Problem Of Incommensurability Research Articles

Against the integrative turn in bioethics: burdens of understanding.

The advocates of Integrative Bioethics have insisted that this recently emerging project aspires to become a new stage of bioethical development, surpassing both biomedically oriented bioethics and global bioethics. We claim in this paper that if the project wants to successfully replace the two existing paradigms, it at least needs to properly address and surmount the lack of common moral vocabulary problem. This problem points to a semantic incommensurability due to cross-language communication in moral terms. This paper proceeds as follows. In the first part, we provide an overview of Integrative Bioethics and its conceptual building blocks: mutlidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity. In the second part, we disclose the problem of semantic incommensurability. The third part gives an overview of various positions on the understanding of interdisciplinarity and integration in interdisciplinary communication, and corresponding attempts at solving the lack of common moral vocabulary problem. Here we lean mostly on Holbrook's three theses regarding the character of interdisciplinary communication. Finally, in the fourth part, we discuss a particular bioethical case-that of euthanasia-to demonstrate the challenge semantic incommensurability poses to dialogues in Integrative Bioethics. We conclude that Integrative Bioethics does not offer a methodological toolset that would warrant optimism in its advocates' predictions of surpassing current modes of doing bioethics. Since Integrative Bioethics leaves controversial methodological questions unresolved on almost all counts and shows no attempts at overcoming the critical stumbling points, we argue for its rejection.

THE POLITICS OF DESPAIR AND THE CALLING OF HISTORY

ABSTRACTWhat happens to history as a set of practices and intellectual protocols when the assumed subject of our historical narratives is not a product of the European Enlightenment? Such has been the question motivating much of Dipesh Chakrabarty's work for almost thirty years. This essay offers a largely chronological account of Chakrabarty's major works. It begins with his first book, published in 1989, which provided a culturalist account of working‐class history in Bengal. It then tracks his movement in the early 1990s toward a position positing radical disjuncture and even incommensurability between the worlds of Indian subalterns and Western moderns, and his subsequent attempts to soften and blur precisely this kind of disjuncture. Meditating on the problems posed by the experiences of subjects who did not live within the time of history led him to answer in the affirmative the question of whether there are experiences of the past that history could not capture. Soon thereafter, however, he drew back from the most extensive articulation of this claim, suggesting that the experiences of the non‐Enlightenment subject could function as a positive resource and not merely as the source of a profound and destabilizing critique. I argue here that this solution to the problem of incommensurability is not entirely satisfactory, for it relies implicitly on precisely the kinds of argumentative asymmetries of which his earlier analysis taught us to be wary. Chakrabarty himself, meanwhile, has continued to step further away from the radicalism of the early 1990s; his most recent book may be read as a defense of rationalist history in the face of contemporary threats posed by the rise of a politics of identity in India.

Problems of Incommensurability

This essay discusses implications of incommensurability of values for justified decision-making, ethics and justice. Under particular conditions incommensurability of values causes what might be called ‘incomplete comparability’ of options. Some leading theorists interpret this in terms of ‘imprecise equality’ and ‘imprecise comparability.’ This interpretation is mistaken and conceals the implications of incommensurability for practical and ethical reasoning. The aim of this essay is to show that, in many cases, incommensurability prevents the assignment of determinate weights to competing values. This may have problematic consequences for a complete and impartial justification of decisions concerning conflicting values to the extent that they depend on the need of weighing them.

Some problems of Alasdair Macintyre’s ‘emotivism thesis’

In this article Alasdair MacIntyre’s thesis concerning emotivist use of moral utterances in contemporary liberal societies is analysed. One tries to show that it needs further clarification since at least three elements of MacIntyre’s argument seem to pose certain problems; these are: ‘discussion halt’ as the source of emotivism, comprehensive doctrines as premises of respective arguments in liberal debates and the problem of incommensurability. These three problematic elements are discussed and interrelations between them are adumbrated.

Passions, Affections, and Emotions: Methodological Difficulties in Reconstructing Aquinas's Philosophical Psychology

AbstractOne methodological difficulty with studying emotions in medieval culture is that the very category of emotion is a modern one that did not exist until two centuries ago. Medieval affective psychology involved concepts such as passions, affections, sentiments, and appetites. It is not immediately clear whether any of these medieval categories are commensurable with the modern category of emotion. I refer to this problem as the problem of incommensurability. In this paper, I illustrate this methodological issue by focusing on Thomas Aquinas's “Treatise on the Passions” and offer some suggestions for overcoming this difficulty.

