This paper theoretically and experimentally investigates the behavior of asymmetric players in guessing games. The asymmetry is created by introducing r>1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$r>1$$\end{document} replicas of one of the players. Two-player and restricted N-player cases are examined in detail. Based on the model parameters, the equilibrium is either unique in which all players choose zero or mixed in which the weak player (r=1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$r=1$$\end{document}) imitates the strong (...) player (r>1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$r>1$$\end{document}). A series of experiments involving two and three-player repeated guessing games with unique equilibrium is conducted. We find that equilibrium behavior is observed less frequently and overall choices are farther from the equilibrium in two-player asymmetric games in contrast to symmetric games, but this is not the case in three-player games. Convergence towards equilibrium exists in all cases but asymmetry slows down the speed of convergence to the equilibrium in two, but not in three-player games. Furthermore, the strong players have a slight earning advantage over the weak players, and asymmetry increases the discrepancy in choices (defined as the squared distance of choices from the winning number) in both games. (shrink)

The Synoptic Problem is a puzzle that scholars have desired to solve since the 18th century. The discussion has a religious background, because it is about the first three canonical Gospels of the Church, namely Matthew, Mark and Luke, which came to be called the Synoptic Gospels. The discussion, in the most basic context, concentrates on the point that there is a possible relationship or connection between the Synoptic Gospels and that each one is substantially similar to another but at (...) the same time includes different aspects. This theoretical discussion separates the Gospel of John from the Synoptic Gospels and does not see it as a main source for the history of Jesus. The method of discussion is based on the reading of the Synoptic Gospels from a birds-eye-view, as seen together, and as comparatively in relation to each other. The aim of the discussion is to reach accurate historical information about Jesus and the birth of Christianity by analyzing the possible relationship between the Synoptic Gospels through their sources. Several hypotheses have been proposed for the solution of the Synoptic Problem. However, all the modern studies in the context of the problem are carried out by Western scholars. In other words, Synoptic Problem is a relatively unknown subject in the Turkish academic circles. So in this paper the aim is to draw the attention of the Turkish academy to the substance and framework of the Synoptic Problem through an introductory survey. In addition, some results that can be reached in this context will be exemplified by getting help from the redaction criticism. Summary: The Synoptic Problem is a puzzle that scholars have been trying to solve since the 18th century. The discussion has a religious background, for it is about the first three canonical Gospels of the Church (namely Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which are called the Synoptic Gospels). The discussion, in the most basic context, concentrates on a possible relationship or connection between the Synoptic Gospels and that each one is substantially similar to another one, but at the same time including different aspects. This theoretical discussion separates the Gospel of John from the Synoptic Gospels, and does not see it as a main source for the history of Jesus. The method of this discussion is based on the broad reading of the Synoptic Gospels as well as a comparison in relation to each other. The aim of the discussion is to reach accurate historical information about Jesus and the birth of Christianity by analyzing the possible relationship between the Synoptic Gospels through their sources.The traditional four Gospels have been debated since ancient times. There have been many dimensions of these discussions. However, whether the Gospels contain contradictory information or not has always been at the forefront. Pagan writers, such as Celsus or Porphyry, criticized the Gospels in this respect. Christian writers, such as Marcion or Tatian who lived in the second century when the Gospels were not seen as canon yet, raised some suggestions based on the doubts that the Gospels were incompatible with the Jewish scriptures and contained contradictions among themselves. Marcion included a single Gospel that was close to the Gospel of Luke in his New Testament canon. Tatian made a mixed version of the four Gospels. In the next stage, the contradictions in the Gospels were explained by the Christian writers, such as Origenes or Augustine. However, the four Gospels were more prominent in this new era and they were regarded as canons by the Church. Therefore, the Christian writers’ approach to the Gospels also began to change. Origen emphasized allegorical interpretation which had been known since the Jewish philosopher Philo (d. 50) in Alexandria. Thus, he wanted to protect the contradictory texts from being seen as the source of the problem. He argued that the problem was the human mind that could not grasp the allegorical mystery of the text or the narrative in the text. Augustine had a similar approach with the suggestion that the Gospels should be read by a faithful heart. According to Augustine, it is natural that the Gospels reflect different characters because the Gospel writers describe Christ differently. In order to be able to comprehend the divine