The commitment in feeling absolutely safe

The experience of feeling safe even in the midst of trials and temptations seems to be a central feature of the Christian faith. In this article I will try to solve some possible difficulties in understanding this kind of absolute safety by discussing some problems noted by philosophers in connection with the related statements by Socrates that a good man cannot be harmed, and by Wittgenstein that he sometimes feels absolutely safe, that nothing can injure him whatever happens. First, I will investigate whether there is an invalid prediction implied in this feeling of absolute safety: how can someone know that nothing will hurt him or her? Second, I will examine whether this experience of complete safety is dependent upon impossible requirements, such as to be a good man or an impeccable Christian. Third, I will consider the character of the people who claim absolute safety as portrayed by different philosophers: do these people really need to be so cold and inhumanly detached from the world for them to be able to say that nothing can hurt them? I will argue that if, instead of asking how someone can claim absolute safety, we ask to what someone commits him- or her-self in making this claim, these difficulties disappear.     

Meta-perception for pathological personality traits: do we know when others think that we are difficult?

The self allows us to reflect on our own behavior and to imagine what others think of us. Clinical experience suggests that these abilities may be impaired in people with personality disorders. They do not recognize the impact that their behavior has on others, and they have difficulty understanding how they are seen by others. We collected information regarding pathological personality traits--using both self and peer report measures--from groups of people who knew each other well (at the end of basic military training). In previous papers, we have reported that agreement between self-report and peer-report is only modest. In this paper, we address the question: Do people know that others disagree with their own perceptions of themselves? We found that expected peer scores predicted variability in peer report over and above self-report for all 10 diagnostic traits. People do have some incremental knowledge of how they are viewed by others, but they do not tell you about it unless you ask them to do so; the knowledge is not reflected in ordinary self-report data. Among participants who expect their peers to describe them as narcissistic, those who agree with this assessment are viewed as being less narcissistic by their peers than those who deny being narcissistic. It therefore appears that insight into how one is viewed by others can moderate negative impressions fostered by PD traits.     

Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis: Understanding What Parents Plan to Tell Their Children About Their Conception

Over 10,000 babies have been born by PGD and PGS worldwide (Simpson, Prenatal Diagnosis 30(7): 682–695 2010). The experience of parents who have undergone this procedure and their children’s well-being are documented, but no research to date has explored whether parents intend to tell their children how they were conceived and whether this raises special issues for them. PGD practitioners recommend research in this area as parents of children born by PGD increasingly ask questions pertaining to disclosure. We conducted 30 in-depth interviews with couples who have had a baby conceived by PGD. We explored what couples plan to tell their children about how they were conceived, when they plan to do this, and issues they anticipate may arise. The couples had a family history of a monogenic disorder or chromosome rearrangement. Six themes emerged which highlight key issues: (1) To tell or not to tell? (2) Primary reason for undergoing PGD, (3) The ideal time to tell, (4) Situations which may warrant earlier disclosure, (5) Words which parents might choose, and (6) Issues which parents anticipate may arise. We conclude that parents are likely to inform their children about PGD because there is an affected sibling or relative about whom they ask questions, and/or their children are carriers of a condition their parents feel obliged to tell them about. Parents felt they would benefit from access to a genetic counsellor at the time of disclosure and are optimistic about the future of reproductive technology for their children.     

How to Release Oneself from an Obligation: Good News for Duties to Oneself

In some cases, you may release someone from some obligation they have to you. For instance, you may release them from a promise they made to you, or an obligation to repay money they have borrowed from you. But most take it as clear that, if you have an obligation to someone else, you cannot in any way release yourself from that obligation. I shall argue the contrary. The issue is important because one standard problem for the idea of having duties to oneself relies on the impossibility of self-release. The argument (the ‘Release Argument’) is that a duty to oneself would be a duty from which one could release oneself, but that this is an absurdity, and so there can be no duties to oneself. This argument is to be rejected because a duty from which one can release oneself is perfectly possible, and such release occurs quite properly from time to time.     