Free Speech in Platoos Gorgias

As this new reading of Plato’s Gorgias shows, four distinct positions with regard to freedom of speech are introduced in this classical text on the relations between philosophy and rhetoric: two realistic and two logical. The realism of rhetoric poses the key political problem of incommensurability between freedom and justice. The realism of philosophy is able to solve this problem, but only through a mediatory differentiation of two purely logical stands, which might have found direct counterparts in the two dominant forms of political philosophy in the 20th century. One of them is political liberalism, which corresponds to the ‘geometric’ way of argumentation in ‘Gorgias’ and inevitably passes into a theory of normative justice. Another is the mainstream ‘continental’ philosophy, which corresponds to the ‘erotic’ way of argumentation in Gorgias and explores the possibilities of the positive freedom.

Reframing Problems of Incommensurability in Environmental Conflicts through Pragmatic Sociology: From Value Pluralism to the Plurality of Modes of Engagement with the Environment

This paper presents the contribution of the pragmatic sociology of critical capacities to the understanding of environmental conflicts. In the field of ‘environmental valuation', nowadays colonised by economics, the approach of plural modes (or ‘regimes') of engagement provides a sociological understanding of the unequal power of conflicting ‘languages of valuation'. This frame entails a shift from ‘values’ to ‘modes of valuation', and links modes of valuation to modes of practical engagement and coordination with the surrounding environment. Different social sources of incommensurability are thus detected and reframed as critical tension within and among modes of human coordination with the environment.

Spirits and Molecules: Ethnopharmacology and Symmetrical Epistemological Pluralism

ABSTRACTEthnopharmacology is the scientific study of indigenous drugs. Herein, I discuss some of the metaphysical issues at stake when rendering traditional medicines scientifically legible. I draw on my laboratory experience, my limited experience with Amazonian shamanism, and the ethnographic literature to consider drugs as relational entities animated in their particular cosmological milieu, with wider historical determinants stabilizing their ontologies. In relation to the problem of incommensurability that comes to the fore in ethnopharmacology, I review the broad problems faced by ethnopharmacology researchers, and extending Daston's concept of ‘applied metaphysics’ from history of science, I analyse ethnopharmacology as a process of synchronic translation across distinct regimes of knowledge and practice, offering insights into an anthropology of incommensurability that rests upon symmetrical epistemological pluralism. This theory may facilitate ethnopharmacologists and anthropologists in negotiations between incommensurable regimes of knowledge by fostering recognition of a plurality of ways of knowing.

How proportional is proportionality?

Proportionality is a set of rules determining the conditions for a limitation of constitutionally protected rights. It is the mainstay of the protection of constitutional human rights in many Western democracies and worldwide. Aharon Barak’s Proportionality is probably the most important and comprehensive book written on the subject to date. The essay presents several key arguments concerning the weaknesses of proportionality in the model proposed and developed by Barak, and shows how Barak’s rejection of various arguments against proportionality is not fully convincing. The essay suggests that the benefits of Barak’s structuring of proportionality are more modest than Barak maintains; points out the weaknesses of Barak’s approach in regard to the interpretation of constitutional rights, which entails a trivialization of the rights and has problematic consequences for the interpretation and application of proportionality as well as undesirable symbolic connotations; and asserts that Barak’s approach increases the problem of incommensurability, which is inherent in the doctrine of proportionality. The essay claims that despite the importance of the book it does not provide a satisfactory answer to many difficult and complex problems regarding proportionality.

Resolving Spirited Debates: Recasting Communication Inquiry as a Spiritual Practice

This paper argues that communication inquiry can be understood as a spiritual practice. Specifically, it looks at three paradigms of communication inquiry: classical scientific, interpretive, and critical. It identifies the spiritual traditions that align with each paradigm and shows how understanding each paradigm from a spiritual perspective can improve the practice of inquiry. Understanding communication inquiry as spiritual also helps address the problem of interparadigmatic incommensurability. This paper closes by identifying common components of spiritual inquiry across the three paradigms.

