A more dangerous enemy? Philo’s “confession” and Hume’s soft atheism

While Hume has often been held to have been an agnostic or atheist, several contemporary scholars have argued that Hume was a theist. These interpretations depend chiefly on several passages in which Hume allegedly confesses to theism. In this paper, I argue against this position by giving a threshold characterization of theism and using it to show that Hume does not confess. His most important “confession” does not cross this threshold and the ones that do are often expressive rather than assertive. I then argue that Hume is best interpreted as an atheist. Instead of interpreting Hume as a proto-logical positivist and arguing on the basis of Hume’s theories of meaning and method, I show that textually he appears to align himself with atheism, that his arguments in the Dialogues on Natural Religion support atheism, and that this position is most consistent with Hume’s naturalism. But, I hold that his atheism is “soft” and therefore distinct from that of his peers like Baron d’Holbach—while Hume really does reject theism, he neither embraces a dogmatically materialist position nor takes up a purely polemical stance towards theism. I conclude by suggesting several ways in which Hume’s atheistic philosophy of religion is relevant to contemporary discussions.     

Predicting one’s own and others’ 16 PF scores

This study examined the relationship between subjects’ actual test derived scores and their estimates of what those scores would be. Sixty subjects completed the 16 PF (form D) and then estimated the scores on each dimension for themselves and another person they knew well. The results showed significant positive correlations on 9 of the 16 dimensions for themselves. The dimensions they were best at estimating were Desurgency-Surgency, Untroubled adequacy-guilt proneness and Threctia-Parmia. Only two correlations (both negative) reached significance concerning their ability to predict another known person’s scores. Whereas subjects believed they were like the other person they nominated (13 of the 16 correlations were significantly positive), in actual fact their test derived scores showed only two significant findings, one positive and the other negative. Results are discussed in terms of lay theories of personality and their relationship to personality assessment.     

When left hands touch: shadow vows and Jung’s quaternity

Is there a connection between the exchange of vows and the fighting and suffering of couples that are unique to the institution of marriage? This essay introduces the concept of Shadow Vows, the unacknowledged assumptions, agreements, and obligations each partner brings to the relationship, which the authors believe are often responsible for longstanding marital discord and strife. The authors ground the existence of shadow vows in Jung’s quaternity, alchemy, typology, archetypal theory, and depth approaches to couple therapy. The essay concludes with a list of themes indicative of shadow vow enactments in clinical work with couples.     

Personal identity and the otherness of one’s own body

Locke claims that a person’s identity over time consists in the unity of consciousness, not in the sameness of the body. Similarly, the phenomenological approach refuses to see the criteria of identity as residing in some externally observable bodily features. Nevertheless, it does not accept the idea that personal identity has to consist either in consciousness or in the body. We are self-aware as bodily beings. After providing a brief reassessment of Locke and the post-Lockean discussion, the article draws on phenomenological arguments that show the body as lived, that is, lived as one’s own body, but also possibly as “other” or “strange.” Against what has been claimed in recent writing, especially in literature on Merleau-Ponty, the author argues that the “mineness” of the body and its “alterity” are not two mutually exclusive features. In the final part of the article, the author suggests that the becoming strange of one’s own body may legitimately be considered as a prominent experience of what it means to be a person.

     

Believing one’s reasons are good

Is it coherent to suppose that in order to hold a belief responsibly, one must recognize something else as a reason for it? This paper addresses this question by focusing on so-called “Inferential Internalist” principles, that is principles of the following form: in order for one to have positive epistemic status Ø in virtue of believing P on the basis of R, one must believe that R evidentially supports P, and one must have positive epistemic status Ø in relation to that latter belief as well. While such principles and their close relatives figure centrally in a wide variety of recent epistemological discussions, there is confusion in the literature about what, precisely, Inferential Internalism commits one to and whether it is so much as coherent. This paper (1) articulates a broader framework for understanding the notion of epistemic responsibility, (2) motivates Inferential Internalism on the basis of considerations about the basing relation, epistemic responsibility, and parallels with practical deliberation, (3) defends Inferential Internalism against charges of incoherence leveled by James Van Cleve and Paul Boghossian, and (4) shows that contrary to a currently widespread view, Inferential Internalism is coherent even if foundationalism and the a priori are rejected. The paper closes with a preliminary argument for an affirmative answer to the initiating question about the requirements of epistemic responsibility.     