How to Tell If a Particular Memory Is True or False

ABSTRACT— How can you tell if a particular memory belonging to you or someone else is true or false? Cognitive scientists use a variety of techniques to measure groups of memories, whereas police, lawyers, and other researchers use procedures to determine whether an individual can be believed or not. We discuss evidence from behavioral and neuroimaging studies and research on lying that have attempted to distinguish true from false memories.     

Responding to indirect speech acts

Indirect speech acts, like the request Do you know the time?, have both a literal meaning, here “I ask you whether you know the time,” and an indirect meaning “I request you to tell me the time.” In this paper I outline a model of how listeners understand such speech acts and plan responses to them. The main proposals are these. The literal meaning of indirect speech acts can be intended to be taken seriously (along with the indirect meaning) or merely pro forma. In the first case listeners are expected to respond to both meanings, as in Yes, I do—it's six, but in the second case only to the indirect meaning, as in It's six. There are at least six sources of information listeners use in judging whether the literal meaning was intended seriously or pro forma, as well as whether there was intended to be any indirect meaning. These proposals were supported in five experiments in which ordinary requests for information were made by telephone of 950 local merchants.     

Portrait of a narcissist: Manifestations of narcissism in physical appearance

Narcissism is characterized in part by an acute concern for one’s appearance. Despite this fundamental aspect of narcissism, little is known about whether narcissism is manifested in features of physical appearance. Can you tell if someone is narcissistic just by looking at them? Our results indicate that snap judgments of narcissism based on full-body photographs are at least as accurate as snap judgments of any of the big five personality traits. Narcissists are more likely to wear expensive, flashy clothing, have an organized, neat appearance requiring a lot of preparation, and (in females) wear makeup and show cleavage. Furthermore, observers’ judgments correlate with the presence of these cues, suggesting that they are drawing on the correct information when making their judgments. Finally, observers’ judgments are associated with three of the four facets of narcissism and capture the unique constellation of personality traits typical of narcissists (i.e., high extraversion and low agreeableness). These findings suggest that physical appearance reflects narcissists’ personality, preoccupation with good looks, and desire to be the center of attention, and serves as a vehicle with which to promote their status.     

Giving the Benefit of the Doubt

Abstract

Faced with evidence that what a person said is false, we can nevertheless trust them and so believe what they say – choosing to give them the benefit of the doubt. This is particularly notable when the person is a friend, or someone we are close to. Towards such persons, we demonstrate a remarkable epistemic partiality. We can trust, and so believe, our friends even when the balance of the evidence suggests that what they tell us is false. And insofar as belief is possible, it is also possible to acquire testimonial knowledge on those occasions when the friends know what they tell us. This paper seeks to explain these psychological and epistemological possibilities.     

Beyond Words: Inarticulable Reasons and Reasonable Commitments

We often come to value someone or something through experience of that person or thing. Call such an experience direct appreciation. When you appreciate something directly you may come to embrace a value that you did not previously grasp. Moreover, in a large and important subset of cases it seems you could not have fully appreciated that value, absent some such experience, merely by considering a report of the reasons or arguments that purport to justify your attitude. It follows that you will remain incapable of fully communicating the reasons for your valuing attitude to someone who lacks any such experience. Despite its ubiquity, this phenomenon goes missing in a great deal of contemporary work in ethics and political philosophy. To make sense of it we need an account of the standards governing our normative commitments that explains how we can have reasons for them without requiring articulacy about these reasons.     

Subjective attributes of attraction: How people characterize their liking,their love,and their being in love

Ninety-nine students (mostly women) at a German university were asked to write down how they could tell that they like someone, love someone, and arc in love with someone (or, in other words, what characterized each sentiment if experienced by them). A taxonomy of 47 characteristics (or indicators) was developed to code the responses for each of the three sentiments. Most frequently mentioned were positive mood in the other's presence (61 % for liking and 53% for love) and arousal (62% for being in love). The most distinctive (or unique) characteristic of liking was desire for interaction with the other; of love, trust in the other; and of bcing in love, arousal. Categorizing the characteristics into a cognitive, an affective, and a behavioral level, a complex pattern of main effects and interaction effects was found through analyses of variance. Gender differences were found but are not discussed because of the small male sample (n= 13). Our findings are discussed with respect to the scales developed by Rubin, Hatfield, and Sternberg, and they are placed in the context of recent research on subjective definitions of attraction sentiments (especially love).     

