On justifications and excuses

The New Evil Demon problem has been hotly debated since the case was introduced in the early 1980’s (e.g. Lehrer and Cohen 1983; Cohen 1984), and there seems to be recent increased interest in the topic. In a forthcoming collection of papers on the New Evil Demon problem (Dutant and Dorsch, forthcoming), at least two of the papers, both by prominent epistemologists, attempt to resist the problem by appealing to the distinction between justification and excuses. My primary aim here is to critically evaluate this new excuse maneuver as a response to the New Evil Demon problem. Their response attempts to give us reason to reject the idea that victims of the New Evil Demon have justification for believing as they do. I shall argue that this approach is ultimately unsuccessful, however much of value can be learned from these attempts. In particular, progress in the debate can be made by following those who advance the excuse maneuver and make explicit the connection between epistemic justification and epistemic norms. By doing so, the questions being debated are clarified, as is the methodology being used to attempt to answer them

On the Nature of Intellectual Vice

Vice epistemology, as Quassim Cassam understands it, is the study of the nature, identity, and significance of the epistemic vices. But what makes an intellectual vice a vice? Cassam calls his own view “Obstructivism” – intellectual vices are those traits, thinking styles, or attitudes that systematically obstruct the acquisition, retention, and transmission of knowledge. I shall argue that Cassam’s account is an improvement upon virtue-reliabilism, and that it fares better against what I call Montmarquet’s objection than its immediate rivals. Nevertheless, I contend that it does not go far enough — Montmarquet’s objection stands. I conclude that either the objection needs to be answered in some other way, or else proponents of Obstructivism need to explain why their account of the nature of the intellectual vices does not have the counterintuitive consequences it appears to have. Alternatively, another account of the nature of the intellectual vices needs to be sought

On the Possibility of Knowledge through Unsafe Testimony

If knowledge requires safety, then one might think that when the epistemic source of knowledge is testimony, that testimony must itself be safe. Otherwise, will not the lack of safety transfer from testimony to hearer, such that hearer will lack knowledge? Resisting this natural line of reasoning, Goldberg (2005; 2007) argues that testimonial knowledge through unsafe testimony is possible on the basis of two cases. Lackey (2008) and Pelling (2013) criticize Goldberg’s examples. But Pelling goes on to provide his own example that attempts to show that Goldberg’s thesis is true: one can gain safe testimonial belief from unsafe testimony. If any of these counterexamples were correct, they would undermine the main reason to think that knowledge based on unsafe testimony is impossible. My aim in this paper is to critically assess these arguments, and to consider the possibility of knowledge through unsafe testimony. Drawing a general moral from the analysis of these cases, I shall contend that it is impossible to acquire safe belief solely on the basis of unsafe testimony. If so, then testimonial knowledge based solely on unsafe testimony is impossible

Disqualifying ‘Disqualifiers’

In addition to the notion of defeat, do we need to expand the epistemological repertoire used in accounting for the context dependence of justification? It has recently been argued that we ought to admit a hitherto unrecognized fundamental epistemic kind called ‘disqualifiers’. Disqualifiers are taken to be not reducible to any other epistemic notion. Rather, they are meant to be primitive. If this is correct, it is a surprising and novel discovery, and so it is worthy of further epistemological investigation. In this paper I shall first argue that the cases given do not motivate positing the notion of a disqualifier. Conclusions drawn about the existence of disqualifiers do not follow from the considerations advanced. Second, I shall directly argue that an essential core claim of those who would posit disqualifiers, that so-called disqualifiers actually do prevent epistemic bases from conferring justification, is false. In sum, I shall argue that there are no disqualifiers

Aerodynamic spike nozzle Patent

Constructing fluid spike nozzle to eliminate heat transfer and high temperature problems inherent in physical spike

Temperature dependent refractive index of silicon and germanium

Silicon and germanium are perhaps the two most well-understood semiconductor materials in the context of solid state device technologies and more recently micromachining and nanotechnology. Meanwhile, these two materials are also important in the field of infrared lens design. Optical instruments designed for the wavelength range where these two materials are transmissive achieve best performance when cooled to cryogenic temperatures to enhance signal from the scene over instrument background radiation. In order to enable high quality lens designs using silicon and germanium at cryogenic temperatures, we have measured the absolute refractive index of multiple prisms of these two materials using the Cryogenic, High-Accuracy Refraction Measuring System (CHARMS) at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, as a function of both wavelength and temperature. For silicon, we report absolute refractive index and thermo-optic coefficient (dn/dT) at temperatures ranging from 20 to 300 K at wavelengths from 1.1 to 5.6 microns, while for germanium, we cover temperatures ranging from 20 to 300 K and wavelengths from 1.9 to 5.5 microns. We compare our measurements with others in the literature and provide temperature-dependent Sellmeier coefficients based on our data to allow accurate interpolation of index to other wavelengths and temperatures. Citing the wide variety of values for the refractive indices of these two materials found in the literature, we reiterate the importance of measuring the refractive index of a sample from the same batch of raw material from which final optical components are cut when absolute accuracy greater than +/-5 x 10^-3 is desired.Comment: 10 pages, 8 figures, to be published in the Proc. of SPIE 6273 (Orlando

The zinc finger transcription factor PLAGL2 enhances stem cell fate and activates expression of ASCL2 in intestinal epithelial cells

O encaminhamento de textos originais para submissão seguem algumas orientações básicas, levando em conta, inicialmente, que devem ser inéditos e que serão submetidos à aprovação de avaliadores especialistas nos temas tratados. Para acessar as informações acerca dos objetivos, da política editorial e das diretrizes e normas de publicação da Revista Trabalho & Educação, clique nos links SOBRE e/ou NORMAS, localizados no topo da página eletrônica da Revista. Agradecemos muitíssimo o interesse em publicar na Revista

Temperature-dependent Refractive Index of CaF2 and Infrasil 301

In order to enable high quality lens designs using calcium fluoride (CaF2) and Heraeus Infrasil 301 (Infrasil) for cryogenic operating temperatures, we have measured the absolute refractive index of these two materials as a function of both wavelength and temperature using the Cryogenic, High-Accuracy Refraction Measuring System (CHARMS) at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. For CaF2, we report absolute refractive index and thermo-optic coefficient (dn/dT) at temperatures ranging from 25 to 300 K at wavelengths from 0.4 to 5.6 pm, while for Infrasil, we cover temperatures ranging from 35 to 300 K and wavelengths from 0.4 to 3.6 pm. For CaF2, we compare our index measurements to measurements of other investigators. For Infrasil, we compare our measurements to the mate~al manufacturer's data at room temperature and to cryogenic measurements for fused silica from previous investigations including one of our own. Finally, we provide temperature-dependent Sellmeier coefficients based on our measured data to allow accurate interpolation of index to other wavelengths and temperatures