Knowing not

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 252 Bloor Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 1V6 People often know rapidly and reliably that they do not know something. A review of contemporary theory reveals that the issue has not received much attention; moreover, the accounts available assume that recognition that one does not know something is achieved only by failure to establish that one does know it. A reaction time experiment assessed two aspects of knowing not, by asking people whether they knew common nouns well enough to use them in sentences and whether they had visited certain cities. The findings were that affirmations of negation were often more rapid than positive reports; hence, the account of knowing not as the complement of knowing that something is the case is not necessarily correct. We suggest that knowing not may be attained as rapidly as positive knowledge on the basis of ability to carry out analytical procedures.     

Last but not least

When two three-letter words are flashed up in sequence, observers cannot tell whether the top halves of the words are the same or different. It follows that words, like faces, are processed holistically, not as a set of separate features.     

Happiness is not Well-Being

This paper attempts to explain the conceptual connections between happiness and well-being. It first distinguishes episodic happiness from happiness in the personal attribute sense. It then evaluates two recent proposals about the connection between happiness and well-being: (1) the idea that episodic happiness and well-being both have the same fundamental determinants, so that a person is well-off to a particular degree in virtue of the fact that they are happy to that degree, and (2) the idea that happiness in the personal attribute sense can serve as a “proxy” for well-being, i.e., that a person’s degree of deep or robust happiness approximates their degree of well-being. It is argued that happiness in both these senses is conceptually, metaphysically, and empirically distinct from well-being. A new analysis of welfare, well-being as agential flourishing, can explain welfare’s real connection to happiness in both the episodic and personal attribute senses. It predicts that such happiness is only directly beneficial when it is valued, when it is a form of valuing, or when it underwrites (i.e., serves as the causal basis for) the disposition to realize one’s values. It is therefore a necessary—but not sufficient—condition for especially high levels of well-being. This analysis of welfare integrates many insights from the eudaimonic tradition of welfare and happiness research in psychology, and also addresses common criticisms of these eudaimonic models.     

Perception is not all-purpose

I aim to show that perception depends counterfactually on the action we want to perform. Perception is not all-purpose: what we want to do does influence what we see. After clarifying how this claim is different from the one at stake in the cognitive penetrability debate and what counterfactual dependence means in my claim, I will give a two-step argument: (a) one’s perceptual attention depends counterfactually on one’s intention to perform an action (everything else being equal) and (b) one’s perceptual processing depends counterfactually on one’s perceptual attention (everything else being equal). If we put these claims together, what we get is that one’s perceptual processing depends counterfactually on one’s intention to perform an action (everything else being equal).

     

求主带领歌

经文:“他自己既然被试探而受苦,就能搭救被试探的人”(来2:18)。新的一年开始了,作为基督徒应继续寻求主的带领,赞美诗第275首就是这样一首求主带领的诗歌。这首诗的作者帕尔默(H．R．Palmer, 1834-1907)出生于美国纽约的一个音乐家庭。他9岁时,就在唱诗班中唱第二声部,曾留学德国和意大利,专攻音乐,学成归国后,历任     

Empathy-congruence-caring are not singular

The conditions which are basic to constructive human relationships in the psychotherapeutic setting are explored as they are currently being expressed in the context of our larger society. The article's thesis is that various elements of our modern society are expressing single dimensions of these necessary conditions, and that these dimensions, when they occur separately, are insufficient for facilitative human interaction.     

Last but not least

When a simple rectangular grid is drawn toward one's face there is the striking illusion that a spherical bulge is protruding from the grid. This illusion may be helpful in studying the interaction of spatial and motion processing.     

Isolation,not locality

There is a long tradition of preferring local theories to ones that posit lawful or causal influence at a spacetime distance. In this paper, we argue against this preference. We argue that nonlocality is scientifically unobjectionable and that nonlocal theories can be known. Scientists can gather evidence for them and confirm them in much the same way that they do for local theories. We think these observations point to a deeper constraint on scientific theorizing and experimentation: the (quasi-) isolation of causal or lawful influence. We argue that this requirement ought to replace the locality desideratum in science. We then explore the possibility that the order of explanation has been reversed: perhaps it is isolatable influence that determines what counts as local in the first place.     

Understanding: not know-how

There is considerable agreement among epistemologists that certain abilities are constitutive of understanding-why. These abilities include: constructing explanations, drawing conclusions, and answering questions. This agreement has led epistemologists to conclude that understanding is a kind of know-how. However, in this paper, I argue that the abilities constitutive of understanding are the same kind of cognitive abilities that we find in ordinary cases of knowledge-that and not the kind of practical abilities associated with know-how. I argue for this by disambiguating between different senses of abilities that are too often lumped together. As a consequence, non-reductionists about understanding—those that claim that understanding-why is not reducible to knowledge-that—need to find another way to motivate the view. In the end, the fact that abilities are constitutive of understanding-why does not give us reason to conclude that understanding is a kind of know-how.