Search Results

Somatoparaphrenia, Anosognosia, and Higher-Order Thoughts

Rocco J. Gennaro

in Disturbed Consciousness: New Essays on Psychopathology and Theories of Consciousness

Rocco J. Gennaro defends the HOT theory of consciousness against the charge that it cannot account for somatoparaphrenia, a delusion where one denies ownership of a limb, and the related anosognosia, ... More

Rocco J. Gennaro defends the HOT theory of consciousness against the charge that it cannot account for somatoparaphrenia, a delusion where one denies ownership of a limb, and the related anosognosia, a condition in which a person who suffers from a disability seems unaware of the existence of the disability. Liang and Lane have argued that somatoparaphrenia threatens HOT theory because it contradicts the notion that according to HOT theory, when I am in a conscious state, I have the HOT that “I am in mental state M.” The ‘I’ is not only importantly self-referential but essential to tying the conscious state to oneself and thus to one’s ownership of M. Indeed, it is difficult to understand how one can have a conscious state but not, at least implicitly, attribute it to oneself. Gennaro argues, for example, that understanding somatoparaphrenia as a delusion leads to a number of replies to Lane and Liang. He also examines the central notions of “mental state ownership” and “self-concepts” to account especially for the depersonalization aspect of somatoparaphrenia. Among other things, Gennaro also discusses to what extent HOT theory can make sense of Shoemaker’s immunity to error through misidentification (IEM) principle.Less

Nelson, Cole v. Young, and the Beginning of the Campaign against the Court: (October Term 1955)

Robert M. Lichtman

in The Supreme Court and McCarthy-Era Repression: One Hundred Decisions

This chapter discusses the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions during its October 1955 term. The flow of decisions in “Communist” cases became heavier in the 1955 term, with the Court handing down nine ... More

This chapter discusses the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions during its October 1955 term. The flow of decisions in “Communist” cases became heavier in the 1955 term, with the Court handing down nine signed decisions. The nine decisions ran the gamut of government action against “subversives”: two contempt cases, one of them against a defense lawyer; a deportation and a denaturalization case; the Subversive Activities Control Board’s order directing the American Communist Party (CPUSA) to register under the Internal Security Act; one case each involving federal and state public-employee loyalty programs; a private-employer firing upheld by state courts; and the criminal conviction of Steve Nelson, a CPUSA official, under a state sedition statute.Less

The Death Throes of Absolute Immunity: The Government of Uganda Before the English Courts

Rosalyn Higgins Dbe Qc

in Themes and Theories

The State Immunity Act of 1978 (the Act) is now in effect in the United Kingdom. The case, Uganda Company (Holdings) Ltd. v Government of Uganda, is of considerable interest. It illustrates what will ... More

The State Immunity Act of 1978 (the Act) is now in effect in the United Kingdom. The case, Uganda Company (Holdings) Ltd. v Government of Uganda, is of considerable interest. It illustrates what will surely be a key problem for the next few years in both the United States and the United Kingdom: the relationship between the concepts of act of state and sovereign immunity. It also provides useful source material on the relationship between international and domestic law. The doctrine of transformation entailed the view that international law became the law of the forum by virtue of its principles being adopted by domestic law. It then became a rule of English law to which stare decisis applied. The doctrine of incorporation, by contrast, would permit an English court to identify the current state of international law and to apply it. More specifically, the Court of Appeal could give effect to changes in international law without waiting for the House of Lords to act first.Less

Execution of State Property: United Kingdom Practice*

Rosalyn Higgins Dbe Qc

in Themes and Theories

This chapter deals with attitudes in the United Kingdom to the attachment or execution of state property pursuant to a judicial ruling by a Court. It is divided into two parts: the first covers the ... More

This chapter deals with attitudes in the United Kingdom to the attachment or execution of state property pursuant to a judicial ruling by a Court. It is divided into two parts: the first covers the attitude and practice of the United Kingdom with regard to the attachment or execution of foreign state property within the former’s jurisdiction. The second comments on the attitude and practice of the United Kingdom government to attachment or execution of its property located within the jurisdiction of foreign states. It is only very recently that the English Courts have moved away from a doctrine of absolute immunity in respect of claims made against foreign sovereigns. The United Kingdom has only just become a party to either of the major international treaties that touch on important aspects of state immunity. The United Kingdom has taken the position — even prior to the passing of the State Immunity Act of 1978 and prior to its stated intention to ratify the European Convention on State Immunity — that it would pay judgment debts.Less

