M and W is an important text; it engages, as very few contemporary philosophy of mind texts have, the serious and neglected dualisms of conceptual scheme and empirical content; spontaneity and receptivity, which are, needless to say, Kantian concerns. McDowell is a proponent of conceptual content (within the realm of a 'minimal empiricism') and appeals to Kant and Wittgenstein to buttress his descriptive approach to philosophical inquiry. M and W has some brillant and evocative insights (with more than a few expensive obscurities), and some of McDowell's metaphors are splendid indeed, such as the teetering 'seesaw' and the 'sideways on picture.' Of course, it attempts to negotiate Kantian insights concerning human cognition with certain contemporary discussions on the Myth of the Given (Sellars), The Third Dogma (Davidson)and the Tribunal of Experience (Quine), and Rorty's attack on epistemology.
This anthology could offer disenchanted graduate students a reason to complete doctoral studies in philosophy. It is that rich and exciting. I am seriously nervous with glee (nerd alert!).
The most important and interesting articles here are: M. Friedman, "Exorcising the Philosophical Tradition" (previously published); R. Pippin, "Leaving Nature Behind" (on subjectivism); B. Stroud, "Sense Experience and the Grounding of Thought" (always a pleasure to read Barry); R. Brandom, "Non-Inferential Knowledge, Perceptual Experience..."; G. McCulloch, "Phenomenological Externalism" (see A. Brueckner and/or K. Falvey on this topic); H. Putnam, "McD's Mind and McD's World" (also see his Three-Fold Cord on McD and his soon to be released UW lectures from Columbia UP); C. Larmore, "Attending to Reasons."
This is my highest recommendation.
In a nutshell, this book sets out to prove that a President of the United States was murdered by a conspiracy that involved the military industrial complex, organized crime and the CIA, along with disgruntled Cuban expatriots who were enraged at JFK for his handling of the Bay of Pigs. It also attempts to prove that this conspiracy was covered up by an amazing level of cooperation between various people and organizations who all had a reason to want President Kennedy dead. It seeks to show that the most powerful of these groups, was the group made up of all those who wanted, indeed needed, a war in Vietnam. It seeks to show that President Kennedy was murdered because he was committed to having all U.S. military forces out of Vietnam by 1965.
If, after reading this, you still have the stomach to venture into this nightmarish theory, you will find a well-reasoned, exhaustively researched, meticulously footnoted and beautifully written book of scholarly construction, with copious endnotes, a complete bibliography, and a full index. You will find well-reasoned paragraphs, incisive reasoning and theories that would be impossible to believe, if Henry Hurt did not do such a professional job of both documenting and interpreting his sources.
In the end, you may well find yourself feeling dismay and grief, at the realization that this book has shattered your illusions about America and its institutions right down to their foundations. More than any other book in my experience, "Reasonable Doubt" reinforces the timeless truths, that ceaseless vigilence is the price of freedom, and that the responsibility of every citizen in a democracy is to keep his/her eyes, ears and mouth open.
Although based upon a North American population (i.e. with its higher societal rates of violence generally) the size of the study, and the relationships it demonstrates suggest that this work has significant implications for other jurisdictions. The book illustrates tools clinicians can use to assist with identification of those with higher for risk of violence.
Although actuarial methods do not offer a panacea for problems associated with risk prediction, they nevertheless provide pointers for increasing the precision with which such assessments can be made. Monahan et. al. acknowledge the limitations of such methods, and point to the complexity of clinical risk assessment for violence potential. The authors also point to the broader contextual, and problematic issues associated with false positives and negatives, in terms of prediction.
Armed with the information contained within this text, clinical staff will have a thorough grounding in the most up to date evidence in the field. This should provide a solid foundation from which staff can approach the complex issue of considering risk assessment generally.