This book presents a theory of the self whose core principle is that the consciousness of the self is a process of self-representing that runs throughout our life. This process aims primarily at defending the self-conscious subject against the threat of its metaphysical inconsistence. In other words, the self is essentially a repertoire of psychological manoeuvres whose outcome is self-representation aimed at coping with the fundamental fragility of the human subject. This picture of the self differs from both the idealist and the eliminative approaches widely represented in contemporary discussion. Against the idealist approach, this book contends that rather than the self being primitive and logically prior, it is the result of a process of construction that originates in subpersonal unconscious processes. On the other hand, it also rejects the anti-realistic, eliminative argument that, from the non-primary, derivative nature of the self, infers its status as an illusory by-product of real neurobiological events, devoid of any explanatory role.
In this volume, Geoffrey Madell develops a revised account of the self, making a compelling case for why the "simple" or "anti-criterial" view of personal identity warrants a robust defense. Madell critiques recent discussions of the self for focusing on features which are common to all selves, and which therefore fail to capture the uniqueness of each self. In establishing his own view of personal identity, Madell proposes (a) that there is always a gap between ‘A is f and g’ and ‘I am f and g’; (b), that a complete description of the world offered without recourse to indexicals will fail to account for the contingent truth that I am one of the persons described; and (c), that an account of conscious perspectives on the world must take into account what it means for an apparently arbitrary one of these perspectives to be mine. Engaging with contemporary positions on the first person, embodiment, psychological continuity, and other ongoing arguments, Madell contends that there can be no such thing as a criterion of personal identity through time, that no bodily or psychological continuity approach to the issue can succeed, and that personal identity through time must be absolute, not a matter of degree. Madell’s view that the nature of the self is substantively different from that of objects in the world will generate significant discussion and debate among philosophers of mind.
Integrating theory, research, and applications, this book examines the defense mechanisms and their role in both normal development and psychopathology. It describes how children and adults mobilize specific kinds of defenses to maintain their psychological equilibrium and preserve self-esteem, particularly in situations of trauma or stress.
Philosophers typically suppose that the contents of our beliefs and other cognitive attitudes are propositions-things that might be true or false, and their truth values do not vary from time to time, place to place, or person to person. Neil Feit argues that this view breaks down in the face of beliefs about the self. These are beliefs that we express by means of a first-person pronoun. Feit maintains-following David Lewis, Roderick Chisholm, and others-that in general, the contents of our beliefs are properties. Unlike propositions, properties lack absolute truth values that do not vary with time, place, or person. Belief about the Self offers a sustained defense of the Property Theory of Content, according to which the content of every cognitive attitude is a property rather than a proposition. The theory is supported with an array of new arguments, defended from various objections, and applied to some important problems and puzzles in the philosophy of mind.
The law - A brief survey of history & procedures -- Federal constitutional standards -- The use of deadly force -- Wound ballistics -- Training vs qualification -- Physiological imperatives -- Tactical factors & misconceptions -- Suicide by cop & the mentally ill subject-- Risk & responsibility -- Aftermath & impact -- Deadly force policy- -- Case histories.
Shaun Gallagher puts forward a pluralist account of the self, and a philosophical account of psychiatric disorders as disorders of the self. He argues that what have been seen as different selves - physical, social, private, extended - should rather be seen as variable factors or processes organized in a certain pattern: this pattern is the self.
