julian Savulescu
{"title":"Natural Selection, Childrearing, and the Ethics of Marriage (and Divorce): Building a Case for the Neuroenhancement of Human Relationships.","authors":"Brian D Earp, Anders Sandberg, Julian Savulescu","doi":"10.1007/s13347-012-0081-8","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s13347-012-0081-8","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We argue that the fragility of contemporary marriages-and the corresponding high rates of divorce-can be explained (in large part) by a three-part mismatch: between our relationship values, our evolved psychobiological natures, and our modern social, physical, and technological environment. \"Love drugs\" could help address this mismatch by boosting our psychobiologies while keeping our values and our environment intact. While individual couples should be free to use pharmacological interventions to sustain and improve their romantic connection, we suggest that they may have an obligation to do so as well, in certain cases. Specifically, we argue that couples with offspring may have a special responsibility to enhance their relationships for the sake of their children. We outline an evolutionarily informed research program for identifying promising biomedical enhancements of love and commitment.</p>","PeriodicalId":513391,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Technology","volume":"25 4","pages":"561-587"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3510696/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"31111234","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The Right and Wrong of Growing Old: Assessing the Argument from Evolution. 变老的对与错:评估进化论的论点。
Philosophy & Technology Pub Date : 2012-12-01 Epub Date: 2012-02-28 DOI: 10.1007/s13347-012-0066-7
Bennett Foddy
{"title":"The Right and Wrong of Growing Old: Assessing the Argument from Evolution.","authors":"Bennett Foddy","doi":"10.1007/s13347-012-0066-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-012-0066-7","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>One argument which is frequently levelled against the enhancement of human biology is that we do not understand the evolved function of our bodies well enough to meddle in our biology without producing unintended and potentially catastrophic effects. In particular, this argument is levelled against attempts to slow or eliminate the processes of human ageing, or 'senescence', which cause us to grow decrepit before we die. In this article, I claim that even if this argument could usefully be applied against attempts to enhance other human traits, it cannot be valid in the case of attempts to enhance the various processes that constitute senescence. I begin by reviewing the biology of ageing to show how it consists of a number of unrelated traits. Then, following the arguments of a number of evolutionary biologists, I explain that every one of these traits is a product of evolutionary 'neglect' rather than 'intent'. Finally, I consider the strongest version of the argument against enhancing senescence, which acknowledges these facts about the evolution of ageing but insists that we have nevertheless have prudential reasons to avoid enhancement wherever there is some uncertainty about the genetics or evolutionary function of a trait. I provide two reasons for rejecting this version of the argument as well, even in the case of human senescence, where such uncertainty is currently significant.</p>","PeriodicalId":513391,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Technology","volume":"25 4","pages":"547-560"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s13347-012-0066-7","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"31228314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信