“Alkie,”“Frat Brother,” and “Jock”: Perceived Types of College Students and Stereotypes About Drinking1

Two studies assessed perceived types of college students and associated stereotypes about drinking. In the first study, 64 university students responded to an open‐ended probe asking them to list types of college students and then rated the amount of drinking done by each of a set of preselected types. In the second study, 236 students responded to the same open‐ended item and directly rated a set of types that had been revised based on Study 1 in terms of drinking and involvement in the academic and sociosexual collegiate subcultures. As hypothesized, consensual responses to the open‐ended probe reflected the college student culture. Also as hypothesized, types of students socially defined in terms of the sociosexual aspects of college (e.g., “fraternity boy”) were rated as likely to drink heavily, whereas types that were seen as being pulled away from college social life, through assumed involvement in academics (e.g., “brain/straight As”), were rated as drinking relatively little. Finally, rated sociosexual involvement was positively correlated, and academic involvement was negatively correlated, with perceived drinking, which supports a central assumption of the framework guiding the research.     

“SCIENCE,” “RELIGION,” AND “SCIENCE‐AND‐RELIGION” IN THE LATE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

Many intellectuals wrote texts on the relations between Islam and science in the nineteenth‐century Ottoman Empire. These texts not only addressed the massive social and cultural changes the Empire was going through, but responded to European authors’ claims about the extent to which Islam was compatible with the modern world. Focusing on several texts written in the second half of the nineteenth century by the influential Muslim Ottoman authors Namik Kemal, Ahmed Midhat, and ?emseddin Sami, this article shows the influence of these exigencies on arguments on Islam and science. In order to represent Islam as a respectable religion in harmony with science, these intellectuals defined a “pure Islam” that was a set of basic principles that could be found in the Qur'an. Rather than an embedded way of life, Islam in these texts was an objectified, delimitable entity that could be imagined as having relations with other entities, such as science.     

The Evolving “D” in “BASIC ID”

The multimodal counseling model is based on the notion that a client's concerns can be dealt with most successfully when the counselor or therapist treats several aspects of a client's functioning. The multimodal model uses the acronym BASIC ID to identify the areas of client functioning that frequently need to be treated. These areas include behavior, affect, sensation, imagery, cognition, interpersonal relations, and drugs. The D mode, which represents drugs, is a misunderstood aspect of the BASIC ID partly because it does not seem to parallel other aspects of the model. Over the past few years the D mode has been expanded to include more than drugs, in particular, to include diet and other physiological factors. This article describes the evolution of the D mode and attempts to show the importance of a physiological dimension to the multimodal counseling approach.     

“Towards a Global Vision of the Church”

After the publication of The Church: Towards a Common Vision (TCTCV) in 2013, the major task and challenge for the Faith and Order Commission's Study Group II has been the progress of the multilateral ecumenical dialogue on ecclesiology. The two subgroups of Study Group II have been working in close cooperation with each other, focusing on two major ways to achieve this progress. The focus of Subgroup 2 has been to harvest the fruits of the official responses to TCTCV. This is being done by the collection and analysis of the official responses to TCTCV, the identification of some key themes and issues that emerge from them, and the evaluation of how they point to the next steps. So far 74 responses have been received; however, geographically speaking, there has been essentially no response from the global South (there have been no responses from Africa, no responses from Latin America, and one from Asia); and, denominationally speaking, roughly 10 percent of the responses come from churches or streams that have not been part of the “traditional” ecumenical movement. Nevertheless, the latter regions and denominational families are crucial: they represent the largest and fastest‐growing part of global Christianity, and thus it is impossible to have a really “universal” and contemporary‐sensitive approach to ecclesiology without substantial input from them. Many of them have also not always been clearly or strongly part of the ecclesiological conversation before TCTCV, and thus it is even more important to include them from now on, and be enriching the multilateral ecclesiological conversation with their contributions as well. Hence, the focus of Subgroup 1 has been to broaden the table of ecclesiological dialogue, by getting into more and wider conversations with ecclesiological perspectives from regions (especially from Asia, Africa, and Latin America), denominational families (e.g., evangelical, Pentecostal, Independent churches, etc.), and forms of being church (e.g., movements, new monasticism, online churches, etc.) “which have not always been clearly or strongly part of discussions on the way to TCTCV, and whose understandings of ecclesiology we want to discover and to enter into dialogue with” (Caraiman minutes, p. 55; cf. Krakow report p. 1).     

“PURE” VERSUS “PRACTICAL” EPISTEMIC JUSTIFICATION

Abstract: In this article I distinguish a type of justification that is “epistemic” in pertaining to the grounds of one's belief, and “practical” in its connection to what act(s) one may undertake, based on that belief. Such justification, on the proposed account, depends mainly on the proportioning of “inner epistemic virtue” to the “outer risks” implied by one's act. The resulting conception strikes a balance between the unduly moralistic conception of William Clifford and contemporary naturalist virtue theories.     

“SECOND-GUESSING”

Messages received from other social actors cannot always be taken at face value. When people have reason to question such messages, it is hypothesized that they engage in a cognitive process called “second-guessing,” wherein they reevaluate the literal interpretation of the message to determine its veridicality. Should they determine that it is not veridical, they generate an alternative, potentially more plausible interpretation. We assessed the frequency and importance of situations that might provoke reinterpretation of messages. Such situations were seen as occurring frequently and were of some importance. Social actors revealed sophisticated knowledge concerning the strengths and weaknesses of information obtained about people or events outside their direct experience. They also claimed to be able to “debias”such information, winnowing a “correct” interpretation from one judged to be “incorrect.” Preliminary data suggest that naive social actors are quite good at delecting scientifically documented sources of bias and making reasonable adjustments in their judgments to correct for those biases when plausibly present.