meaning in these texts, the Gospels must be read in a spiritual mood. After all, all these Christian writers aimed to respond to the criticism by the pagan writers regarding the Gospels, as well as the current suspicions in the minds of Christians.Origen was the first Christian thinker to devote an effort to solve the debates on the Gospels in a logical and systematic way. As for Augustine, he was the starting point of the Synoptic Problem since Augustine was the first to mention the links between the Gospels texts, namely the idea that the authors of the Gospels may have used each other as sources. However, in the modern sense, the Synoptic Problem has been transformed into an academic discipline by the intellectuals who followed the path of Enlightenment thinkers, such as Reimarus (1684-1768), Lessing (1729-1781), Griesbach (1745-1812), and Eichhorn (1752-1827). Because modern researchers differ from old writers based on Church ideologies, they began to demolish traditional beliefs about the Gospels. Thus, the effort to harmonize incompatible narratives in the Gospels is left aside. Indeed, the ancient writers put a lot of effort into it. Now, in the places where indirect relations can be established between the Gospels, the idea of finding the common hypothetical sources of these Gospels is prominent. The claim that the Gospels were directly connected to Jesus as a historical figure has been gradually faded away. The basis of the Synoptic Problem is the comparative reading of the Synoptic Gospels. In the modern sense, this comparison and its interpretation was made by J. J. Griesbach (1745-1812) for the first time. Griesbach was the first scholar to compare Matthew, Mark, and Luke in a way to create a synopsis. His comparison is based on a reading done by placing several passages or narratives from the Gospels side by side.Many hypotheses have been put forward for the solution of the Synoptic Problem. Two-Source Hypotheses, Four-Source Hypotheses, and Farrer Theory are the most popular ones among researchers. These views are based on Marcan Priority. In this context, independently from each other, Matthew and Luke used Mark’s text as their sources. Also, according to the Two-Sources and Four-Source Hypotheses, the authors of Matthew and Luke used another written document as their sources. This document is named the “Q” which derives from the German word “Quellen.” In this way, it is assumed that the Q-document and the Gospel of Mark are the sources of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke.The writers of the Gospels wrote their own texts by using written and oral sources. One of the scholarly methods is the redaction criticism that explores how the Gospel writers shaped the old literary documents by arranging, re-shaping, and revising them. This theory looks at whether the source used by an author is known and available today in order to understand whether how the author used his sources would provide important clues about his tendencies or ideologies. In this regard, the theory of the Marcan priority can be rendered functional along with the redaction criticism. In doing so, it is possible to reach important conclusions about Jesus and the birth of Christianity, as well as the theological and ideological ideas of the unknown authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. First of all, the authors of Matthew and Luke used Mark’s text as their sources. Secondly, we have these three Gospels today. And finally, the ways in which the writers of Matthew and Luke shaped the text, phrases, or expressions of Mark reveal important results about their thoughts. The analysis shows that the authors of Matthew and Luke sometimes made additons that could be called interpolation to Mark’s text; sometimes they wanted to censor some statements in Mark; sometimes they tried to explain or clarify some statements in the Mark, or sometimes they tried to blur clear expressions and expositions in Mark's text. These authors did not do such things without a reason. They wanted to reshape Mark’s text in accordance with their theological understanding of Jesus as Christ. In this context, according to some expressions in Mark, Jesus' power had a limit. The authors of Matthew and Luke did not find these statements appropriate, because they changed Mark’s some statements to create an impression that Jesus’ power was not limited. This proves that the authors of Matthew and Luke re-arranged their resources to present Jesus as a superhuman being. Similarly, in Mark, there are lines in which Jesus declares his loyalty and servitude to the God of Israel. In such passages, he presented his personality in a low Christology context against God. However, the authors of Matthew and Luke were disturbed by such statements, because they intervened in these statements in Mark. They wanted to change some of the meanings and contexts in Mark’s text through such interventions and presented Jesus as Christ in a high Christological context to their readers. In the end, all these researches also responded to the question of to what extent the Gospels provide reliable information on a historical basis. (shrink)

Bu metin 11 Haziran 2020'de ArtDog İstanbul dergisinde yayınlanmıştır. Zafer Aracagök'e burada yeniden üretmemize izin verdiği için teşekkür ediyoruz. Homeros'un Odysseus'un gemisinin Siren'lerin karanlık ve büyüleyici darboğazından geçişini tasvir ettiği zamanlardan bu güne birçok sanatçı, yazar ve düşünür bu sahneyi ele almış, Adorno ve Horkheimer'ın Aydınlanma'nın Diyalektiği ve Franz Kafka'nın “Siren'lerin Sessizliği” adlı öyküsü en dikkat çekici yorumlar arasında yerlerini almışlardır. İki çalışma - Philosophie – Nouvel article.