Influence of emotional content and perceived relevance on spread of urban legends: a pilot study

This study examined factors thought to be associated with the spread of urban legends. 62 participants (84% female, 65% white, M age = 22 yr.) read 15 urban legends, 3 of which had a stated local component, and rated various characteristics of each legend, including how scary it was, how believable it was, and how likely the participants would be to tell it to someone else. As predicted, both a high fear rating and a high believability rating were positively correlated with the reported intent to tell (rho60 = .41, p < .0001 and rho60 = .67, p < .02, respectively). There was also a significant positive correlation between familiarity and intent to tell (rho60 = .22, p < .0001); however, presence of a local connection was not strongly correlated with intent to tell. It is possible that the local stories were less believable because they all involved ghosts.     

Help seeking amongst child and adolescent victims of peer‐aggression and bullying: The influence of school‐stage,gender, victimisation,appraisal, and emotion

Background: An important element of many anti‐bullying programmes is encouraging victims to tell someone about their predicament. Research has already reported prevalence of telling, who/when children tell and efficacy of telling. However, seeking help can be viewed as a coping behaviour, and coping processes such as appraisal and emotion may be important predictors of whether pupils ask for help. Aims: To examine the effects that background variables (gender, school‐stage), victimisation (duration, frequency), appraisal (threat, challenge, control) and negative emotion have upon support seeking by child and adolescent victims of peer‐aggression and bullying. To also examine how effective pupils perceive social support to be. Sample: Participants were 830 children (49% male) aged 9–14 years. Three hundred and seventeen pupils were in Primary 6, 307 in Secondary 2 and 206 in Secondary 3. Method: A self‐report bullying questionnaire was completed by the participants within their classes. Questionnaires included items relating to victimisation, appraisal, emotion, and coping strategy choice as well as demographic data. Results: Hierarchical multiple regression analysis revealed that gender, challenge appraisals, and emotions were significant predictors of the degree to which child and adolescent victims of peer‐aggression and bullying sought help (accounting for 15.8% of the variance): girls were more likely than boys to seek help, as were pupils with high challenge appraisals or those experiencing high levels of negative emotion. Also, girls were more likely than boys to view support as the best strategy for both stopping bullying and for helping them to feel better. Conclusion: Results suggest that pupils are more willing to seek help when they see the situation as one in which something can be achieved. Pupils also may be seeking support to get help coping with negative emotions, and this may need to be emphasized to teachers.     

The Selective Laziness of Reasoning

Reasoning research suggests that people use more stringent criteria when they evaluate others' arguments than when they produce arguments themselves. To demonstrate this “selective laziness,” we used a choice blindness manipulation. In two experiments, participants had to produce a series of arguments in response to reasoning problems, and they were then asked to evaluate other people's arguments about the same problems. Unknown to the participants, in one of the trials, they were presented with their own argument as if it was someone else's. Among those participants who accepted the manipulation and thus thought they were evaluating someone else's argument, more than half (56% and 58%) rejected the arguments that were in fact their own. Moreover, participants were more likely to reject their own arguments for invalid than for valid answers. This demonstrates that people are more critical of other people's arguments than of their own, without being overly critical: They are better able to tell valid from invalid arguments when the arguments are someone else's rather than their own.     

The Struggle for a Blessing. Reflections on Genesis 32:24–31

Jacob was left alone; and a man wrestled with him until daybreak. When the man saw that he did not prevail against Jacob, he struck him on the hip socket; and Jacob's hip was put out of joint as he wrestled with him. Then he said, “Let me go, for the day is breaking.” But Jacob said, “I will not let you go, unless you bless me.” So he said to him, “What is your name?” And he said, “Jacob.” Then the man said, “You shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with God and with humans, and have prevailed.” Then Jacob asked him, “Please tell me your name.” But he said, “Why is it that you ask my name?” And there he blessed him. So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life is preserved.” Then sun rose upon him as he passed Penuel, limping because of his hip. (Gen. 32:24–31, NRSV)     

