Ordinary citizens are rarely charged with making consequential decisions in representative democracies. Almost all consequential decisions are delegated to elected representatives or political appointees. On what basis should we judge whether decisions should be placed in the hands of ordinary citizens or delegated to political elites? I argue that decision-making authority should be allocated in whatever way an assembly of randomly selected citizens would choose, given reasonable beliefs about the consequences of their possible choices. The standard I defend is a variation of the principal-agent model of political representation, in which the people are viewed as a principal and officeholders as their agents. As it is usually formulated, the objectives of the people are defined by the preferences of the majority. I draw on this formulation in chapter 4 to explain why the majority might rationally prefer to delegate authority to a citizens’ assembly instead of an elected legislature and why they might rationally view citizens’ assemblies with distrust, when they are organized and administered by elites. But the standard formulation of the principal-agent model does not provide a coherent standard when the will of the majority is not well-defined. Several chapters on social choice theory explain this problem and why political theorists’ previous responses to it have been unconvincing. In light of this problem, I argue for a revisionary understanding of the principal-agent model, according to which the people and its will are identified not with the preferences of the majority but rather with the decisions of a citizens’ assembly. To motivate this approach I offer a critique of the recent literature on “epistemic democracy,” which describes an alternative form of justification for empowering ordinary citizens. Appeals to expertise and knowledge have historically figured prominently in justifications of political exclusion and hierarchy, but epistemic democrats put them to use in defending participatory forms of democratic politics. Epistemic democrats claim that decision processes in which inexpert, ordinary citizens participate can exhibit greater “collective wisdom” than elite- or expert-dominated decision-making. Chapters 2 and 3 explain why these arguments sit uncomfortably with the nature of disagreements in politics. / Government

The purpose of this work is to investigate how processes of inference are reflected in the grammar of the natural language. I consider a range of phenomena which call for a representational theory of mind and thought. These constructions display a certain regularity in their truth conditions, but the regularity does not extend to closure under arbitrary logical entailment. I develop a logic that allows me to speak formally about classes of inferences. This logic is then applied to analysis of indirect speech, belief reports, evidentials (with special attention to Bulgarian) and clarity assertions. / text

There is a lack of exhaustively investigation for the public speech and the modality of politicians’ speech is been researched for the very first time. The society is highly interested in politics and it has a big influence on the users of language. The paper deals with the modality conception and its expression ways in politicians’ speech. The political discussions program’s “Spaudos klubas” materials are used for studies. After analysis of politicians spoken language was made, some bents for modality usage came to light. In a case of epistemic modality possibility and reality, that embrace real facts, are expressed in politicians’ speech. And in a case of deontic modality possibility and necessity, that encompass will acts, are expressed. The usage of dynamic modality in politicians’ speech is very rare. Realis is put into words by indicative mood and irrealis – by subjunctive and imperative mood. Another way politicians express irrealis is future tense. All basic senses of primary modality - reality, possibility and necessary, are introduced in politicians’ spoken language. In discussions programs politicians mostly use reality meaning sentences (65,35 percent). In telecasts people in politics use all types of basic modal sentences. Direct sentences are used in the most part, it is evade a usage of incentive sentences and the number of interrogative sentences is the least. Secondary modality categorical reliability expression cases are more frequent than the problematic... [to full text]

This thesis examines the role of epistemic cognition within the context of a Knowledge Community and Inquiry (KCI) curriculum for secondary science. The study employs a new form of design-based research, called Model-Based Design Research (MBDR), which first maps a formal pedagogical model onto the curriculum design, and then assesses how the enacted curriculum adheres to the design. The curriculum design was a ten-week Grade 11 Biology unit that met the Ontario Ministry requirements for evolution and biodiversity, and included activities situated within a unique immersive environment called EvoRoom. The thesis includes an assessment of students' epistemological views about science and science learning, and evaluates the epistemic commitments of KCI using a relevant theoretical framework of epistemic cognition. The analysis reveals the complex interconnections amongst the epistemological, pedagogical and technological elements of the design, resulting in recommendations for future design iterations as well as theoretical insights concerning the KCI model.

This thesis examines the role of epistemic cognition within the context of a Knowledge Community and Inquiry (KCI) curriculum for secondary science. The study employs a new form of design-based research, called Model-Based Design Research (MBDR), which first maps a formal pedagogical model onto the curriculum design, and then assesses how the enacted curriculum adheres to the design. The curriculum design was a ten-week Grade 11 Biology unit that met the Ontario Ministry requirements for evolution and biodiversity, and included activities situated within a unique immersive environment called EvoRoom. The thesis includes an assessment of students' epistemological views about science and science learning, and evaluates the epistemic commitments of KCI using a relevant theoretical framework of epistemic cognition. The analysis reveals the complex interconnections amongst the epistemological, pedagogical and technological elements of the design, resulting in recommendations for future design iterations as well as theoretical insights concerning the KCI model.