An ARTery Best Book of the Year An Art of Manliness Best Book of the Year In a culture that has become progressively more skeptical and materialistic, the desires of the individual self stand supreme, Mark Edmundson says. We spare little thought for the great ideals that once gave life meaning and worth. Self and Soul is an impassioned effort to defend the values of the Soul. “An impassioned critique of Western society, a relentless assault on contemporary complacency, shallowness, competitiveness and self-regard...Throughout Self and Soul, Edmundson writes with a Thoreau-like incisiveness and fervor...[A] powerful, heartfelt book.” —Michael Dirda, Washington Post “[Edmundson’s] bold and ambitious new book is partly a demonstration of what a ‘real education’ in the humanities, inspired by the goal of ‘human transformation’ and devoted to taking writers seriously, might look like...[It] quietly sets out to challenge many educational pieties, most of the assumptions of recent literary studies—and his own chosen lifestyle.” —Mathew Reisz, Times Higher Education “Edmundson delivers a welcome championing of humanistic ways of thinking and living.” —Kirkus Reviews
It is ten years into the future and the nation's government is nearing financial and moral collapse. A small group (the TLR) believes deadly force is necessary to save individual liberty from the two-party political aristocracy that is Congress. They believe the imminent economic collapse will be an excuse for the dictatorial powers soon to be claimed by the federal government. They accuse Congress of having "increased your powers far beyond their constitutional limits. You have systematically destroyed our natural right to own ourselves and make our own choices. You have become an aristocracy that steals our production and controls us as if we are your serfs." They announce to the nation, "Ours is the only form of revolution now possible, but it has this advantage. If lives must be taken, only ours or those that have stolen our lives will be required to forfeit theirs." They give Congress three days ... to approve their proposed Term Limits Amendment to the Constitution, one that prevents professional politicians from serving in Congress, or, unless they first resign, the long term incumbents "will be term-limited in the only way they leave us." The Department of Justice targets term limits supporters and libertarians in its hunt for the terrorist group. But when the first senator is "term-limited" in spite of all that federal authorities can do to stop it, it is clear the terrorists will not be easily found. They are inside the federal law enforcement agencies that are hunting them. This novel examines a critical issue for our liberty"--Amazon blurb
The cell walls seem to close in as he buries his head in his hands. The same thoughts repeat over and over in his fogged mind: It all happened so quick. One second I was getting out of my car, the next he was attacking me. Now I'm being charged with manslaughter! How did this happen? It was self-defense . . . wasn't it? Prison is filled with people who thought they were defending themselves. Just saying, "It was self-defense" isn't enough. When you claim self-defense you are basically confessing to a crime. To keep from being convicted you must provide evidence your actions remained within certain boundaries and you acted with just cause. You're going to have to prove it was self-defense. That's assuming you stayed inside legal boundaries and acted reasonably in the first place. If you didn't . . . Now . . . are you sure you know what constitutes actual self-defense? If the honest answer is no, then this book is an absolute must-read! In the Name of Self-defense is an in-depth exploration of what is and what is not self-defense. It covers real-life problems overlooked by most training. Issues that will arise if you find yourself involved in violence. Most of all it will challenge what you think you know about defending yourself. Using the information contained in this book could mean the difference between legitimate self-defense, you laying in a parking lot, or prison! This book presents information unlike any you've seen before, focusing not only on the aftermath of an incident, but on what commonly leads to violence and how your actions before, during, and after will make or break your claim of self-defense. Learn about the limitations on self-defense, how to accurately assess a situation, scale force and concisely "articulate" the timeline of events to officers and legal professionals in a manner that reduces the chances of a misunderstanding . . . and a subsequent prison sentence. Whether you want to add to the knowledge you acquired as a beginner in a self-defense class or you're an instructor looking to further your own knowledge or a professional whose job requirements place you in potentially violent situations with dissatisfied clients or customers . . . it doesn't matter! In the Name of Self-defense is a must-read for everybody! If you're lucky, you will never need the information contained within these pages, but if you ever require it what you learn from this volume will be vital. Author and self-defense expert Marc MacYoung takes you on an entertaining journey through these lesser known (and some never-before-broached) aspects of self-defense. MacYoung helps readers understand how to avoid violence, how to use the appropriate amount of force if it happens, and how to present the facts in a way that self-defense is clearly understood and judged applicable to that situation. With a witty sense of humor and fifty years experience in a plethora of violent encounters coupled with a montage of experts in his corner, MacYoung delivers a thought-provoking examination of the world of self-defense and protecting yourself legally after being forced to protect yourself physically.
When is it right to go to war? The most persuasive answer to this question has always been 'in self-defense'. In a penetrating new analysis, bringing together moral philosophy, political science, and law, David Rodin shows what's wrong with this answer. He proposes a comprehensive new theory of the right of self-defense which resolves many of the perplexing questions that have dogged both jurists and moral philosophers. By applying the theory of self-defense to international relations, Rodin produces a far-reaching critique of the canonical Just War theory. The simple analogy between self-defense and national defense - between the individual and the state - needs to be fundamentally rethought, and with it many of the basic elements of international law and the ethics of international relations.