This text has already been published in La Deleuziana – Online Journal of Philosophy – ISSN 2421-3098 N. 10 / 2019 – RHYTHM, CHAOS AND NONPULSED MAN.: We all know by now why a kid starts whistling in the middle of a territory unknown. Refrain builds up a milieu, deterritorialising all the forces of the unknown with the ear of an other. However, have we as yet considered how the ear gets into resonance with the transformation of the unknown into (...) the known? In other words, - Philosophie – Nouvel article. (shrink)

From a phenomenological point of view on the relationship between art and philosophy, we can see that both of them refer to a pre-subjective and a preobjective field. In this context, art becomes a creative activity that makes the world itself visible in a way independent of all human values and judgments, rather than giving a representation of the objective world. However, its creativity is shaped not only due to the artistic abilities but to the fact of being actually a (...) corporeal entity. Perceiving refers to an endless creation since it emerges as the founding activity of the body anchored in the world. The artist, like the philosopher, whether with words or brush strokes also has the possibility to express this primordial perception which is prior to all the correction and the arrangement of mind, in its birth. The pre-reflexive ground of perception refers to an existence which is both individual and collective as being filled with invisible meaning horizons. The aesthetical experience arises in seizing this existence. But in order to understand this, the true nature of the vision must be conceived. This paper tries to indicate the role that aesthetic experience plays in making the Logos of the primordial world visible. In this context, the relation between Merleau-Ponty and Paul Cézanne, who is a very important figure for him, is considered from both philosophy and art as well as from a philosopher and a painter. What we encounter here is not a philosophy of art nor an aesthetics, but the artistic nature of philosophy itself. (shrink)

La autora presenta una critica a la concepcion clasica de los sentidos asumida por la mayoria de autores naturalistas que pretenden explicar el contenido mental. Esta crítica se basa en datos neurobiologicos sobre los sentidos que apuntan a que estos no parecen describir caracteristicas objetivas del mundo, sino que actuan de forma ʼnarcisita', es decir, representan informacion en funcion de los intereses concretos del organismo.El articulo se encuentra también en: Bechtel, et al., Philosophy and the Neuroscience.

A common view in both philosophy and the vision sciences is that, in human vision, wavelength information is primarily ‘for’ colouring: for seeing surfaces and various media as having colours. In this article we examine this assumption of ‘colour-for-colouring’. To motivate the need for an alternative theory, we begin with three major puzzles from neurophysiology, puzzles that are not explained by the standard theory. We then ask about the role of wavelength information in vision writ large. How might wavelength information (...) be used by any monochromat or dichromat and, finally, by a trichromatic primate with object vision? We suggest that there is no single ‘advantage’ to trichromaticity but a multiplicity, only one of which is the ability to see surfaces and so on as having categorical colours. Instead, the human trichromatic retina exemplifies a scheme for a general encoding of wavelength information given the constraints imposed by high spatial resolution object vision. Chromatic vision, like its partner, luminance vision, is primarily for seeing. Viewed this way, the ‘puzzles’ presented at the outset make perfect sense. 1 Reframing the Problem1.1 Introduction1.2 Three puzzles1.2.1 Why is trichromatic vision an anomaly in diurnal mammals?1.2.2 Why does the colour system occupy such a large and central part in human vision?1.2.3 Why are the blue cones so rare?1.3 Recasting the question2 The Costs and Benefits of Spectral Vision2.1 Spectral information and object vision2.2 Encoding the spectral dimension of light2.2.1 ‘General’ versus ‘specific’ encoding2.2.2 Spectral encoding and the monochromat2.2.3 Spectral encoding and the dichromat2.2.4 Spectral encoding and the human trichromat2.3 Three puzzles revisited2.3.1 Why is trichromatic vision an anomaly in diurnal mammals?2.3.2 Why does the colour system occupy such a large and central part in human vision?2.3.3 Why are the blue cones so rare3 Conclusion. (shrink)

