Christian Social Justice Advocate: Contradiction or Legacy?

In this article, the relationship between Christian religiosity and the principles of social justice is explored, including the sociopolitical aspects of faith and advocacy. A particular emphasis is placed on the historical legacy and theological relationships between Christianity and social justice. The author concludes with a call for increasingly overt and intentional social justice work among counselors who self‐identify as Christian.     

Disciplinary Counseling: A Contradiction?

Many counselors appear to be operating on false assumptions (shibboleths) regarding counseling. The removal of these shibboleths leaves one more receptive to examining the basic assumptions underlying the linkage of discipline and counseling. Discipline and counseling may be seen as similar in terms of their educational goals, and counseling is used as a tool for the disciplinary counselor to implement the attainment of these common goals. Unresolved problems remain, however. Counseling is used during only a portion of disciplinary activities; thus there seems to be a misplaced emphasis on counseling in the title of the disciplinary counselor. Such inaccuracy may have unfortunate implications. Because of the usually accepted meaning of “discipline,” the title of disciplinary counselor is confusing and possibly damaging to both the profession and the students it intends to serve.     

Love and Justice: a Paradox?

Three claims about love and justice cannot be simultaneously true and therefore entail a paradox: (1) Love is a matter of justice. (2) There cannot be a duty to love. (3) All matters of justice are matters of duty. The first claim is more controversial. To defend it, I show why the extent to which we enjoy the good of love is relevant to distributive justice. To defend (2) I explain the empirical, conceptual and axiological arguments in its favour. Although (3) is the most generally endorsed claim of the three, I conclude we should reject it in order to avoid the paradox.     

Metacognitive Habits: Contradiction in Terms or Valid Theoretical Concept? The Role of Metacognition in Habitual Behavior

The aim of the present article is to present data showing that habitual actions might be conceptualized as metacognitive habits. The study is based on 3 data collections assessing smoking and school attendance. Habits were measured by a self-report habit index (SRHI) scale that assesses the level in which given behaviors are performed without self-awareness. Metacognitions were measured by the Mental Constructions (MCs) scale that assesses the level of awareness in performing behaviors in question. The results show that MCs and SRHI have (a) moderate to strong positive correlations and (b) similar relations to dependent variables. The study concludes that the further explorations of metacognitive habits are warranted.     

Can the Paradox of Forgiveness Be Dissolved?

The “paradox of forgiveness” can be described as follows: Forgiving, unlike forgetting, is tied to reasons. It is a response to considerations that lead us to think that we ought to forgive. On the other hand, acts of forgiveness, unlike excuses, are responses to instances of culpable wrongdoing. If, however, the wrongdoing is culpable, there is (or seems to be) no reason to forgive it. So two mutually exclusive theses about forgiveness both seem to be equally warranted: Forgiveness is related to reasons, but there can be no reasons for forgiveness. In this paper, I attempt to dissolve this paradox. I argue that the paradox arises as a result of a too narrow conception of “reason” and that it can be dissolved if we acknowledge different kinds of reasons for forgiveness. More specifically, I examine three kinds of reasons for forgiving an act of wrongdoing: (1) Moral reasons that make forgiveness morally mandatory. (2) Prudential reasons for forgiveness. (3) Moral reasons that pertain to the character of the forgiver and that favor forgiveness without making it morally mandatory. I show that while the paradox of forgiveness arises when we consider reasons of the first kind, it can be dissolved with recourse to reasons of the second and third kind. The upshot of the argument is that we can be rational in deciding to overcome our feelings of resentment towards an act of unjustified and unexcused wrongdoing—and this is a strong point in favor of forgiveness.     

The Eucharistic Theology of Richard Field (1561-1616): Confusion,Contradiction, or Creative Synthesis?

Abstract

This examines the eucharistic thought of Richard Field, a Church of England clergyman scholar, as found in his major work, Of the Church (1610). This provided thorough treatment of a number of other topics. He argued that many of the differences apparently dividing Protestants were illusory. Field tends to be portrayed in the secondary literature as having obscured his own eucharistic views in his efforts to reconcile Lutheran and Reformed eucharistic doctrine. In addition, his eucharistic theology tends to be viewed in the literature as conforming to the English Reformed tradition. This paper argues that Field actually clarified his beliefs through his attempts to reconcile differing Protestant camps, and that he espoused not so much a wholly Reformed eucharistic doctrine as a creative synthesis of Lutheran and English Reformed elements, somewhat in tension but not necessarily in contradiction.     