Execution of State Property in English Law

Rosalyn Higgins Dbe Qc

in Themes and Theories

It was not until the 1970s that the United Kingdom abandoned its longstanding adherence to the doctrine of absolute immunity from suit in respect to claims made against foreign states or governments. ... More

It was not until the 1970s that the United Kingdom abandoned its longstanding adherence to the doctrine of absolute immunity from suit in respect to claims made against foreign states or governments. The transition from absolute to qualified immunity occurred, first in the common law and then more apprehensively, by statute. The question of execution of state property could arise where there had been a waiver of immunity from jurisdiction, or the entering of unconditional appearance. So far as in rem proceedings are concerned, the very nature of the proceedings somewhat blurs the normal distinction between jurisdiction and execution. In the in personam common law cases that affirmed restrictive immunity, the issue of execution was not clearly addressed. Section 9 of the State Immunity Act of 1978 provides that where a state has agreed in writing to arbitration (either ad hoc or in respect of a future dispute), it will not be immune from preceedings in the courts of the United Kingdom which relate to the arbitration.Less

Sovereign Immunity and the Enforcement of International Cultural Property Law

Riccardo Pavoni

in Enforcing International Cultural Heritage Law

This chapter examines the extent to which states can raise the defence of sovereign immunity from suit and execution. It describes three exceptions to immunity from suit that may apply in cases ... More

This chapter examines the extent to which states can raise the defence of sovereign immunity from suit and execution. It describes three exceptions to immunity from suit that may apply in cases involving cultural property. The first is the ‘commercial exception’ to state immunity, such as that provided by article 10 of the United Nations Convention on State Immunity (UNCSI), or § 1605(a)(2) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) in the United States. The second is the ‘ownership, possession, and use of property’ exception and its limitations (as per article 13 UNCSI, or § 1605(a)(4) FSIA). The third is the ‘expropriation’ exception of § 1605(a)(3) of the FSIA. The chapter discusses the difficulties resulting from the recognition of these limited exceptions. In the area of immunity from execution, it considers the extent to which a ‘cultural heritage’ exemption from measures of constraint is legitimate when claims for the recovery of art based on customary or treaty obligations or for the return of cultural objects taken away in times of war or peace are brought before the courts. It also discusses the contours and feasibility of a ‘cultural human rights’ exception to sovereign and sovereign-property immunity along the lines of the Italian Ferrini jurisprudence.Less

Introduction

Alexej Ulbricht

in Multicultural Immunisation: Liberalism and Esposito

This chapter introduces the topic by looking at some of the inconsistencies in contemporary discourses of multiculturalism. The starting point is that there is at one and the same time all manner of ... More

This chapter introduces the topic by looking at some of the inconsistencies in contemporary discourses of multiculturalism. The starting point is that there is at one and the same time all manner of hostility towards minorities and a persistent idea that the UK is a place that welcomes and celebrates diversity. This contradictory discourse is illustrated through a brief look at four types of fear that exist around immigration – over security, economy, culture, and nature. This does not function as a systematic inquiry, but rather sets the scene for the theoretical argument that follows. The basic argument is that rather than understanding the hostility towards minorities as a backlash against multiculturalism it needs to be seen as a tendency that is already inscribed within liberal multiculturalism. This tendency is best understood as a process of immunisation. The second part of the chapter gives a brief initial outline of Esposito’s conception of immunity – as the incorporation of a dangerous outside element into the body in order to strengthen it against that element – as well as providing some background on EspositoLess

Multiculturalism as a Mode of Immunising the Body of Liberalism

Alexej Ulbricht

in Multicultural Immunisation: Liberalism and Esposito

This chapter explains the usage of Esposito’s concept of the immunity paradigm, and how it is operationalised to talk about multiculturalism. It begins with an account of Esposito’s theory on ... More

