Philosophers and cognitive psychologists have argued that categories are delimited in more flexible ways, for example via a notion of family resemblance or similarity to a prototype.
Croce asserts that Dewey is still arguing against Hegelians of his youth who held, for example, to a notion of "the Absolute," which Croce had rejected.
For example, we formulate a notion of coalitional stability inspired by that of the core from conventional coalitional games, and prove that the problem of showing that the core of a qcg is non-empty is Dp1-complete.
For example, many defend a notion of the self as a relational, ecological being who is a member of the larger biotic (living, organic, ecological) community.
In both of those examples, there is a notion of the indivisibility of interests.
Zandvoort (2000), for example has pleaded for a notion of responsibility in engineering that is more like the legal notion of strict liability, in which the knowledge condition for responsibility is seriously weakened.
For example, one can add a notion of inaccessible set to a weak constructive set theory and obtain a (generalised) predicative theory, while the same notion embedded in a classical context becomes extremely strong (see the sections on Predicativity in constructive set theory and Large sets in constructive and intuitionistic ZF).
For example, all three traditions share a notion of karma as the actions of individuals that determine their future births, yet each has attached unique connotations to the concept.
"We could try to pre-program everything in advance, but that's not trivial – how for example do you program in a notion like 'fairness' or 'harm'?" There is another dimension to the problem aside from ambiguous definitions.
Davis (2012), and also for example Ladd (1991), argue for a notion of responsibility that focuses less on blame and stresses the forward-looking or virtuous character of assuming responsibility.