The purpose of this paper is to critically examine Richard Rorty’s arguments in favour of a limited role for religion in the public sphere, both with regard to their practical value and their consistency with Rorty’s other philosophical commitments. A brief description of Rorty’s various philosophical commitments is followed by a detailed analysis of the negative practical consequences that can be foreseen resulting from Rorty’s approach to the topic of religion and any attempt to enforce his proposed treatment of religion. After looking at the practical problems with Rorty’s position, a closer look was taken at Rorty’s consistency across his philosophical writings. With a particular focus on Rorty’s pragmatism and his epistemic relativism the author concludes that Rorty’s arguments for reducing the influence of religion in the public sphere remain of questionable practicality and, furthermore, are at odds with his epistemological commitments. Rorty’s commitment to liberal democracy entails a commitment to protecting citizens’ rights to voice their opinions in hopes of influencing public policy. Despite his controversial writings with regards to the role of religion in society, authors such as Jeffrey Stout and Nicholas Wolterstorff provide alternative approaches to the appropriate treatment of religion in society that remain consistent with an anti-foundational commitment to liberal democracy and can expect to produce more favourable practical outcomes. / Graduate

In this thesis I scavenge the history of philosophy for answers to the question ‘How are claims to knowledge justified?’. I argue that Plato’s psychological doctrine of knowledge marks the starting point of a philosophical inquiry motivated by the possibility to discover foundations of knowledge through investigating the nature of mind. At the core of this inquiry lies the hypothesis that if the psychological mechanisms that govern the capacity for knowledge acquisition is fully understood, then answers will follow about why judgements are true or false. The prospective result of the inquiry is a theory of universal epistemic justification which demarcates epistemically warranted beliefs from unwarranted beliefs. I suggest that there is a historically persistent case of cognitive dissonance within the epistemological enterprise — a tension between two of its central theses — which is caused by the persistence of the of the hitherto unsuccessful but ongoing quest for universal epistemic justification, and its inciting promises. The contradicting theses are those of certain justification (that one is justified in believing that p only if p is entailed by evidence) and proportional justification (that one is proportionally justified in believing that p to the extent that evidence makes p credible). I discuss the consequences of giving up one of the respective theses. I conclude that the thesis of certain justification cannot be given up unless an adequate theory of proportional justification is proposed, and that the legacy of searching for universal epistemic justification will continue unless epistemologists are able to construct one.

This dissertation reports on the results of a study into the characteristics of epistemic topoi and the methods of their identification in a corpus of biomedical publications. The study was conceived in response to the need for a systematized description of the organization of argumentative text and discourse. This need is well recognized in knowledge-intensive fields: information processing, storage, and retrieval; corpus analysis and natural language processing; data mining, knowledge management and translation; professional training and education. The study followed the design of a situated study combined with a methodological inquiry. I used inductive methods to describe the features and functions of recurrent patterns of argumentative and linguistic organization. This part of the study consisted in close reading of a corpus of fifty-five NTG papers and rhetorical and linguistic annotation of seventeen clinical studies (45,599 words) selected from the corpus. The data was generated by means of rhetorical and linguistic analysis. Visual annotation played an essential role in the identification and description of the argumentative patterns, complementing the traditional methods of corpus analysis. Forty-eight basic and nine composite epistemic topoi forming the superstructure of the papers were identified in the corpus. The topoi were found to be loosely associated with the IMRD structure and signalled with configurations of lexicogrammatical, semantic, deictic, and coreferential features. The topoi were classified according to the modes of reasoning and textual and discursive functions. The obtained results confirmed earlier insights into the links of linguistic patterning with text and discourse semantics. A significant outcome of the linguistic analysis is a catalogue of linguistic features that were found to have regular links with the topoi in the corpus. The role of linguistic configurations as identifiers of argumentative meanings makes them a valuable medium of text and discourse analysis. By linking the argumentative meanings to the surface features of text and discourse, the analysis of linguistic configurations presents informatics practitioners with an alternative to the current methods of natural language processing and knowledge management. The catalogue of linguistic features and a detailed description of the study design make the presented findings amenable to secondary analysis, extrapolation, and generalization. The auxiliary objectives of this study were a survey of argumentative practices represented in the corpus and a review of the state of epistemic research. The results of the survey and review suggest that agonistic reasoning practices and over-reliance on reductionist models have negative implications for research writing and communication. Specifically, they hamper analysis of argumentative organization of natural text and discourse. As an alternative to agonistic argumentation, I propose an argumentation model based on Aristotle’s and Kneale’s conceptions of situated knowledge and learning. The model of textual and discursive organization that accommodates situated knowledge and learning is political stasis. This model can be used as a heuristic and analytic tool. In this dissertation I use it as an explanatory conception and as a system of reference points for identifying significant research trends both in argumentation studies and in clinical NTG research.

No description available.

No description available.