Women and Leadership: A Developmental Paradox?

In this article, the author explores the nature of leadership from a gendered perspective, specifically addressing leadership challenges for women. Leadership challenges, gender stereotypes, and definitions of leadership are discussed. Recommendations for professional redefinition of leadership within the counseling profession and strategies for successful negotiation of leadership roles are provided.     

Mao's ‘On Contradiction’

Conclusion On Contradiction was a historical document, based on Marxism-Leninism's dialectical materialism. The concrete political situations from the 1930's up to now have largely confirmed the author's analysis, and these confirmations and this analysis provided new insights into Marxist-Leninist theory. The world is moving ahead, and countless events are happening. The theories of Marx, of Lenin and of Mao are there to offer occasions for reflexion and perhaps experimentation. But is there something new to be added toOn Contradiction? Will there be an utter rethinking or a creative understanding of it?     

Subjected Subjects? On Judith Butler's Paradox of Interpellation

Judith Butler's theory of the constitution of subjectivity conceptualizes the subject as a performative materialization of its social environment. In her theory Butler utilizes Louis Althusser's notion of interpellation, and she critiques the constitutive paradoxes to which its tautological framing leads. Although there is no pre‐existing subject, as it is constituted in the turn to the interpellative hail, Butler nonetheless theorizes a guilt and compulsion acting on an “individual” that compels his or her turn to answer the hail. There is a price to pay for subjectivity in Butler's schema: the reprimand of the interpellative law that punishes at the same time as it constitutes. But a return to Althusser's text finds that he does not rely so much on coercion and guilt in his explanation of the subject's answer to the hail. Althusser can instead be read as suggesting that we are already an instantiation and enactment of power‐ideology and, to paraphrase Michel Foucault, are already the principle of our own “subjection.” This contests the notion that we are in any way compelled to submit to an external, punitive force to become subjects. As subjects, we are always‐already the embodiment of the field of society‐power‐ideology.     

The Paradox of Wuwei? Yes (and No)

This essay considers P. J. Ivanhoe's critical challenge to Slingerland's analysis of wuwei(‘effortless action’). While I agree with Ivanhoe that we should do more work to embody and understand the concept of wuwei, I will defend Slingerland's notion that wuwei involves paradox—particularly in the cases of Zhuangi and Laozi. The present essay is not a defense of the specifics of Slingerland's analysis. Nonetheless, this essay focuses on defending the notion of paradox. Ivanhoe offers an alternative view of wuwei, one that sees the paradox as a riddle. I argue that this kind of formulation would frame the problem of wuwei in an unhelpful manner. I offer several novel ways of overcoming, or at least qualifying, the experience of paradox that seems to be at play in nondoing.     

Grelling’s Paradox

Grelling’s Paradox is the paradox which results from considering whether heterologicality, the word-property which a designator has when and only when the designator does not bear the word-property it designates, is had by ‘ ȁ8heterologicality’. Although there has been some philosophical debate over its solution, Grelling’s Paradox is nearly uniformly treated as a variant of either the Liar Paradox or Russell’s Paradox, a paradox which does not present any philosophical challenges not already presented by the two better known paradoxes. The aims of this paper are, first, to offer a precise formulation of Grelling’s Paradox which is clearly distinguished from both the Liar Paradox and Russell’s Paradox; second, to offer a solution to Grelling’s Paradox which both resolves the paradoxical reasoning and accounts for unproblematic predications of heterologicality; and, third, to argue that there are two lessons to be drawn from Grelling’s Paradox which have not yet been drawn from the Liar or Russell’s Paradox. The first lesson is that it is possible for the semantic content of a predicate to be sensitive to the semantic context; i.e., it is possible for a predicate to be an indexical expression. The second lesson is that the semantic content of an indexical predicate, though unproblematic for many cases, can nevertheless be problematic in some cases.     

Do constitutive norms on belief explain Moore’s Paradox?

Philosophical Studies - In this article I assess the prospects for a particular kind of resolution to Moore’s Paradox. It is that Moore’s Paradox is explained by the existence of a...     

Can the Russellian Monist Escape the Epiphenomenalist’s Paradox?

Topoi - Russellian monism—an influential doctrine proposed by Russell (The analysis of matter, Routledge, London, 1927/1992)—is roughly the view that physics can only ever tell us about...     

A Counseling Paradox: Do Preservice Counselors Need Employment Counseling?

Data from this study identified a significant discrepancy between preservice counselors' perceptions of their career opportunities and actual placement data.