Spare the rod and spoil the child?

The four papers which follow were originally presented at a research conference at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, on the use of discipline by primary caregivers. The use of corporal punishment in child discipline was discussed extensively. There was no consistent opinion among the authors about whether corporal punishment should be totally discouraged or whether such discipline had its place in the array of practices used by parents. Data supporting both points of view were presented and it was recommended that classification schemes of disciplinary practices include, in addition to a typology, some indications of the harshness of the punishment, the way in which it is administered and important contextual aspects.     

Is Scripture the origin of the Halakhah?

Scripture, in particular the Pentateuch, forms the natural starting point for any inquiry into origins in Judaism. The question answered here derives from a simple fact: the Pentateuch is privileged within the Rabbinic system, which links as much of the Halakhah to the Pentateuchal law codes as it possibly can. So it is quite natural to treat Scripture as the base-line and the Halakhic category-formations as the variable, in seeking the origin of the system. But what happens when we treat the system as the base-line and Scripture as the variable? Then we see that the Halakhic system viewed as a coherent statement does not originate in Scripture. Scripture is not the origin of the Halakhah. Why not? Because of this paradox: Scripture is necessary for the Halakhic system. But Scripture is insufficient for the Halakhic system. The Halakhic system is necessary for Scripture. The Halakhic system is sufficient without Scripture. It requires only Scripture's facts ‐ and these on their own form no system.     

Is the Rorschach welcome in the courtroom?

A survey of 7,934. recent federal and state court cases in which psychologists presented Rorschach testimony revealed only 6 in which the appropriateness of the Rorschach was challenged and just one in which the testimony was not admitted into evidence. There is accordingly good reason to believe that, despite occasionally voiced concerns to the contrary, the Rorschach is welcome in the courtroom.     

Is Scripture the origin of the Halakhah?

Scripture, in particular the Pentateuch, forms the natural starting point for any inquiry into origins in Judaism. The question answered here derives from a simple fact: the Pentateuch is privileged within the Rabbinic system, which links as much of the Halakhah to the Pentateuchal law codes as it possibly can. So it is quite natural to treat Scripture as the base-line and the Halakhic category-formations as the variable, in seeking the origin of the system. But what happens when we treat the system as the base-line and Scripture as the variable? Then we see that the Halakhic system viewed as a coherent statement does not originate in Scripture. Scripture is not the origin of the Halakhah. Why not? Because of this paradox: Scripture is necessary for the Halakhic system. But Scripture is insufficient for the Halakhic system. The Halakhic system is necessary for Scripture. The Halakhic system is sufficient without Scripture. It requires only Scripture's facts - and these on their own form no system.     

Does the consequence argument beg the question?

The Consequence Argument has elicited various responses, ranging from acceptance as obviously right to rejection as obviously problematic in one way or another. Here we wish to focus on one specific response, according to which the Consequence Argument begs the question. This is a serious accusation that has not yet been adequately rebutted, and we aim to remedy that in what follows. We begin by giving a formulation of the Consequence Argument. We also offer some tentative proposals about the nature of begging the question. Although the charge of begging the question is frequently made in philosophy, it is surprisingly difficult to pin down the precise nature of this dialectical infelicity (or family of such infelicities). Thus we offer some new proposals about the nature of begging the question with an eye to understanding what is going on in central cases in which the charge is legitimately made. We then defend the Consequence Argument against the charge that it begs the question, so construed. We contend that, whatever the other liabilities of the argument may be, it does not beg the question against the compatibilist.     

Is the Rorschach Welcome in the Courtroom?

A survey of 7,934. recent federal and state court cases in which psychologists presented Rorschach testimony revealed only 6 in which the appropriateness of the Rorschach was challenged and just one in which the testimony was not admitted into evidence. There is accordingly good reason to believe that, despite occasionally voiced concerns to the contrary, the Rorschach is welcome in the courtroom.     

Where in the brain is the self?

Localizing the self in the brain has been the goal of consciousness research for centuries. Recently, there has been an increase in attention to the localization of the self. Here we present data from patients suffering from a loss of self in an attempt to understand the neural correlates of consciousness. Focusing on delusional misidentification syndrome (DMS), we find that frontal regions, as well as the right hemisphere appear to play a significant role in DMS and DMS related disorders. These data are placed in the context of neuroimaging findings.     

Is the Splash Red?

Ball (2009) claims that without phenomenal concepts, the knowledge argument fails. In this article, I argue that Ball doesn’t succeed in proving his claim. The reason is that the Marianna case is not a case where the acquisition of the concept required for entertaining a phenomenal belief content Q alone is sufficient for Marianna, given enough physical information about her environment, to infer Q.     

Who is the Church?

Abstract : Although the question of survival is on the mind of most mainline congregations in the United States, the real crisis facing the churches is one of identity. After briefly reviewing three theological paradigms for the church (Word‐event, communion, and missio dei), I propose that the question of the church's identity is best answered by returning to the “story of the church,” which properly “starts with the Spirit,” and by reclaiming a concept of the church as a Spirit‐breathed people who are called and sent.     

Should the probabilities count?

When facing a choice between saving one person and saving many, some people have argued that fairness requires us to decide without aggregating numbers; rather we should decide by coin toss or some form of lottery, or alternatively we should straightforwardly save the greater number but justify this in a non-aggregating contractualist way. This paper expands the debate beyond well-known number cases to previously under-considered probability cases, in which not (only) the numbers of people, but (also) the probabilities of success for saving people vary. It is shown that, in these latter cases, both the coin toss and the lottery lead to what is called an awkward conclusion, which makes probabilities count in a problematic way. Attempts to avoid this conclusion are shown to lead into difficulties as well. Finally, it is shown that while the greater number method cannot be justified on contractualist grounds for probability cases, it may be replaced by another decision method which is so justified. This decision method is extensionally equivalent to maximising expected value and seems to be the least problematic way of dealing with probability cases in a non-aggregating manner.