In Consciousness Explained, Daniel Dennett presents the Multiple Drafts Theory of consciousness, a very brief, largely empirical theory of brain function. From these premises, he draws a number of quite radical conclusions—for example, the conclusion that conscious events have no determinate time of occurrence. The problem, as many readers have pointed out, is that there is little discernible route from the empirical premises to the philosophical conclusions. In this article, I try to reconstruct Dennett's argument, providing both the philosophical views (...) behind the empirical premises, and the hidden empirical arguments behind the derivation of the philosophical conclusions. (shrink)

Throughout the text, fundamental questions concerning the nature of visual perception are addressed.

Studies on participation and spatial orientations of college students have examined aspects of university life, as projected through language, from a reportorial or narrative perspective, but hardly any one of these studies has been devoted exclusively to how students' participation structure, together with the activities participants orient to at the participation space, evokes shared socio-academic backgrounds and cultural constraints, a major way to gain access into the students' cognitive and pragmatic tendencies. This research, thus, addresses itself to Nigerian college students' (...) participation configuration, their participant roles, and the illocutionary goals of their encounters within the Goffmanian participation framework and discourse pragmatic parameters. For data, 100 interactions amongst students of the Faculty of Arts, University of Ibadan, Nigeria, were taped and scrutinised for participation forms and spatial descriptions. Two types of participation structure are manifest in the interactions, namely, unmarked and marked participations. The unmarked participation structure is the regular frame in which Goffman's ratification and non-ratification framework is strictly observed. The marked participation configuration, an unexpected interactional frame which bifurcates into accommodated and non-accommodated structures, takes interruptions by unaccredited participants as appropriate or inappropriate. The paper contends that participation configuration and contextual elements prescribe participant roles together with the pragmatic functions assigned to language and actions in the interactions. Thus, the illocutionary goals of participants, rooted in socio-academic matters and enabled by participation structures, spatial orientations and body language manipulations are contextually negotiated. (shrink)

Nigerian Pidgin is a popular informal communicative code in Nigerian social, economic and political experience. It is sometimes spoken in formal situations in the hospital setting when participants find it pragmatically convenient. Despite its communicative significance, little research has been carried out on the use of Pidgin in conversational interactions in Nigerian hospitals, a gap this study fills by investigating how Pidgin is used in constructing emotions relating to social and medical conditions in hospitals. Seventy five interactions between doctors and (...) clients in Nigerian Pidgin were sampled; the data analysis was based centrally on relevance theory. Nigerian Pidgin evokes negative and positive emotions. Negative emotions manifest as pain and fear, while positive emotions appear as excitement and relief. Doctors and clients gain access to each other’s intentions through their shared knowledge of Pidgin, their co-construction of ailments, and their contextually based local interactional resources. They thus negotiate emotions as cue-dependent variables that are steered with the help of cognitive processes. (shrink)

The twentieth century in Africa, more than elsewhere in the world, has been an era of startling and unprecedented changes. These changes have been most dramatic with respect to the sociopolitical organization of the continent. While at the beginning of the century, most of Africa, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, had hardly emerged from prefeudal or feudal social formations, the advent of European colonialists, whose avarice for conquest and colonial territories was fueled by the blossoming technological capabilities of the Industrial Revolution and (...) the expansionist market demand of a new and burgeoning capitalist economy in Europe, transformed the face of Africa forever. (shrink)

In this paper, I defend divine conceptualism against one prominent critique from William Lane Craig in his book God and Abstract Objects. Craig argues that the divine conceptualist’s only way out of the “bootstrapping objection” results in an unpalatable concession of defeat to the metaphysical anti-realist. Craig’s argument depends on an analysis whereby God is causally or logically prior to the divine concepts. As such, the conceptualist may resist it by adopting—following Ralph Cudworth—a version of divine conceptualism which does not (...) construe the relationship between God and His thoughts as one of either causal or logical priority. (shrink)

