Rape Myths and Beyond: A Commentary on Edwards and Colleagues (2011)

This article comments on Edwards et al. (2011) who review the state of the current literature on rape myths, defined as ??prejudicial, stereotyped or false beliefs about rape, rape victims, and rapists?? (Burt 1980; p. 217). I argue that while studying rape myths is important to understanding the persistence of sexual assault against women in Western societies, other factors that contribute to this problem need to be considered. Specifically, I focus on the importance of examining societal messages regarding women??s sexuality, as well as examining how individuals conceptualize and define rape more broadly. I conclude by discussing directions for moving toward producing real changes in the prevalence of sexual violence as well as ways to intervene more effectively with victims of sexual violence.     

A Challenge to the Integrity of Creation: An African Woman's Perspective

Is JPIC a compelling process calling churches and Christians to commitment and involvement within the life of the world? Or, as some critics claim, is JPIC a rather a handy but not too practical theoretical construct within which to house the various environment and development commitments of the ecumenical movement? These are ongoing and helpful questions which are not new to the JPIC process. They are important, and necessary to keep in the forefront of debate and discussions in churches, for they point to a central truth — that JPIC is effective only to the extent that it makes a difference in the lives of people. The wealth of theological reflection and socio-political assessment of the JPIC process, as evidenced by the articles of this issue of The Ecumenical Review, are meaningful precisely in relation to their capacity to form and inform the understandings and actions of churches and Christians in the world. For in the last analysis, JPIC can only be measured in terms of human life, and of flesh and blood. Therefore, it seems worthwhile, and perhaps necessary, within a journal of theological reflection which has as its focus the JPIC process, to include a testimony to JPIC as it is lived out at the grassroots level. We know that women bear a disproportionate impact of the effects of poverty and unjust economic systems. Women too experience a disproportionate impact of the effects of racism. As bearers of life into the world, and as the primary nurturers of future generations, women claim a special place in relation to the environment. It is appropriate, therefore, that Cecilia Asogwa inserts into these JPIC reflections a personal account of a community of rural women in Africa who begin to work together in an economic self-help group, and in so doing discover themselves involved as active participants and leaders in their community. For these women, JPIC has meant personal and community empowerment which they have experienced as part of the healing of creation.     

Particular Divine Action: A Challenge To Intellectual Integrity In A Post-Christian Age

Abstract

The fact that certain configurations of problems and the philosophical antinomies, paradoxes and confusions they contain regularly return in the history of the rational exposition of these problems points to more than the limitations of human reason and the inexhaustibility of the subject matter; it is indicative of a structural problem (Ibid.). If we agree that integrity is defmed as the quality of being unimpaired based on unity or wholeness, then holding beliefs based on theories compromised by structural problems jeopardises one’s intellectual integrity. The Christian notion of particular divine action founders on more than one structural problem. On the one hand, divine action is held to be constitutive of the Christian faith. On the other hand, it is held to be inconceivable (unthinkable), improbable (unlikely to happen), impossible (incapable of occurring or happening), unnecessary (not required or desired), and indefensible (not justifiable or excusable) by the way many interpret current scientific, philosophical and theological theories. Together, these objections assert that divine action is implausible. This paper outlines five objections to particular divine action that poses a challenge to intellectual integrity. In doing so, the minimum requirements for a rationally justifiable theory of divine action is delineated.     

A Critique of Classical Psychoanalytic Theories of Anti-Semitism: A Commentary on M. Ostrow's Myth and Madness: The Psychodynamics of Anti-Semitism

The American Journal of Psychoanalysis -     

Kantian Schemata: A Critique Consistent with the Critique

Kant posits the schema as a hybrid bridging the generality of pure concepts and the particularity of sensible intuitions. However, I argue that countenancing such schemata leads to a third‐man regress. Siding with those who think that the mid‐way posit of the Critique of Pure Reason's schematism section is untenable, my diagnosis is that Kant's transcendental inquiry goes awry because it attempts to analyse a form/matter union that is primitive. I therefore sketch a nonrepresentational stance aimed at respecting this primitivity.     

Estlund on Epistocracy: A Critique

An influential anti-democratic argument says: ??(1) Answers to political questions are truth-apt. (2) A small elite only??the epistocrats??knows these truths. (3) If answers to political questions are truth-apt, then those with this knowledge about these matters should rule. (4) Thus, epistocrats should rule.?? Many democrats have responded by denying (1), arguing that, say, answers to political questions are a matter of sheer personal preference. Others have rejected (2), contending that knowledge of the true answers to political questions is evenly distributed. David Estlund finds neither of these replies conclusive. Instead, he attacks (3) arguing that there can be no agreement between qualified people as to who the epistocrats are and that people are not subject to being ruled by experts, whose status as such they can reasonably dispute. Critically, I argue that this argument does not block all forms of epistocratic argument and that Estlund fails to consider the full range of plausible epistocratic views. More constructively, I offer a modest argument for why greater expertise does not necessarily warrant greater political authority. Presumably, the set of feasible options might differ, depending on what procedure is used, and a sub-optimal choice by nonepistocrats from a better set might be superior to the optimal choice by epistocrats from a worse set. In such cases, the mere fact of greater expertise does not warrant political authority, i.e., (3) is false.     

The Last Time: Commentary on Paper by Stuart A. Pizer

Pizer presents poetic details of his patient's complex therapy and analysis. This commentary examines one moment in the treatment that may have violated the potential in potential space. The question is raised as to the impact of such a moment.     

Integrating Integrity: The Organizational Translation of Policies on Research Integrity

Science and Engineering Ethics - Responsible conduct of research and research integrity has become a key concern in both research policy and public media resulting in a number of soft law...     

Meritocracy: A Critique

Herpes Simplex, by T. Natasha Posner, The Experience of Illness Series, London: Routledge, 1998, 143 pages, paperback £13.99     

Ethics and Selfhood: A Critique

Connectionism: Debates on Psychological Explanation, Volume Two Edited by Cynthia Macdonald and Graham Macdonald Blackwell, 1995. Pp. xvii + 424. ISBN 0–631–19744–3. £50.00 (hbk). ISBN 0–631–19745–1 £16.99 (pbk).

New books on the philosophy of religion

Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason By J.L. Schellenberg, Cornell University Press, 1993. Pp. 217. ISBN 0–8014–2792–4. $36.50 (hbk).

Reason and the Heart By William J. Wainwright, Cornell University Press, 1995. Pp. 160. ISBN 0–8014–3139–5. $28.50 (hbk).

The Rationality of Belief and the Plurality of Faith Edited by Thomas D. Senor, Cornell University Press, 1995. Pp. 291. ISBN 0–8014–3127–1. $39.95 (hbk).     

The Social Model of Disability: A Philosophical Critique

abstract Emerging from the political activism of disabled people's movements and mainly theorised by the scholar Michael Oliver, the social model of disability is central to current debates in Disability Studies as well as to related perspectives on inclusive education. This article presents a philosophical critique of the social model of disability and outlines some of its theoretical problems. It argues that in conceptualising disability as unilaterally socially caused, the social model presents a partial and, to a certain extent, flawed understanding of the relation between impairment, disability and society, thus setting a framework that needs clarifications and extensions and presents limits to the achievement of its own aim of inclusion. This article concludes by suggesting that, despite its theoretical limits, the social model acts as a powerful and important reminder to face issues of inclusion as fundamental, moral issues.