Mysteries of morality

Evolutionary theories of morality, beginning with Darwin, have focused on explanations for altruism. More generally, these accounts have concentrated on conscience (self-regulatory mechanisms) to the neglect of condemnation (mechanisms for punishing others). As a result, few theoretical tools are available for understanding the rapidly accumulating data surrounding third-party judgment and punishment. Here we consider the strategic interactions among actors, victims, and third-parties to help illuminate condemnation. We argue that basic differences between the adaptive problems faced by actors and third-parties indicate that actor conscience and third-party condemnation are likely performed by different cognitive mechanisms. Further, we argue that current theories of conscience do not easily explain its experimentally demonstrated insensitivity to consequences. However, these results might be explicable if conscience functions, in part, as a defense system for avoiding third-party punishment. If conscience serves defensive functions, then its computational structure should be closely tailored to the details of condemnation mechanisms. This possibility underscores the need for a better understanding of condemnation, which is important not only in itself but also for explaining the nature of conscience. We outline three evolutionary mysteries of condemnation that require further attention: third-party judgment, moralistic punishment, and moral impartiality.     

埃琉息斯秘仪与奥尔菲斯教之比较

埃琉息斯秘仪与奥尔菲斯教是古希腊文明中两个既相似、又不同的宗教文化现象。二者处于相同的社会环境之中,是同一类型的崇拜方式,都与生殖崇拜、冥府崇拜密切相关,强调个人与神灵的结合,具有广泛的社会基础,注重来世的生活和有一定的排外性及神秘性。但二者在仪式的举行、机制的管理、教义的传承方式、来世幸福的实现方式和与公共宗教的关系上有着极大的区别。     

Health Message Framing: Moderators,Mediators, and Mysteries

Health message framing is an important aspect of health communication. Over the past 20 years, researchers have sought to identify the contexts in which gain‐framed and loss‐framed health messages are most likely to motivate healthy behavior. Two major approaches have emerged: One approach focusing on matching the frame of the message to how people perceive the risks and uncertainties of the advocated health behavior and the other approach focusing on matching the frame of the message to the motivational orientation of the recipient. In this review, we describe these two major approaches to health message framing, identify the most likely psychological mediators that explain why these approaches motivate behavior, suggest a way to integrate these two approaches, and outline several key future directions for both basic and applied research in health message framing.     

Mysteries of the Psychoanalytic Process: Reflections on Chaos,Complexity, and Emergence

The American Journal of Psychoanalysis - Psychoanalysis is inherently messy and mysterious. The mysteries of the psychoanalytic process are viewed through the lens of chaos and complexity theory....     

难题、辩护与原则的确定--对"安慰剂对照双盲法人体实验"的医学伦理思考

从技术要求上看 ,针对人的药物或其他治疗方法的人体实验 (即涉及人体的医学实验 )研究 ,往往采取“对照”的方法和原则进行 ,而在各种对照中 ,对受试者通过随机分组、使用安慰剂和利用双盲法的“安慰剂对照双盲法人体实验”是其中常规的技术要求和做法 ,这种做法是为了保证科研结论的客观性和增强人们对科研结论的可信度。但必须十分清醒地认识到其中存在大量医学伦理难题 ,需要对此进行伦理学辩护 ,并确定解决难题的伦理学原则。1　伦理难题的存在◆“安慰剂对照双盲法人体实验”是获取研究结论的惟一手段选择吗 ?可以适应于所有的实验吗 …     

分析方法与哲学问题

分析哲学旨在通过语言分析,达到概念的清晰性、表达的严格性和推理的有效性。哲学史上确有一些命题和问题是模糊的和不严格的,因而妨碍了问题的解决和哲学的进展。分析的方法有助于我们澄清和部分地解决传统哲学中的一些问题,从而使其中一些问题得到部分的解决。一些众所周知的哲学命题和著作,如“哲学是爱智慧”、“天人合一”、老子《道德经》,或者在意义的清晰性上,或者在推理的有效性上,存在一些缺陷。将分析的方法应用在这些命题上和话语上,有利于我们获得更清晰的理解,从而在一定程度上避免没有结果的争论。     

Standard and non-standard Newcomb Problems

Examples involving common causes — most prominently, examples involving genetically influenced choices — are analytically equivalent not to standard Newcomb Problems — in which the Predictor genuinely predicts the agent's decision — but to non-standard Newcomb Problems — in which the Predictor guarantees the truth of her predictions by interfering with the agent's decision to make the agent choose as it was predicted she would. When properly qualified, causal and epistemic decision theories diverge only on standard — not on non-standard — Newcomb Problems, and thus not on examples involving common causes.