C. James

It is generally believed that Bohm's version of quantum mechanics is observationally equivalent to standard quantum mechanics. A more careful statement is that the two theories will always make the same predictions for any question or problem that is well posed in both interpretations. The transit time of a “particle” between two points in space is not necessarily well defined in standard quantum mechanics, whereas it is in Bohm's theory since there is always a particle following a definite trajectory. For this reason tunneling times (in a scattering configuration through a potential barrier may be a situation in which Bohm's theory can make a definite prediction when standard quantum mechanics can make none at all. I summarize some of the theoretical and experimental prospects for an unambiguous comparison in the hope that this question will engage the attention of more physicists, especially those experimentalists who now routinely actually do gedanken experiments.

Summary This paper argues that The Consolation of Philosophy by Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius and Either/or by Søren Kierkegaard bear certain striking similarities in their content, form, arguments, and in the way key ideas are expressed. It proposes that the explanation for this similarity could be causal dependency: The Consolation impacted Kierkegaard, consciously or unconsciously, in the development of Either/or. Regardless of whether this is correct or not, it further proposes that the correlation between these two works is close enough that an intertextual reading is valuable for the comprehension of both The Consoluation and Either/or. This paper seeks to prove this by executing such a reading.

Peroxisomes are eukaryotic organelles that are the subcellular location of important metabolic reactions. In humans, defects in the organelle's function are often lethal. Yet, relative to other organelles, little is known about how cells maintain and propagate peroxisomes or how they direct specific sets of newly synthesized proteins to these organelles (peroxisome biogenesis/assembly). In recent years, substantial progress has been made in elucidating aspects of peroxisome biogenesis and in identifying PEX genes whose products, peroxins, are essential for one or more of these processes. The most progress has been made in understanding the mechanism by which peroxisome matrix proteins are imported into the organelles. Signal sequences responsible for targeting proteins to the organelle have been defined. Potential signal receptor proteins, a receptor docking protein and other components of the import machinery have been identified, along with insights into how they operate. These studies indicate that multiple peroxisomal protein‐import mechanisms exist and that these mechanisms are novel, not simply variations of those described for other organelles.

The emphasis in human pluripotent stem cell (hPSC) technologies has shifted from cell therapy to in vitro disease modelling and drug screening. This review examines why this shift has occurred, and how current technological limitations might be overcome to fully realise the potential of hPSCs. Details are provided for all disease‐specific human induced pluripotent stem cell lines spanning a dozen dysfunctional organ systems. Phenotype and pharmacology have been examined in only 17 of 63 lines, primarily those that model neurological and cardiac conditions. Drug screening is most advanced in hPSC‐cardiomyocytes. Responses for almost 60 agents include examples of how careful tests in hPSC‐cardiomyocytes have improved on existing in vitro assays, and how these cells have been integrated into high throughput imaging and electrophysiology industrial platforms. Such successes will provide an incentive to overcome bottlenecks in hPSC technology such as improving cell maturity and industrial scalability whilst reducing cost.

The notion of stakeholder salience based on attributes (e.g., power, legitimacy, urgency) is applied in the family business setting. We argue that where principal institutions intersect (i.e., family and business); managerial perceptions of stakeholder salience will be different and more complex than where institutions are based on a single dominant logic. We propose that (1) whereas utilitarian power is more likely in the general business case, normative power is more typical in family business stakeholder salience; (2) whereas in a general business context legitimacy is socially constructed; for family stakeholders, legitimacy is based on heredity; and (3) whereas temporality and criticality are somewhat independent in general-business urgency, they are linked in the family business case because of family ties and family-centered non-economic goals. We apply this theoretical framework to position and integrate the contributions to this special section of Business Ethics Quarterly on “Stakeholder Theory, Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Family Enterprise.”

Most work on fallacies continues to conceptualize fallacious reasoning as involving a breach of a formal or quasi-formal rule. Chaim Perelman's theory of argumentation provides a way to conceptualize fallacies in a completely different way. His approach depends on an understanding of standards of rationality as essentially connected with conceptions of universality. Such an approach allows one to get beyond some of the basic problems of fallacy theory, and turns informal logic toward substantive philosophical questions. I show this by reinterpreting three so-called fallacies - theargumentum ad baculum, equivocation and composition/division - in the light of Perelman's account.

Why does one theory "succeed" while another, possibly clearer interpretation, fails? By exploring two observationally equivalent yet conceptually incompatible views of quantum mechanics, James T. Cushing shows how historical contingency can be crucial to determining a theory's construction and its position among competing views. Since the late 1920s, the theory formulated by Niels Bohr and his colleagues at Copenhagen has been the dominant interpretation of quantum mechanics. Yet an alternative interpretation, rooted in the work of Louis de Broglie in the early 1920s and reformulated and extended by David Bohm in the 1950s, equally well explains the observational data. Through a detailed historical and sociological study of the physicists who developed different theories of quantum mechanics, the debates within and between opposing camps, and the receptions given to each theory, Cushing shows that despite the preeminence of the Copenhagen view, the Bohm interpretation cannot be ignored. Cushing contends that the Copenhagen interpretation became widely accepted not because it is a better explanation of subatomic phenomena than is Bohm's, but because it happened to appear first. Focusing on the philosophical, social, and cultural forces that shaped one of the most important developments in modern physics, this provocative book examines the role that timing can play in the establishment of theory and explanation.

Examples of theory development in quantum field theory and in S-matrix theory are related to three questions of interest to the philosophy of science. The first is the central role of highly abstract, mathematical models in the creation of theories. Second, the process of creation and justification actually used make it plausible that a successful theory is equally well characterized as being stable against attack rather than as being objectively correct. Lastly, the issue of the reality of theoretical entities is discussed in light of this representation of theory generation and selection.

In the philosophy of science, we are to assess critically and on their intrinsic merits various proposals for a consistent interpretation of quantum mechanics, including resolutions of the measurement problem and accounts of the long-range Bell correlations. In this paper I suggest that the terms of debate may have been so severely and unduly constrained by the reigning orthodoxy that we labor unproductively with an unhelpful vocabulary and set of definitions and distinctions. I present an alternative conceptual framework, free of many of the standard conundrums.