This chapter explains the usage of Esposito’s concept of the immunity paradigm, and how it is operationalised to talk about multiculturalism. It begins with an account of Esposito’s theory on community and how it is linked to the notion of immunity – focusing mainly on his books Communitas and Immunitas. Immunisation is a protective reaction against a risk that exists on the border between inside and outside – it is the partial incorporation of that external risk to strengthen the body. The chapter argues that liberals perceive of non-liberal culture as such a risk, and that liberal multiculturalism consists of a series of processes that partially incorporate the other in order to strengthen liberalism. In order to further illustrate what this means Esposito’s work is connected to Kristeva’s work on abjection and Foucault’s work on delinquency – arguing that what happens to actual subjects who become subject to an immunitary operation is that they are precisely constructed as abject and delinquent.Less

Liberal Multiculturalism and Rights: Citizens, Humans and Other Subjects

Alexej Ulbricht

in Multicultural Immunisation: Liberalism and Esposito

This chapter looks at the importance of civic and human rights for liberal theories of multiculturalism, looking at Kymlicka’s work to examine how rights operate as a process of immunity in liberal ... More

This chapter looks at the importance of civic and human rights for liberal theories of multiculturalism, looking at Kymlicka’s work to examine how rights operate as a process of immunity in liberal multiculturalism. It draws on the work of Balibar to identify several antinomies and exclusions that are associated with civic and human rights, and shows how these are carried over into liberal multiculturalism. This involves looking at rights both conceptually and in terms of their deployment as part of a regulatory regime. Rights discourse immunises liberalism in two principle ways: it inscribes certain exclusions, even as it aims to include; and it transform languages of resistances into the form of rights claimsLess

Disagreement and the Horizons of Consensus

Alexej Ulbricht

in Multicultural Immunisation: Liberalism and Esposito

This chapter focuses on how dialogue and consensus function in liberal theories of multiculturalism, using Parekh’s work as an example. It engages with Jacques Rancière's work in order to critique ... More

This chapter focuses on how dialogue and consensus function in liberal theories of multiculturalism, using Parekh’s work as an example. It engages with Jacques Rancière's work in order to critique this conception of consensus and argues that it serves to deny the formation of political subjecthood. The latter part of the chapter looks at the claim that liberal theories of multiculturalism lead to a fusion of horizons. It argues that rather than providing a real engagement and fusion in the ideal of Gadamer, liberal multiculturalism merely produces a kind of hyper-consensus. Dialogue and consensus immunises liberalism through incorporating the other, but this incorporation does not actually lead to a substantial change of liberalism. Further change is blocked with reference to the existence of the consensus – disagreements are rendered invisibleLess

Recognition: Tolerant, and Cunning

Alexej Ulbricht

in Multicultural Immunisation: Liberalism and Esposito

This chapter examines how recognition operates as an immunitary process by focusing on the work of Taylor. It draws on the work of Povinelli to argue that while recognition is meant to incorporate ... More

This chapter examines how recognition operates as an immunitary process by focusing on the work of Taylor. It draws on the work of Povinelli to argue that while recognition is meant to incorporate groups into the polity it operates with certain provisos that strengthen the liberal polity at the expense of the subject of recognition. It then links liberal ideas of recognition to liberal discourses of tolerance, elaborating a critique that draws on Brown’s work. Both recognition and tolerance operate with the proviso that no protection should be given to abhorrent practices – and the definitional hegemony over abhorrence lies with liberals. Recognition and tolerance immunise liberalism by mobilising against repugnant practices in the act of offering recognition, and by inscribing a hierarchy in which liberalism is constructed as being in the position to extend tolerance and recognition.Less

Conclusion

Alexej Ulbricht

in Multicultural Immunisation: Liberalism and Esposito

This chapter gives a summary of what has been said previously in the text and restates the critique that is made of liberal multiculturalism. It then goes on to concretise what was said in the ... More

This chapter gives a summary of what has been said previously in the text and restates the critique that is made of liberal multiculturalism. It then goes on to concretise what was said in the previous chapter about rhythm and syncopation by giving some examples. It takes a look at the film Le Havre as a fictional illustration of the kind of community that was suggested. A number of examples from London are also engaged with to illustrate the kinds of things that syncopation entails. The chapter ends by exploring some of the wider implications of the overall argument, not just for liberalism but also for other traditions.Less

The Elusiveness Thesis, Immunity to Error through Misidentification, and Privileged Access

José Luis Bermúdez

in The Bodily Self: Selected Essays

Two ideas have played a prominent role in philosophical discussions of self-knowledge. The first is the idea that we enjoy introspective ways of finding out about ourselves are fundamentally ... More

