In this note I would like to approach the question posed in the title, and in the literature, from a purely consequentialist perspective. In other words, I want to ask, would treating extreme poverty as a violation of human rights actually lead to a reduction in poverty, or at least lead to the conditions which would in turn lead to a reduction in poverty? This is not to minimize or deny the im...

The basis of legal case-based reasoning is the doctrine of stare decisis: decisions in new cases should follow decisions in similar old cases. This paper takes as a starting point the ‘case comparison’ interpretation of the stare decisis doctrine. In this interpretation one establishes by case comparison which previously decided cases are sufficiently similar to a new case, after which the old ...

Evolutionary debunking arguments (EDAs) are arguments that appeal to the evolutionary origins of evaluative beliefs to undermine their justification. This paper aims to clarify the premises and presuppositions of EDAs-a form of argument that is increasingly put to use in normative ethics. I argue that such arguments face serious obstacles. It is often overlooked, for example, that they presuppo...

Several of our studies indicate that persuasive-arguments theory by itself is an adequate explanation of polarization. Sanders and Baron (Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1977,13,303-314) criticize this research. More generally, they contend that both argumentation and comparison are involved, “with persuasive arguments facilitating the shifts motivated by social comparison.” We feel ...

‎A universal schema for diagonalization was popularized by N.S‎. ‎Yanofsky (2003)‎, ‎based on a pioneering work of F.W‎. ‎Lawvere (1969)‎, ‎in which the existence of a (diagonolized-out and contradictory) object implies the existence of a fixed-point for a certain function‎. ‎It was shown that many self-referential paradoxes and diagonally proved theorems can fit in that schema‎. ‎Here‎, ‎we fi...

-