Consent Under Pressure: The Puzzle of Third Party Coercion

Coercion by the recipient of consent renders that consent invalid. But what about when the coercive force comes from a third party, not from the person to whom consent would be proffered? In this paper I analyze how threats from a third party affect consent. I argue that, as with other cases of coercion, we should distinguish threats that render consent invalid from threats whose force is too weak to invalidate consent and threats that are legitimate. Illegitimate controlling third party threats render consent invalid just as they do in two party cases. However, knowing that the consent is invalid is not sufficient to tell the recipient of consent what she may or should do. I argue that when presented with a token of consent from someone whom she thinks is experiencing an illegitimate controlling threat, the recipient may act on that token if and only if doing so represents a reasonable joint decision for her and the victim of coercion. The appropriate action for someone faced with third party coercion therefore depends on the other options open to her and those open to the victim of coercion.     

Put Yourself at the Helm: Charting New Territory,Correcting Course,and Weathering the Storm of Career Trajectories

What bearing have you set you set your sights on? How do you navigate the ever-changing swells and winds of our professional landscape? Are you feeling a nebulous desire for change, that your career is not going in the direction you were expecting, worry about lack of future opportunities, or even a deep dissatisfaction in your current position? You are not alone. The formation of the Committee on Advanced Training for Certified Genetic Counselors (CATCGC) was partly in response to such sentiments, expressed within a vibrant dialogue amongst members of the genetic counseling community. The CATCGC sought to understand how genetic counselors chart courses for their careers by conducting a Decision Points exercise during a pre-conference symposium (PCS) at the 2014 NSGC Annual Education Conference. Participants were asked to identify a decision point at which they were most satisfied with their careers and one at which they were least satisfied and to describe the situation, their personal goals and intentions, any actions they took, and the outcomes. Qualitative analysis in the constructivist tradition was conducted on participants’ responses and facilitators’ notes from the PCS to explore what personal meanings were made of the decision points; twelve themes related to Career High Points, Low Points, and how genetic counselors made career transitions were identified. Using a constructivist framework, themes are presented in the context of the authors’ personal experiences, and the authors’ share their reflections on these data. We wrote this article to offer you a window into your peers’ experiences - the good, the bad, and the ugly - hoping to encourage and challenge you to reflect deeply, no matter where you are on your career journey.     

Responsible authorship and peer review

In this article the basic principles of responsible authorship and peer review are surveyed, with special emphasis on (a) guidelines for refereeing archival journal articles and proposals; and (b) how these guidelines should be taken into account at all stages of writing. In the South Seas there is a cargo cult of people. During the war they saw airplanes land with lots of good materials, and they want the same thing to happen now. So they’ve arranged to make things like runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head like headphones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas—he’s the controller—and they wait for the airplanes to land. They’re doing everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it looked before. But it doesn’t work. No airplanes land. So I call these things cargo cult science, because they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they’re missing something essential, because the planes don’t land. Now it behooves me, of course, to tell you what they’re missing. ... It’s a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty—a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you’re doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid—not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you’ve eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked—to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated. ... In summary, the idea is to try to give all of the information to help others to judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads to judgment in one particular direction or another. Richard P. Feynman, “Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!” ¹ (pp. 310–311)     

To Be or Never to Have Been: Anti-Natalism and a Life Worth Living

David Benatar argues that being brought into existence is always a net harm and never a benefit. I disagree. I argue that if you bring someone into existence who lives a life worth living (LWL), then you have not all things considered wronged her. Lives are worth living if they are high in various objective goods and low in objective bads. These lives constitute a net benefit. In contrast, lives worth avoiding (LWA) constitute a net harm. Lives worth avoiding are net high in objective bads and low in objective goods. It is the prospect of a LWA that gives us good reason to not bring someone into existence. Happily, many lives are not worth avoiding. Contra Benatar, many are indeed worth living. Even if we grant Benatar his controversial asymmetry thesis, we have no reason to think that coming into existence is always a net harm.     

The Beyond Within: An Interview about Aging with Gilda Frantz and Katie Sanford

This article is an interview with two veteran Jungian analysts and long-time friends on how Jungian psychology has helped them with the aging process and how they prepared themselves to grow older. They each discuss some of the best and worst times they have experienced in getting older. They also share what their relationships have been like with their deceased husbands, and they tell their favorite stories about Jung.