On economic paradigms, rhetoric and the micro-foundations of macroeconomics

<section class="abstract"> This paper considers from a methodological point of view why disputes in macroeconomics over its fundamental assumptions regularly occur. It analyses the problem first using Kuhn's concept of the paradigm and then draws on McCloskey's use of rhetorical analysis. It finds the latter of limited help due to the problem of incommensurability between paradigms. It concludes with a discussion of the debate over the need for rethinking the issue and rigour of micro-foundations in macroeconomic theory, notably in terms of the representative agent model. </section>

Rethinking Disagreement: Philosophical Incommensurability and Meta-Philosophy

Set in the context of the current interest among Analytic philosophers in the “epistemology of disagreement,” this paper explores the meta-philosophical problem of philosophical incommensurability. Motivated by Nietzsche’s provocative remark about philosophy as prejudices and desires of the heart “sifted and made abstract,” the paper first outlines the contours of the problem and then traces it through a series of examples. Drawing largely on the tradition of phenomenology and philosophical hermeneutics, a broadly Continental response to this formidable problem is suggested. Disagreement cannot be understood simply in terms of epistemological strategy, but needs to be regarded in a fundamentally hermeneutical light.

Thomas Kuhn et l’oubli de la pratique

Cet article examine l’œuvre de Thomas Kuhn au prisme du rôle que joue la notion de pratique dans le développement de sa théorie de la rationalité scientifique. Je commence par exposer les enjeux épistémologiques de la théorie de l’incommensurabilité. Je montre ensuite comment l’intuition originale d’une conception pratique et sociale de l’incommensurabilité en vient à être remplacée par une interprétation linguistique plus conventionnelle. Dans la deuxième partie de l’article, j’examine la solution donnée par Kuhn au problème de l’incommensurabilité et j’en montre l’insuffisance. Je montre ensuite que c’est l’incapacité à penser la dimension épistémologique de la pratique qui empêche Kuhn de donner une solution pleinement satisfaisante au problème épistémologique soulevé par La structure des révolutions scientifiques.

Radical-cum-Relation: Bridging Feminist Ethics and Native Individual Autonomy

For the purpose of advancing the feminist commitment to inclusion and nonliberal articulations of pluralism, in this essay I conceptualize the Native account of individual autonomy that itself evolves from a commitment to pluralism. I demonstrate that Native individual autonomy is concurrently strong and feminist in nature—what I call “radical-cum-relational.” That is, Native autonomy is more radical than the traditional liberal conception and is simultaneously grounded in relationality, which is the basis of much of feminist ethics. I demonstrate that the Native conception of autonomy is radical and promotes the highest degree of individual self-determination and independence qua individuality and particularity. Yet this radical self-determination depends on intense social interdependency. The grounding metaphysics and epistemology of the Native framework are conceived entirely in terms of ethical relationships between and responsibilities to other individuals, animals, and the Earth. That is, no part of the Native paradigm can be understood outside of the ethical connections persons have by virtue of their primary position as community members. It is by situating radical autonomy against a background of ethical social interdependence, together with the background condition of gender equality of Native practices, that the radical construal of Native individual freedom is feminist. To shore up and illustrate the connection between Native autonomy and feminism, I argue that an identification between the Native social practice of gifting and feminist reciprocity can be made, specifically Iris Marion Young’s notion of asymmetrical reciprocity. Finally, I argue that this connection avoids the problem of incommensurability and so is theoretically possible, responsible, and fits the criterion of respectfulness also at the foundation of the Native framework. Broadly speaking, the problem of incommensurability is concerned with theorists’ inability to recognize foundational incompatibilities between paradigms and their forced attempts to merge them, often at the price of ignoring inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and contradictions that result from impossible translations and conversions. Historically and to the present day, Western philosophy has been egregiously guilty of distorting Native theories and practices. In this essay I argue that since translation takes place at the level of praxis rather than at the level of language, my argument circumvents problems that arise from failed attempts to map cultural concepts onto others that do not share similar foundations.

