No Story,No Analysis?

The construction of narrative is closely linked to identity formation, or the establishment of a sense of self, with its attendant notions of history and continuity and lineal development. Story-making within analysis is seen as being at the heart of symbolic process and of psychic change. The story serves as a form of transitional object combining factual with imaginal, internal and external realities, and reflects our desire to internalize one another. With regard to clinical work, this paper explores the following ideas specifically: the apparent absence of narrative in the analysis of some patients; the use of story as a defence in the service of a false self; how we differentiate 'true' and 'false' stories; and, lastly, the therapeutic value of reconstruction as a form of story making.     

Is mutual advantage a general theory of justice? More domain worries

Philosophical Studies -     

What worries first-year students? Psychometric properties of the Student Worry Scale

The transition to university can be stressful for first-year university students. Despite the fact where the feeling of worry is a shared symptom by various mental health issues, there is a lack of studies that investigate into this matter. As worry is a domain-specific construct, there is a need for a valid and reliable measure of worry specifically for university students. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Student Worry Scale (SWS), particularly in terms of its validity and reliability. For this purpose, the current study recruited a sample of 295 first-year students to evaluate the psychometric properties of SWS. Exploratory factor analysis yielded a five-factor structure of SWS, which explained 55.7% of the total variance. The yielded five factors were general worries, financial-related concerns, significant other’s well-being, academic concerns, and social adequacy concerns. Inter-correlations between the five factors were all significant (r ranged between 0.395 and 0.625). The SWS demonstrated good internal consistency in this study (Cronbach’s alpha ranged between 0.786 and 0.941). Overall, the SWS is psychometrically evidenced to be a reliable and valid content-based worry measure specifically for university students.     

Modern health worries – the dark side of spirituality?

Modern health worries (MHWs) are widespread in modern societies. MHWs were connected to both negative and positive psychological characteristics in previous studies. The study aimed to investigate the relationships among intuitive‐experiential information processing style, spirituality, MHWs, and psychological well‐being. Members of the Hungarian Skeptic Society (N = 128), individuals committed to astrology (N = 601), and people from a non‐representative community sample (N = 554) completed questionnaires assessing intuitive‐experiential information processing style, spirituality, modern health worries (MHWs), and psychological well‐being. Astrologers showed higher levels of spirituality, intuitive‐experiential thinking, and modern health worries than individuals from the community sample; and skeptics scored even lower than the latter group with respect to all three constructs. Within the community sample, medium level connections between measures of spirituality and the experiential thinking style, and weak to medium level correlations between spirituality and MHWs were found. The connection between MHWs and experiential thinking style was completely mediated by spirituality. Individuals with higher levels of spirituality are particularly vulnerable to overgeneralized messages on health related risks. Official communication of potential risks based on rational scientific reasoning is not appropriate to persuade them as it has no impact on the intuitive‐experiential system.     

Is Nature Enough? No

Abstract. This essay is based on a lecture delivered at the 2002 IRAS Star Island conference, the theme of which was “Is Nature Enough? The Thirst for Transcendence.” I had been asked to represent the position of those who would answer No to the question. I thought it would stimulate discussion if I presented my side of the debate in a somewhat provocative manner rather than use a more ponderous approach that would argue each point in a meticulous and protracted fashion. Here I lay out a theological position that finds naturalism wanting in three ways: in terms of human spiritual needs, in terms of the mind's need for deep explanation, and in terms of the perennial human search for truth. Again, the style of presentation, like that of the original lecture, prohibits the kind of philosophical development that an adequate answer to each of the issues requires. The purpose is that of evoking discussion on a most important question.     

What are the possibilities for coordinating education information databases?

ERIC is the closest thing to a national database covering the field of education and yet ERIC's coverage is not comprehensive and responsibility for providing information concerning educational resources of all types is fragmented. Given that ERIC cannot obtain the resources to increase its coverage, this article outlines what can be done to coordinate the various existing education information databases. Coordination is seen as possible both during database generation and the later search and retrieval phase. Specific recommendations are provided for four defined stages: (1) Coverage/Acquisitions/Selection; (2) Processing (Cataloging/Indexing/Abstracting); (3) Finding the Right Database to Search (Referral); (4) Retrieval. Ted Brandhorst is the director of the ERIC Processing and reference Facility, the centralized editorial, computerized processing, and database management facility for the ERIC network. He graduated from the University of California, Berkeley, in 1955 and obtained his M.L.S. there in 1957. He came to the Library of Congress in 1959 as a Special Intern and has worked in virtually every division of that library. From 1962–1969 he served as the Assistant Director of the NASA Scientific and Technical Information Facility. He joined ERIC as Director of the ERIC Facility in 1970.     

The relation between evil and transcendence: new possibilities?

Evil has always been a main interest in the field of philosophy and, lately, in the field of ethics – in both continental and analytic traditions – the idea of evil seems to be making a comeback. The propensity in philosophy is to understand evil in radical immanent terms. Lars Svendsen, in A Philosophy of Evil, argues for example that evil is about inter-human relationships, not about a transcendent, supernatural force. Emmanuel Levinas, on the other hand, describes evil as something that cannot be integrated into the world, something that is always on the outside: the radical Other. Furthermore, evil appears to us as something chaotic, defying comprehension. Does this mean evil is something transcendent? In this article I will analyse the concept of evil in terms of the typology of transcendence that was developed by Wessel Stoker. I will argue that there are, within the (post-) modern discourse, and due to new developments in the understanding of transcendence, new nuanced possibilities of thinking about evil and its relation to transcendence – especially to ‘transcendence as alterity’. Traces of this kind of understanding of evil will be indicated in Paul Ricoeur's view of evil. This notion of evil may enhance our ethical responsibility towards it.     