Abū Ḥanīfa (d. 150/767) discussed the main issues of the science of kalām in the first period and expressed his best views on these issues in response to the sects that he accepted as bid'ah (innovation). Later, kalām scholars tried to justify these views by using different arguments according to the changing conditions and time. Undoubtedly, one of the most important opinions that Abū Ḥanīfa expressed and passed on to the next generations from the perspective of the science of kalām (...) is those related to faith. In fact, faith is the strongest and most deep-rooted bond a believer establishes with his/her Creator. The individual shapes his world and the hereafter through this bond. On the other hand, faith is a phenomenon that does not contain doubt but carries certainty. In this respect, a person is included in the same category as a believer after she has firmly believed, and is called a believer or a Muslim, as the Qur'an puts it. Because no matter what race or color he is, he takes the same name because he believes in the same principles. Abū Ḥanīfa, who lived in a time when Muslims differed among themselves and differences of opinion increased, accepted faith as a common denominator by emphasizing the common values of Islam. Abū Ḥanīfa refers to this as "equality in faith". The issue of equality in faith, which is discussed as a result of the differentiation in matters related to the nature of faith, is shaped according to whether the action is counted as part of faith or not. Since Abū Ḥanīfa did not consider deeds a part of faith, so he advocated equality in faith. This view was adopted later by many scholars in the Māturīdī tradition. In the Hanafī-Māturīdī tradition, it can be said that the issue of equality in faith as well as issues such as confirmation and certainty in faith were shaped by the opinions of Abū Ḥanīfa. When equality in faith is accepted, one is not allowed to question the faith of another and say that his/her own faith is superior to the other because only God can know it. On the other hand, the understanding of equality in faith prevents external appearance and formalism from being decisive in one's religious life. Thus, a believer cannot accuse his brother who has deficiencies in his deeds but has faith of being infidel. When Abū Ḥanīfa's view of equality in faith is interpreted according to contemporary paradigms, his emphasis on human love, tolerance, and unity of the ummah, which has validity today, can clearly be observed. Therefore, it is seen that the reflection of a theological issue on social life is stressed in his opinion. This paper aims to study the issue of "equality in faith", one of the issues related to faith, and its reflection on social life by using the texts which are attributed to Abū Ḥanīfa. (shrink)

Rönesans ve ardında Aydınlanma dönemiyle beraber gerçekleşen bilimsel ilerlemeler fazlaca dikkat çekmeyi başarmıştır. Bunun sonucunda modern bilim, bilginin en güvenilir kaynağı olarak kabul edilerek onun her meseleyi çözebileceği bir zemine oturtturulmuştur. Öyle ki bilim, Tanrı’nın var olup olmadığına dair de bilgi üretebileceği dillendirilmiştir. Bu aşamada ideolojik yaklaşımların ve din adına sergilenen bazı temelsiz akıl dışı argümanların katkısıyla da bilim artık kutsal bir müesseseye dönüştürülmüştür. Kutsala dönüştürülen bilim, bir diğer kutsal olan dinle artık ortak bir zeminde buluşamayacak hale dönüşmüş ve yanlış (...) bir dikotomiye alet edilmiştir. Dolayısıyla artık ilerleyen bilim, yavaş yavaş “Tanrı’yı yok etmeye” başlamıştır. Artık bu hale dönüşen bilim anlayışı ateistlerin de en büyük destek noktaları olmuştur. Kutsala dönüşen bu bilim anlayışı her ne kadar temelde Hıristiyanlık inancına karşıt olarak ortaya çıkmış olsa da yer yer tüm inançlara yansıtılmaya çalışılmıştır. Oysaki bilimden, “bilimin ilerlemesiyle Tanrı’nın yok olacağına” dair veri sunmasını beklemek aslında bilimin sınırlarından bihaber olmayı gerekli kılmaktadır. Bilimin ilerlemesiyle inancın yok olacağı söylemi, İslam dini açısından kabul edilebilir bir argüman olarak görülmemektedir. Çünkü İslam, aklı dinamik olarak tasvir etmekte ve tabiatı Tanrı’nın varlığının delili olarak sunmaktadır. Diğer taraftan bilimin ilerlemesiyle Tanrı’ya yer kalmayacağını iddia edenlerin unutmaması gereken önemli husus, dinin/imanın bir bilgi eksikliği olmadığı aksine bilginin insanı tasdiğe yönelttiği gerçeğidir. Ayrıca Müslümanların bilimde geri kalmalarının sebebini onların inançlarına bağlayanlar, bunu siyasi, sosyal ve ekonomik bazı sebeplerde araması gerekmektedir. (shrink)