The Real Virtue of Friedman's Neo-Kantian Philosophy of Science

Michael Friedman has recently developed a neo-Kantian conception of science as a rival to holistic accounts. According to Friedman, the main virtue of his neo-Kantian philosophy is that it resolves the problem of incommensurability. A close reading of Friedman's work, however, indicates that his account surprisingly accomplishes the opposite of what he believes to have defended. This article will argue that the real virtue of Friedman's neo-Kantian account of scientific theories is not that it resolves the problem of incommensurability but that it provides an elegant philosophical account much needed to substantiate Thomas Kuhn's historical thesis of incommensurability.

The Economic Problem of Happiness: Keynes on Happiness and Economics

By stressing the substantial continuity of vision between John Maynard Keynes’s early unpublished essays and his more mature writings, the paper discusses Keynes’s ethics and focuses on his thoughts about happiness. In particular, we emphasize the anti-utilitarianism of Keynes’s vision and his belief that material wealth is but a precondition to enjoy the possibilities of a good life, and direct attention to problems of incommensurability raised by the multidimensional nature of happiness as considered by Keynes. We then argue that the rediscovery of Keynes’s legacy in this respect may be a precious counterweight to the most controversial aspects of today’s happiness research.

Reciprocity and practical comparability

Reciprocity does not require exactness but only a certain equilibrium in the things reciprocated: it is often overabundant. In addition, reciprocity may be fulfilled by returning something of a different kind that may be heterogeneous and incommensurable with the thing received. The reason of this “uneven response” of reciprocity is that in these situations the exchange of means aims at manifesting some values that are ends for the persons involved. Hence, the consideration of reciprocity supposes a reinsertion of ends in economics. The paper firstly defines reciprocity. Next, it summarizes a variety of arguments for a reconsideration of ends in economics. After that, it explains the differences between the rationalities of means and ends. A key difference lies in the problem of incommensurability of ends. This problem will be then tackled and a possible way to overcome it will be proposed. It will be finally sustained that practical comparability allows for incommensurable fair reciprocation.

Reference and Incommensurability: What Rigid Designation Won’t Get You

Causal theories of reference in the philosophy of language and philosophy of science have suggested that it could resolve lingering worries about incommensurability between theoretical claims in different paradigms, to borrow Kuhn’s terms. If we co-refer throughout different paradigms, then the problems of incommensurability are greatly diminished, according to causal theorists. I argue that assuring ourselves of that sort of constancy of reference will require comparable sorts of cross-paradigm affinities, and thus provides us with no special relief on this problem. Suggestions on how to think about rigid designation across paradigms are included.

Paradigmapping Studies of Culture and Organization

This article argues that cross cultural management research is in a crisis of its own making. It is a captive of the delusion that nomothetic theory is progressing towards convergence of an ideal view. Within the context of this fallacy are competing perspectives and paradigms that appear incommensurable. The battle appears to be which paradigm will win. It is our contention that the battle is futile and unnecessary. We reveal how `paradigmapping' is useful in understanding the manner in which paradigms and incommensurability can be framed in discourse involving culture and organization. Through this work of Frijof Capra we seek to formulate a new perspective on paradigms. This view enables an informative account of where principal contributions can be located within the intellectual space of studies of culture and organizations. It reveals that all knowledge contributions are captive of one privileged view, tolerant of a second marginalized view and denigrative or ignorant of a third view. In other words, all knowledge is captive of blind prejudices. We offer an outline of strategic research options within the field and the potential for transcending potential problems of incommensurability. We conclude that `anything goes', as long as it involves what Capra has called `epistemic consciousness'; namely a realization of the prejudices inherent in our epistemologies, a determination to avoid single-paradigm myopia, and encouragement to employ bricolage in the context of local moralities, relationships and actionable outcomes.

Pyramids or Silos: Alternative Representations of the Systems Thinking Paradigms

This paper is written from the perspective of a practitioner-researcher coming to terms with methodologically or theoretically pluralist practice. Common depictions of the relationship between the hard and soft paradigms are discussed, including the influence of the problem of paradigmatic incommensurability. The consequences of different ways in which this relationship is depicted are examined, in light of various perspectives on the relationship of Critical Systems Thinking to these paradigms. Alternative models of this relationship are provided, followed by discussion of how these models can be extended to combinations of other paradigms in different contexts.