Background: The occupational therapy profession needs a framework to guide understanding of the occupational nature of sexuality and intimacy, assessment, intervention design, and measurement of ...outcomes. This study aimed to defne the occupational nature of sexuality and intimacy and develop a theoretical and occupation-based screen, in-depth self-assessment, and performance measure. Method: The Occupational Performance Inventory of Sexuality and Intimacy (OPISI) was developed following DeVellis's (2017) guidelines for scale development that involved mapping the construct, generating an item pool, determining the format for measurement, and reviewing the initial item pool. Results: The Occupational Therapy Sexual Assessment Framework (OTSAF) was developed to defne the occupational nature of sexuality and intimacy, depict how the theoretical constructs intertwine with the domain of occupational therapy, and guide scale development. The OPISI includes a self-screen, in-depth self-assessment, and an individualized measure to establish baseline performance and detect self-perceived change in ability, satisfaction, understanding, and confdence in skills and ability to improve occupational performance associated with sexuality and intimacy over time. Conclusion: The OTSAF defnes the occupational nature of sexuality and intimacy and informs the occupational therapy scope of practice. The OPISI includes theoretical and occupation-based tools to adequately screen, assess, and measure performance related to the complex occupational nature of sexuality and intimacy. Formal validation is needed prior to releasing the OPISI for clinical use. Comments The authors report that that they have no conficts of interest to disclose. Keywords OPISI, sexuality, intimacy, assessment, framework, occupational therapy Cover Page Footnote The authors would like to acknowledge Christopher Bentlage and Jeremy Warriner, who shared their experiences, highlighted the signifcance of sexuality and intimacy to individuals with disabilities, and invoked shame in our profession for our silence in addressing the topic in practice. We would also like to acknowledge Dr. George Szasz, a pioneer in sexual medicine, who readily shared his experiences, insight, and expertise throughout this process and supported our efforts to break the silence in addressing sexuality and intimacy in occupational therapy. Complete Author List Beth Ann Walker, Kasey Otte, Kelsey LeMond, Pamela Hess, Kandyse Kaizer, Tori Faulkner, and Davis Christy Credentials Display Beth Ann Walker, PhD, MS, OTR Kasey Otte, Kelsey Lemond, Pamela Hess, Kandyse Kaizer, Tori Faulkner, and Davis Christy (OTD, May 2020) Copyright transfer agreements are not obtained by The Open Journal of Occupational Therapy (OJOT). Reprint permission for this Applied Research should be obtained from the corresponding author(s). Click here to view our open access statement regarding user rights and distribution of this Applied Research. DOI: 10.15453/2168-6408.1694
Kategorije 10, 13b27-35 Martinjak, Igor
Nova prisutnost,
07/2021, Letnik:
XIX, Številka:
2
Journal Article, Paper
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
U radu se ispituje mogućnost reprezentiranja Aristotelove rasprave o singularnoj predikaciji iz Kategorija 10, 13b27-35 u trima simboličkim idiomima – u jeziku logike prvog reda s identitetom, s i ...bez određenih opisa, te jezicima slobodnih logika – te se pokazuje zašto nijedna reprezentacija nije u potpunosti odgovarajuća. Prema prvoj opciji, obvezujemo Aristotela na (meta)logičke implikacije koje on ne prihvaća. Prema drugoj opciji, pripisujemo Aristotelu Russellovu teoriju imena. U konačnici, treća nas opcija ostavlja s pretpostavkom da se ‘postoji’ može reprezentirati predikatom. Takvu pretpostavku, međutim, Aristotel izričito odbija.
The possibility of formal representation of Aristotle’s discussion about singular predication in Categories 10, 13b27-35 is investigated through three symbolic idioms: the first-order language with identity, with and without definitive description, and through the languages of free logics. I show that such representations are not fully adequate. According to the first option, we are committing Aristotle with some (meta)logical implications he is not willing to accept. According to the second option, we are burdening Aristotle with Russell’s theory of names. Finally, the third option leaves us with the assumption that ‘exist(s)’ could be represented with a predicate. This assumption, however, Aristotle emphatically rejects.
