In 1699, John Toland published an early version of Shaftesbury's Inquiry concerning Virtue or Merit (IVM).
It was during this period that he rewrote the Inquiry concerning Virtue or Merit and completed versions of A Letter concerning Enthusiasm (LCE), Sensus Communis: An Essay on the Freedom of Wit and Humour (SC), The Moralists (M) and Soliloquy, or Advice to an Author (SA).
He did write one work the Inquiry concerning Virtue or Merit that has the kind of clearly-telegraphed thesis development and argumentation we've come to expect from a philosophical treatise.
However, in Smith's account the spectator's belief about what the recipient actually feels about the agent is not important for the spectator's judgment concerning the merit and demerit of the agent.
These concerns merit close consideration, but there is so much more at stake.
Mr. Frank, however, said the concerns "merit an extension of the comment period in order to allow a thorough investigation and evaluation".
These concerns merit more discussions leading toward distillations of lessons learned for enforced OR capacity building in LMICs.
While the evidence in this area is complex and often contradictory, and a full evidence review is beyond the scope of this article, a few areas of concern merit discussion in order to provide necessary context for our results.
Federal law requires that judges disqualify themselves when they have a financial interest in a case, have given ad-vice or expressed an opinion "concerning the merits of the particular case" or when their "impartiality might reasonably be questioned".
There is ongoing debate in the philosophy of science concerning the merits of model selection in explications of the notion of simplicity, informativeness, and the like (see, for example, Sober 2004, Romeijn and van de Schoot 2008, Romeijn et al 2012, Sprenger 2013).
