Nicolas Kleinschmidt

Peter van Inwagen famously promotes the unusual claim that there are no such things as material artifacts. In order to make his claim plausible, he presents a number of arguments, three of which will be subject to discussion in this paper: We argue that these arguments fail to make a convincing case for the denial of material artifacts. In addition, we reveal the benefits of the belief in the existence of material artifacts. We conclude that, contrary to van Inwagen’s suggestion, it would not be better not to believe in material artifacts, as there are a number of good reasons for holding on to this belief.

In this article we examine the role of Entscheider (decision-makers) in the German asylum procedure, both legally and ethical. As the responsibility for deciding on asylum applications lies exclusively with them, their significance for the German asylum procedure can hardly be underestimated. However, over the last few decades the situation of Entscheider changed significantly: While the number and complexity of the cases they have to decide on has increased due to the growing immigration, the requirements for their education have been lowered, owed to critical amendments to the relevant law. We analyze how the law currently defines the role of Entscheider, whether the legal framework is constitutional, and what modifications morality requires. Although the law defining their role seems to be constitutional, Entscheider’s education must be improved and they must be entrusted with the hearing of the applicants to meet what morality requires, we conclude. DOI: 10.17879/95189429199.