On the meaning of indexicals

The approach adopted in the paper is based on the theory known as Montague grammar. Accepting, in general, that theory — especially in its modified version, which is due to Thomason and Kaplan — the author points out certain inadequacy in its treatment of the meaning of some indexical expressions and suggests some modification of its theoretical framework in order to avoid that shortcoming. It is claimed that to do justice to the meaning of so-called indefinite indexicals (such as “we”, “you”, “now”) two kinds of dependence of their semantic values upon the context of use must be taken into account — a semantic (or lexical) and a pragmatic (or extralexical) one.     

On the proper formulation of conditionalization

Synthese - Conditionalization is a norm that governs the rational reallocation of credence. I distinguish between factive and non-factive formulations of Conditionalization. Factive formulations...     

On the search for meaning

The author demonstrates heuristic ways to differentiate healthy from pathological meanings in life. He argues that no one can tackle such a task without first detecting the purpose of life. To find it, one must recognize that, ultimately, life does not belong to anyone, and this on two accounts: First, it is received through parental union, and second, it is only temporal and must thus be given back. Life is a loan that must be returned through death. These two polar realities, it is here believed, inform the whole of existence and guide us toward healthy growth (positive existential mental health).     

On the meaning of meaning when being mean: commentary on Berkowitz's "on the consideration of automatic as well as controlled psychological processes in aggression"

Berkowitz (this issue) makes a cogent case for his cognitive neo-associationist (CNA) model that some aggressive behaviors occur automatically, emotionally, and through conditioned association with other stimuli. He also proposes that they can occur without "processing," that is, without meaning. He contrasts his position with that of social information processing (SIP) models, which he casts as positing only controlled processing mechanisms for aggressive behavior. However, both CNA and SIP models posit automatic as well as controlled processes in aggressive behavior. Most aggressive behaviors occur through automatic processes, which are nonetheless rule governed. SIP models differ from the CNA model in asserting the essential role of meaning (often through nonconscious, automatic, and emotional processes) in mediating the link between a stimulus and an angry aggressive behavioral response.     

On the meaning of statistical interactions

The problems which can arise in predicting the presence or absence of statistical interactions when a theoretical model is not set into correspondence with the experimental design model are considered in the context of a specific study of developmental differences in distractibility. It is concluded that intuitive or incomplete theoretical analyses often lead to incorrect prediction concerning statistical interactions and to spurious or ambiguous conclusions based on the confirmation or disconfirmation of those predictions and that the analysis of the relationship between a theoretical model and the experimental design model will offer considerable protection against such undesirable outcomes.     

On the development of stimulus control

Pigeons were trained to peck one key when presented with white noise at any of five intensities lower than a reference intensity, and to peck another key when presented with white noise at any of five intensities greater than the reference intensity. The shape of the stimulus control curves (proportion of responses to one key versus stimulus intensity) changed from a horizontal line at the beginning of training to the sigmoid form of typical psychometric functions at the end of training. The development of stimulus control is described in terms of a model based on the theory of signal recognition and a concept of attention.     

Sensory and meaning features in stimulus recognition and associative retrieval.

Three experiments addressed the problem of isolating the effects of sensory similarity on subprocesses involved in coding paired associates. In the first, the standard recognition-recall procedure was used and stimulus similarity, concreteness, and frequency were varied. However, because of concern with the validity of this recognition procedure as a measure of functional stimulus contact, an alternative was developed. This alternative led to the second study in which only stimulus similarity was manipulated. In the third experiment, similarity was varied, and the pairs were either associatively compatible, unrelated, or incompatible. The results using the new procedure indicated that similarity consistently disrupted functional stimulus contact but not associative retrieval. By contrast, associative relatedness facilitated both subprocesses.