Two ideas have played a prominent role in philosophical discussions of self-knowledge. The first is the idea that we enjoy introspective ways of finding out about ourselves are fundamentally different from our ways of finding out about ordinary physical objects and other psychological subjects. The second is the idea (Hume’s elusiveness thesis) that when we find out about our own properties through introspection we are not acquainted with any object whose properties they are. It is natural to think that these two ideas are related – and, in particular, that it is (at least partly) because we do not encounter the self as an object in introspection that the knowledge of the self gained through introspection is epistemically privileged. This paper explores this idea in the context of awareness of one’s own body in proprioception and in ordinary perceptual awareness.Less

Bodily Awareness and Self-Consciousness

José Luis Bermúdez

in The Bodily Self: Selected Essays

We are embodied, and we are aware of our bodies ‘from the inside’ through different forms of bodily awareness. But what is the relation between these two facts? Are these forms of bodily awareness ... More

We are embodied, and we are aware of our bodies ‘from the inside’ through different forms of bodily awareness. But what is the relation between these two facts? Are these forms of bodily awareness types of self-consciousness, on a par, say, with introspection? In this paper I argue that bodily awareness is a basic form of self-consciousness, through which perceiving agents are directly conscious of the bodily self. The first two sections clarify the nature of bodily awareness. Sections III to V I explore how bodily awareness functions as a form of self-consciousness and how this is connected to the property of being immune to error through misidentification relative to the first person pronoun. In section IV I consider, and remain unconvinced by, an argument to the effect that bodily awareness cannot have first person content (and hence cannot count as a form of self-consciousness). Finally, section V sketches out an account of the spatial content of bodily awareness and explores the particular type of awareness of the bodily self that it provides.Less

Freedom and Immunity

in Terms of the Political: Community, Immunity, Biopolitics

Chapter 4 unpacks one of the great words of the political lexicon–namely, freedom. Reading freedom through the lens of an etymological analysis of communitas and immunitas, the chapter argues that ... More

Chapter 4 unpacks one of the great words of the political lexicon–namely, freedom. Reading freedom through the lens of an etymological analysis of communitas and immunitas, the chapter argues that the more freedom is discussed in political discourse and in the media, the more its truly complex sense escapes us, because it remains entrapped in a subjectivist framework–only an individual can regard freedom as an object to defend or conquer, to possess, or to extend. As long as freedom is confined to what is “proper” rather than “common,” freedom is turned instead into its opposite. Instead, we should think of freedom as that part of community that resists immunization and remains open to difference.Less

Waiting for the Death Knell: Speaking of Music (So to Speak)

Laura Odello (ed.)

in Speaking of Music: Addressing the Sonorous

In the whole occidental tradition of metaphysics, from Plato onward, philosophy tried to contain and neutralize music by reducing it to logos that resonates without harm in the political community. ... More

In the whole occidental tradition of metaphysics, from Plato onward, philosophy tried to contain and neutralize music by reducing it to logos that resonates without harm in the political community. Yet, in the manner of a lapsus, music comes back to haunt the philosophical ear and to expose it to its own excess, that of an uncertain or lacking discourse—another discourse.Less

The road to protection

Kriston R. Rennie

in Freedom and protection: Monastic exemption in France, c. 590-c. 1100

This chapter examines the historical and conciliar framework of monastic exemption, with a particular interest in tracing its formation and development between the fifth and eighth centuries. Such a ... More

This chapter examines the historical and conciliar framework of monastic exemption, with a particular interest in tracing its formation and development between the fifth and eighth centuries. Such a focus outlines its growth during the early Middle Ages, which determined the monastery’s place within the local diocesan context. The construction, and subsequent deconstruction, of this relationship underpins this book’s ongoing investigation, which seeks ultimately to understand how and why papal protection became a coveted asset among French monasteries. To make this understanding possible, this chapter asks what came before the surge and why. It argues for an emerging pattern and character of exemption under the Franks, which proved central to developing notions of spiritual and physical protection under the popes. As a consequence of this novel mentality, a monastery’s relationship with its surrounding environment permitted greater degrees of freedom and protection than ever before. This unique transformation took time to develop, forging alliances that effectively shifted individual monasteries away from their Frankish protectorate towards the burgeoning spiritual centre in Rome.Less