Arnold Gesell and the Maturation Controversy

This article examines the work of Arnold Lucius Gesell and argues that he not only paved the way for contemporary research in motor development, but that he and colleagues anticipated fundamental issues about growth that must be addressed by psychologists and neuroscientists who are committed to the advancement of developmental science. Arnold Lucius Gesell was a pioneer in developmental psychology when the field was in its infancy. He worked diligently for the rights of physically and mentally handicapped children to receive special education that would enable them to find gainful employment. Gesell's writings in books and popular magazines increased public awareness of and support for preschool education and better foster care for orphans. Despite these achievements, many of his successors have questioned his views about infant development. Developmental psychologists have criticized Gesell for proposing a stage theory of infant growth that has fallen into disfavor among contemporary researchers. His conception of development as a maturational process has been challenged for allegedly reducing complex behavioral, perceptual, and learning processes to genetic factors. The author rejects this overly simplistic interpretation and contends that Gesell's work continues to stand the test of time.     

Tay-Sachs and the abortion controversy

Tay-Sachs disease is a fatal recessive genetic disorder that effects the central nervous system of Ashkenazi Jewish infants. The disease is incurable. The only method of prevention is screening for heterozygotes with subsequent amniocentesis for at-risk couples and abortion of the genetically doomed infants. Genetic screening and abortion are complex ethical issues that bridge the worlds of religion and science and challenge the dynamic halachic reasoning of the Jewish people. This work examines the debate surrounding the abortion controversy, with special emphasis on the subjective biases inherent in debates of this type.     

Croatian controversy

A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory and Practice, and the Believer Vol. 3. Soviet Studies on the Church and the Believer's Response to A theism, by Dmitry V. Pospìelovsky. London: Macmillan Press, 1988. Paperback, 325pp. £14.95

Symbols of Power: The Esthetics of Political Legitimation in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe edited by Clars Arvidsson and Lars Eric Blomqvist. Almqkvist and Wiksell International, Stockholm, 1987, 185pp.

Fear no Evil by Natan Sharansky. London: George Weidenfeld and Nicholson Ltd, 1988. 468 pp., £16.95     

Psychological research and the prostate-cancer screening controversy

In October of 2011, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force released a draft report in which they recommended against using the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test to screen for prostate cancer. We attempt to show that four factors documented by psychological research can help explain the furor that followed the release of the task force's report. These factors are the persuasive power of anecdotal (as opposed to statistical) evidence, the influence of personal experience, the improper evaluation of data, and the influence of low base rates on the efficacy of screening tests. We suggest that augmenting statistics with facts boxes or pictographs might help such committees communicate more effectively with the public and with the U.S. Congress.     

On the factor score controversy

A summary and interpretation of the recent literature on the indeterminacy of factor scores is given in simple terms. A good index of factor score determinacy is the squared multiple correlation of the factor with the observed variables.     

Dynamic models of development and the mechanistic-organismic controversy

Starting with a prototypical model of Newtonian mechanics, a sequence of dynamic models with increasing structural complexity is presented. The implicated smooth variation along a dimension of structural complexity yields dynamic models which display organismic properties such as stagewise development and emergent self-organization. Consequently, it is concluded that dynamic models of development are inherently neutral with respect to the mechanism-organicism controversy. Accordingly, a unitary research program is proposed in which these dynamic models serve as building blocks for the construction of a coherent explanatory system of development.     

Clinical controversy and the domains of scientific evidence

The diversity of mental health care "schools" or therapeutic perspectives poses problems in selecting and using any single therapeutic perspective. This article describes the genesis of clinical controversy--that is, how two or more therapeutic perspectives of the same clinical situation can be so different yet not necessarily differ in outcome. Ideas drawn from contemporary philosophy of science show how different "schools" derive separate, incompatible sets of scientific evidence from the same clinical situation. The school or theory determines (in part) not just what evidence is used, but what evidence is actually perceived. The authors conclude by recommending a pluralistic approach to mental health care; they map out some consequences of this pluralism and suggest some strategies for minimizing the disadvantages of "mixing and matching" therapeutic perspectives.     

The Chimenti controversy

Jacopo Chimenti (c 1551-1640), an artist from Empoli, made two sketches of a young man holding a compass and a plumb line. When these were seen, mounted next to one another, by Alexander Crum Brown in 1859, he combined them by overconvergence and described the stereoscopic depth he saw. Brown's informal observation was conveyed to David Brewster, who suggested that the drawings were produced for a stereoscope, possibly made by Giovanni Battista della Porta. There followed a bitter debate about the supposed stereoscopic effects that could be seen when the pictures combined. Brewster's claims were finally dispelled when precise measurements were made of the drawings: some parts were stereoscopic and others were pseudoscopic. Brewster's attempts to wrest the invention of the stereoscope from Wheatstone were unsuccessful.     

Thomson and the current state of the abortion controversy

ABSTRACT Many philosophers who wish to defend abortion, but who have become frustrated by the resistance of the personhood question to yield to any nonarbitrary solution welcomed Judith Thomson's 'A defense of abortion.'Thomson argues that abortion is sometimes justifiable even if the foetus is a person. In this paper I argue that Thomson's argument is a defense of abortion, rather than merely extraction without death, only because of the current state of medical technology. Once the technology is in place to extract foetuses while preserving their lives and to allow them to develop to full term outside the uterus, Thomson cannot defend the killing of the foetus. If she is right, however, a woman will still have the right to have a foetus extracted from her body. Finally, it is pointed out that the source of the problem with Thomson's argument is the major premise in most arguments for the permissibility of abortion: a woman's right to control her own body. If the defence of abortion is to entail a defence of the termination of the foetus, then this premise, understood as the right to remove an unwanted entity from one's body or the right to alter one's body as one wishes, simply will not do the trick.