Na području arhivske teorije i prakse razvijeni su razni on-line arhivski informacijski sustavi s različitim vrstama suvremenih arhivskih opisa. Unatoč činjenici da postoje međunarodno prihvaćeni ...profesionalni standardi za opis arhivskoga gradiva, u praksi postoje velike razlike između realizacije opisa i njihovih standardiziranih obrazaca. U radu su prikazani rezultati analize više od 20 takvih sustava. Nema značajne razlike na tehničko-tehnološkom nivou, dok su na sintaktičkoj i semantičkoj razini identificirani brojni problemi. To uzrokuje osnovni znanstveni problem u arhivistici. Među njima je i pitanje jesu li informacijske strukture koji se smatraju se arhivskim informacijskim sustavima kompatibilne jedne s drugima u kontekstu razmjene informacija na međunarodnoj razini. Neki pokazatelji govore da postizanje tog cilja zahtijeva velike zahvate u pojedine arhivske informacijske sustave, što ima izravan negativan utjecaj na troškove proizvodnje meta zapisa.
Taking into account the fact that, throughout history, certain artworks have been considered as “worth of watching” (according to the Greek etymon ἀξιοϑέατος / aksioteatos), preservation, or ...theorizing, while others were not, one is led to investigate the various types of evaluative descriptions. Those artworks that are more valuable than others, or simply valuable in themselves on the basis of rather specific features, have always represented the paradigmatic model for the evaluator, thus revealing the identitary nature of value as different from one epoch to another. Our aim has been to discern, with regard to this starting point, the way in which the process of evaluating artworks fits the general matrix of the universal theory of value, with its clearly distinguished levels of evaluation, beginning with value descriptions, continuing through the features of evaluation or abstract qualities of values extracted from these descriptions, and ending with value norms or systems of accepted generalizations in evaluation. Value standpoints in such an evaluation matrix represent dispositions or preferences in procedures, which reflect the norms or signifying concepts of the time. Corresponding procedures, or applications of the hierarchicized signification of artworks, are manifested in all known forms of artwork assessment: attribution, institutionalization, and setting of priorities in terms of exhibition, conservation, acquisition, restoration, and so on. Research in the history of European art-historical ideas has corroborated the hypothesis that, prior to the late 18th century, clear normative patterns were applied when it came to the evaluation of artworks. However, with the emergence of early Romanticism, this could no longer be done in the traditional way. Before the period in question, visual art was created (regardless of some stylistic discrepancies between individual authors) and classified according to well-defined thematic areas and functions. Such qualifications made it possible to distinguish clearly between major stylistic periods, creating the impression of development regardless of the later evaluative classifications of individual cycles in historical production thus understood. A comparison between the axiological matrix and the features of individual historical periods has revealed, on the one hand, a stable relationship between the functionally nomological features of artistic productions and the cultural instrumentalizations of art, and on the other a stable relationship between the overtly semantic conceptualizations in the epoch of modernism and the ostensibly structural mode of artistic expression. In the postmodern period, all that was once understood as the stylistic language of form, or the autonomy of the artefact, has been transformed in the evasive media multiplication of the postindustrial epoch into a whole series of reproductive languages, replicas, transfers, copies, or simulacra, and forced into a relationship of permanent detachment with regard to the “original” (source). Thus, instead of an artwork in context, the context itself is now presented as an artwork, structured all over again according to some of the possible principles in the theoretical choice of interpretation. The impossibility of defining precisely the boundaries of the medium, and its increasing dematerialization, have made it more difficult to apply universal evaluative criteria to a particular artwork, which has led to a conflict between cultural evaluation and the subjection of experience to the semantic functions of evaluations. Nevertheless, recent research on perception in the field of neuroscience has indicated that the sensory perception of the external world and the assignation of meaning to those perceptions indeed happen simultaneously, and that these processes cannot take place separated from one another. The conclusion shows that the modern evaluation conflicts are largely a consequence of an irreversible and entropic state of culture in the 21st century. We should therefore aim at a revision, not so much of the hitherto accepted and standardized values, but rather of the present systems of evaluation and the ensuing evaluative descriptions of art.