Other than “the set pattern”: Developing one’s own thoughts about spirituality and religion

In qualitative research, psychoanalysts and psychoanalytic psychotherapists who had continued to have a personal interest in religion or spirituality reflected on their religious upbringing. The 25 participants interviewed often gave their responses in what can be identified as narrative form. These narratives articulated participants’ often poignant and distinctive, sometimes humorous, experiences. They relate how and why accepted teaching regarding religious and spiritual issues was challenged, usually in adolescence, but for several participants much earlier. Important aspects included differing responses of significant others to the participants’ independent thinking, the beginnings of subsequent religious and spiritual questing, and, for some, the decision to become a psychotherapist.     

Wanting more than you have and it’s Consequences for Well-being

Americans have a lot of stuff, but are not necessarily happier for it. One possibility is that even if we want what we have, we want more. Wanting more may increase have-want discrepancies and reduce well-being. In this paper, we introduce the construct wanting more, and show that it negatively predicts well-being. We then identify materialism as a mediator of this relationship. Wanting more negatively effects well-being at least in part because those who want more are more likely to be materialistic. Finally, we show that wanting more than one has and wanting what one has are distinct constructs, and that wanting what one has moderates the relationship between wanting more and well-being. Those who want more are less happy only if they also do not want what they have. Wanting what one has may reduce attention to have-want discrepancies that result from wanting more.     

Seeking one’s heading through eye movements

A study of eye movements during simulated travel toward a grove of four stationary trees revealed that observers looked most at pairs of trees that converged or decelerated apart. Such pairs specify that one’s direction of travel, calledheading, is to the outside of the near member of the pair. Observers looked at these trees more than those that accelerated apart; such pairs do not offer trustworthy heading information. Observers also looked at gaps between trees less often when they converged or diverged apart, and heading can never be between such pairs. Heading responses were in accord with eye movements. In general, if observers responded accurately, they had looked at trees that converged or decelerated apart; if they were inaccurate, they had not. Results support the notion that observers seek out their heading through eye movements, saccading to and fixating on the most informative locations in the field of view.     

How to know one’s experiences transparently

Philosophical Studies - I would like to propose a demonstrative transparency model of our immediate, introspective self-knowledge of experiences. It is a model entirely in line with transparency....     

Weyl’s Appropriation of Husserl’s and Poincar“s Thought

This article locates Weyl's philosophy of mathematics and its relationship to his philosophy of science within the epistemological and ontological framework of Husserl's phenomenology as expressed in the Logical Investigations and Ideas. This interpretation permits a unified reading of Weyl's scattered philosophical comments in The Continuum and Space-Time-Matter. But the article also indicates that Weyl employed Poincaré's predicativist concerns to modify Husserl's semantics and trim Husserl's ontology. Using Poincaré's razor to shave Husserl's beard leads to limitations on the least upper bound theorem in the foundations of analysis and Dirichlet's principle in the foundations of physics. Finally, the article opens the possibility of reading Weyl as a systematic thinker, that he follows Husserl's so-called transcendental turn in the Ideas. This permits an even more unified reading of Weyl's scattered philosophical comments.     

Investigating how ostracizing others affects one’s self-concept

Abstract

Social relationships are connected with an individual’s self-concept, so events that influence one’s relationships subsequently influence one’s self-concept. Ostracism, being excluded and ignored, is an aversive experience involving both a target (the one being ostracized) and source (the one ostracizing). We will discuss previous limitations of source paradigms and how we addressed them when developing our paradigms. We will also highlight current source research, from a co-edited special issue, and how this research is relevant to an individuals’ self-concept. Lastly, we will suggest how cognitive dissonance work can ground source research within a larger theoretical framework and inspire future research. We consider how one’s self-concept influences cognitive dissonance related to knowingly harming others through ostracism.     

McTaggart’s Paradox and Crisp’s Presentism

In his review of The Ontology of Time, Thomas Crisp (Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, 2005a) argues that Oaklander's version of McTaggart's paradox does not make any trouble for his version of presentism. The aim of this paper is to refute that claim by demonstrating that Crisp's version of presentism does indeed succumb to a version of McTaggart's argument. I shall proceed as follows. In Part I I shall explain Crisp's view and then argue in Part II that his analysis of temporal becoming, temporal properties and temporal relations is inadequate. Finally, in Part III, I shall demonstrate that his presentist ontology of time is susceptible to the paradox he so assiduously sought to avoid.