Remarks in praise of guilt

This article is an elaboration and extension of an earlier article concerned with guilt and morality in the modern age. The focus is on two general issues arising from what was presented there. First, there is an attempt to explicate the conception of human agency underlying the emphasis on individual responsibility in the original essay. Second, there is a critical examination of the moral relativism position so common in the contemporary world. Both the shrinking conception of human agency and responsibility and the growing acceptance of moral relativism are strongly criticized, and it is concluded that a rationally-based morality must be defended against those many persons today for whom ‘anything goes’ in the realm of human behavior.     

Satisficing rationality: In praise of folly

Conclusion From a psychological point of view, human wants and desires form a multitiered structure. If values are related in any way to human affectivity or desire - and this is something most maximizing theorists would certainly not dispute - then we are forced to recognize that human values also form a multi-tiered structure. Failure to appreciate this connection leads maximization theorists seriously astray, both in their interpretation of human behavior and in their postulates of rationality. Optimizing involves satisficing, not strictly maximization; satisficing is truly rational.I thank David Schmidtz and Jan Narveson, and the participants of a colloquium at the University of British Columbia, for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this essay.     

In praise of "false" models and rich data

The authors argue that "true" models that aim at faithfully mimicking or reproducing every property of the sensorimotor system cannot be compact as they need many free parameters. Consequently, most scientists in motor control use what are called "false" models--models that derive from well-defined approximations. The authors conceptualize these models as a priori limited in scope and approximate. As such, they argue that a quantitative characterization of the deviations between the system and the model, more than the mere act of falsifying, allows scientists to make progress in understanding the sensorimotor system. Ultimately, this process should result in models that explain as much data variance as possible. The authors conclude by arguing that progress in that direction could strongly benefit from databases of experimental results and collections of models.     

More than enough guilt to go around: oedipal guilt, survival guilt, separation guilt

The concepts of oedipal guilt, survivor guilt, and separation guilt are examined using clinical material from a child case to demonstrate the intermingling of these constructs. A brief review of their evolution in the psychoanalytic literature reveals a frequent conflation of the terms guilt and fear, the former at times standing in for both meanings. The fear/guilt distinction and the subsequent differentiation of guilt into oedipal, survivor, and separation guilt have implications for how analysts understand and interpret particular kinds of clinical material. Two sets of adult clinical data are next presented: the first illustrates a shift from interpreting a patient's fear of retribution for forbidden desires to interpreting guilt over pursuing those desires. The second vignette illustrates a common dynamic in which a patient's fear/anxiety regarding the ability to lead an independent life defends against deeper feelings of guilt over this same desire. This latter dynamic can play an important role in negative therapeutic reactions and interminable analyses. Developmental research suggests that toward the end of the first year of life, infants' capacity to attribute independent mental states and intentionality to self and others allows for the rudimentary experience of guilt.     

In praise of vagueness: malleability of vague information as a performance booster

Is the eternal quest for precise information always worthwhile? Our research suggests that, at times, vagueness has its merits. Previous research has demonstrated that people prefer precise information over vague information because it gives them a sense of security and makes their environments more predictable. However, we show that the fuzzy boundaries afforded by vague information can actually help individuals perform better than can precise information. We document these findings across two laboratory studies and one quasi-field study that involved different performance-related contexts (mental acuity, physical strength, and weight loss). We argue that the malleability of vague information allows people to interpret it in the manner they desire, so that they can generate positive response expectancies and, thereby, perform better. The rigidity of precise information discourages desirable interpretations. Hence, on certain occasions, precise information is not as helpful as vague information in boosting performance.     

Missing out: In praise of the unlived life,by Adam Phillips

Over the past three years, Greece has been in the throes of economic and social crises. The crises have been triggered by the implementation of severe austerity policies and have been connected with negative effects on people’s mental health and well-being. Consequently, psychological therapies have been instigated to respond to the arising systemic and political problems such as unemployment, deprivation and economic oppression. Traditional modes of intervention based on individualization, depoliticization and pathologization are hard pressed to help people confront such issues. Could mainstream approaches prevail? Using the mythical and tragic hero Prometheus, this review focuses on how psychotherapists and counsellors can help people who have been confronting insurmountable problems to reflect on the meaning of human suffering and develop active resistance against unjust authority in adverse conditions.     

Maternal guilt

The recent emphasis on humans as cooperative breeders invites new research on human family dynamics. In this paper we look at maternal guilt as a consequence of conditional maternal investment. Solicited texts written by Finnish mothers with under school-aged children in 2007 (n = 63) described maternal emotions perceived as difficult and forbidden. Content analysis of guilt-inducing situations showed that guilt arose from diverging interest and negotiations between the mother and child (i.e., classic parent- offspring conflict). Also cultural expectations of extensive and perpetual high-quality maternal investment or the "motherhood myth" induced guilt in mothers. We argue that guilt plays an important role in maternal-investment regulation. Maternal guilt is predicted to vary with social and cultural context but also to show universal characteristics due to parent-offspring conflict and allomaternal manipulation. Results are preliminary and intended to stimulate research into the mechanisms, gender differences and cultural variations of guilt and other social emotions in human parenting.