U ovom se radu razmatra viđenje otoka i otočnoga prostora u očima stranih putnika tijekom ranog novog vijeka. Obradom brojnih izvora nastojalo se proniknuti u glavne razloge njihove, najčešće krive ...percepcije u onodobnim svjedočanstvima i ukazati na ključne momente u promjeni takva viđenja. Može se kazati da je isprva to viđenje bilo pod utjecajem kasnosrednjovjekovnih portulana, ali i opterećeno naslijeđem iz antike, posvjedočenim na brojnim kartama s konca XV. i iz prve polovine XVI. stoljeća. Do osjetnog pomaka u vjerodostojnijem percipiranju istočnojadranske obale i otoka dolazi od sredine XVI. stoljeća, kada nastaju brojna putopisna djela u kojima se opisuje spomenuti prostor, uz brojne kartografske prikaze koji su omogućili da se prikazani geografski objekti potvrđuju u plovidbenoj praksi i po potrebi korigiraju. Ipak, za osjetniji napredak u tom pravcu trebat će sačekati kraj XVII. stoljeća, kada dolazi do sustavnih prikupljanja podataka s terena, prvenstveno za potrebe karata, ali su te korigirane informacije vrlo brzo proširene i na tekstove geografskih djela. Konačno, u drugoj polovini XVIII. stoljeća, usavršavanjem mjerničkih tehnika i drugačijim vrjednovanjem i tretmanom površinskih oblika, prostor se otoka počinje sagledavati u svojoj cjelini, omogućujući tako stvaranje realne slike o veličini otočnoga prostora.
Suprotno općeprihvaćenom mišljenju, argumentiram da Gettierovi protuprimjeri za trodijelnu analizu znanja kao opravdanoga istinitog vjerovanja nisu uspjeli zato što uvjet opravdanja, a pogotovo uvjet ...istinitosti za znanje u tim slučajevima nisu jednoznačno ispunjeni. Jer sudovi u koje se vjeruje jesu semantički ambivalentni te se za njih ne može jasno reći jesu ili istiniti ili neistiniti, pa stoga ni jesu li predmeti opravdanih istinitih vjerovanja. To je zbog zbunjujuće semantičke uloge koju igra odreðeni opis (u prvom protuprimjeru) i ekskluzivna disjunkcija (u drugom protuprimjeru). Stoga nijedan od Gettierovih navodnih protuprimjera zapravo ne opovrgava trodijelnu analizu kao takvu, nego samo jednu njezinu interpretaciju. Gettierovi se slučajevi mogu u najboljem slučaju protumačiti kao oni koji zahtijevaju modifikaciju i poboljšanje tradicionalne analize, a ne kao oni koji zahtijevaju njezino zamjenjivanje. Neki se drugi gettierovski slučajevi, npr. oni koje su iznijeli Lehrer i Feldman, mogu razmatrati na analogan način.
Problem vrijednosti u ovom se radu razmatra kroz različite oblike, načine i moduse povijesnog vrednovanja na polju vizualne umjetnosti, s pretpostavkom da su svi tipovi preferencija prema određenome ...umjetničkom djelu ili djelima, u odnosu na druga u srodnoj skupini, specifični postupci vrednovanja. Najčešći među njima su procjenjivanje umjetnine, atribucija, institucionalizacija, određivanje prioriteta u izložbenoj djelatnosti, zaštiti, otkupu ili restauraciji. Kao takvi praktičan su odraz sustava označavanja i stvaranja hijerarhija te su odraz normativno definiranih dispozicija ili vrijednosno relativiziranih koncepata. Kroz povijesni pregled kulturnih paradigmi, posebno onih što su jasno razlučive na povijesnoumjetničkoj matrici velikih stilskih razdoblja, ekstrahiraju se njima svojstvena obilježja vrijednosti. Formalne značajke umjetničkih djela, pokazuje se, najbolje svjedoče ishodišta preferencija ili institucionalizirane kriterije naručitelja, a potom i suprotstavljene im vrijednosne kriterije umjetnika ili kritičara – posrednika od kasnog XVIII. st. nadalje. S periodom ranog romantizma markirana je granica između tradicionalnih i modernih obrazaca vrednovanja, odnosno artikulirana je ideja vrijednosnog pluralizma usko povezana s promjenom shvaćanja prirode vizualnog medija. U zaključku se pokazuje kako su suvremeni konflikti vrednovanja u velikoj mjeri posljedica ireverzibilnog i entropijskog stanja kulture u XXI. stoljeću te da smo upućeni na reviziju, ne toliko do sada prihvaćenih i standardiziranih vrijednosti, koliko poznatih nam sustava vrednovanja i, posljedično tomu, vrijednosnih opisa umjetnosti.
PDF