Should Humans Colonize Mars? No

Space advocates, presidents, and NASA administrators have talked for decades about sending people back to the Moon and on to Mars, to stay. Neither funding nor public support has materialized. Billionaire Elon Musk has declared his intent to establish a human colony on Mars, drawing much media attention. Here Linda Billings argues that it would be unethical to contaminate a potentially habitable planet for further scientific exploration and immoral to transport a tiny, non-representative, subset of humanity—made up of people who could afford to spend hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars on the trip—to live on Mars.     

No Reservations Required? Defending Anti-Nominalism

In a 2005 paper, John Burgess and Gideon Rosen offer a new argument against nominalism in the philosophy of mathematics. The argument proceeds from the thesis that mathematics is part of science, and that core existence theorems in mathematics are both accepted by mathematicians and acceptable by mathematical standards. David Liggins (2007) criticizes the argument on the grounds that no adequate interpretation of “acceptable by mathematical standards” can be given which preserves the soundness of the overall argument. In this discussion I offer a defense of the Burgess-Rosen argument against Liggins’s objection. I show how plausible versions of the argument can be constructed based on either of two interpretations of mathematical acceptability, and I locate the argument in the space of contemporary anti-nominalist views.     

No Blame No Gain? From a No Blame Culture to a Responsibility Culture in Medicine

Healthcare systems need to consider not only how to prevent error, but how to respond to errors when they occur. In the United Kingdom’s National Health Service, one strand of this latter response is the ‘No Blame Culture’, which draws attention from individuals and towards systems in the process of understanding an error. Defences of the No Blame Culture typically fail to distinguish between blaming someone and holding them responsible. This article argues for a ‘responsibility culture’, where healthcare professionals are held responsible in cases of foreseeable and avoidable errors. We demonstrate how healthcare professionals can justifiably be held responsible for their errors even though they work in challenging circumstances. We then review the idea of ‘responsibility without blame’, applying this to cases of error in healthcare. Sensitive to the undesirable effects of blaming healthcare professionals and to the moral significance of holding individuals accountable, we argue that a responsibility culture has significant advantages over a No Blame Culture due to its capacity to enhance patient safety and support medical professionals in learning from their mistakes, while also recognising and validating the legitimate sense of responsibility that many medical professionals feel following avoidable error, and motivating medical professionals to report errors.     

No Harm,No Foul? Justifying Bans On Safe Performance-Enhancing Drugs

Scholars such as Simon (2007; 2004) and Loland (2002) as well as the authors of the World Anti-Doping Code (2001) argue that using performance-enhancing substances is unhealthy and unfairly coercive for other athletes. Critics of the anti-doping position such as Hoberman (1995), Miah et al. (2005) and Tamburrini (2007) are quick to argue that such prohibitions, even though well-intended, constitute an unjustifiable form of paternalism. However, advocates for both of these positions assume that preserving good health and, conversely, avoiding health-related harms, lie at the centre of the debate. Given the apparent stalemate in the debate over the validity of health concerns on performance-enhancing drugs, in this essay, I investigate ethical issues of ‘harm-free’ pharmaceutical performance enhancement. Beginning with the hypothesis that a harm-free performance-enhancing drug may be produced in the future, I ask if there would still be compelling reasons for prohibiting such a drug. I address this question by providing two arguments against allowing athletes to use pharmaceutical performance-enhancing drugs – the damage to the testing and contesting of sport and the loss of internal goods that are intrinsically satisfying. These two arguments taken together, I argue, are sufficient to sustain the prohibition of pharmaceutical performance-enhancing drugs without citing their harmful side effects.     

Genetic Moral Enhancement? Yes. Holiness? No

As moral human beings, we deplore our violence and try to rein it in through moral suasion and post-hoc restraint. Could genetic engineering help? Moral enhancement through genetic engineering might predispose us to performing good acts, good deeds. However, good acts alone, theologically speaking, do not count as either morality or holiness. Becoming a good and holy person-in-community is a process of freely chosen character development. While re-creating ourselves genetically to eliminate aggressive acts is not insignificant, such interventions constitute a starting point, not the endpoint, of living a meaningful life in relation to God. Bernard Lonergan’s notion of moral agency requires moral conversion and religious conversion, neither of which could be achieved through gene expression alone. Conversion requires free and intentional participation in moral character development. Finally, we note that salvation according to Christianity is not earned, regardless of a person’s good acts or good moral character.     

Should Humans Colonize Other Planets? No

In certain segments of the space community, the idea of colonizing other planetary bodies has been popular for decades. Disproportionate attention to this idea in the mass media, and lip service from key U.S. government officials, may convey the impression that the goal of space colonization¹1. Though some advocates now eschew the term “colonization” in favor of “settlement” when advocating for human expansion to other planetary bodies, the author makes no distinction between the two terms in this particular case and will use the term colonization.View all notes and exploitation is universally embraced. This author will argue that this is not the case, and, further, should not be. Given the current state of humankind’s overall ethical and moral development, humans should clean up the mess they have made on their home planet and learn how to take care of one another here before they go off into space.