PHILOSOPHIC WARRANTS FOR SCRIPTURAL REASONING

Addressing readers who are already acquainted with the practices of Scriptural Reasoning (SR), this essay offers a logical strategy for warranting and testing such practices as well as all postmodern criticisms of modern inquiry. The strategy is to distinguish the logic of suffering, which is reducible to the binary terms of propositional logic, from the logic of repair, which is not. The essay argues that, if reduced to such binary terms, efforts at repair become inadvertent acts of oppression, or acts that produce suffering. The essay concludes that postmodern and postliberal theorists become inadvertent oppressors when their attempts to repair modern inquiry are presented through propositional logics. The practice of SR should be irreducible to such logics.     

THE PROMISE OF SCRIPTURAL REASONING

This Response reintroduces Scriptural Reasoning as portrayed in the essays, showing their various readings and reasonings and how they shed light on SR, while also identifying some lacunae in and between them. The different strengths of these views interact with each other in a highly dynamic and sustaining practice of reading and reasoning Scriptures together, where there is a high degree of mutually responsible hospitality and the possibility of achieving a complex harmony. In conclusion, three tasks for the future of SR are identified: concentrating on the seminal features of the Abrahamic traditions, targeting them and auditing SR performance.     

SCRIPTURAL REASONING AND THE PHILOSOPHY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE

This essay explores of the relationship between religion and science using Max Weber's insights into the philosophy of social science, C. S. Peirce's philosophy of religion and the Qur’anic treatment of material reality. The Weber‐Peirce‐Qur’an conversation opens up the possibility of a (social) scientific affirmation of religion and a religious affirmation of science. Scriptural Reasoning (SR) has already demonstrated that it is capable of creating “mutual ground” between the different religious traditions. This exploration of the exchange between SR and the social sciences suggests that SR has the potential of contributing to the creation of mutual ground between the religious traditions and the “secular” academy.     

HEAVENLY SEMANTICS: SOME LITERARY-CRITICAL APPROACHES TO SCRIPTURAL REASONING

This essay i) shows how certain key virtues of the practice of Scriptural Reasoning (SR) offer correctives to a mode of western rationality that regards itself as “supra‐traditional” and universally valid; and ii) illuminates those virtues with the help of literary theory which shares SR's concern with how texts and their interpretation affect possibilities for human life in any given context. It identifies four “marks” of SR (particularity, provisionality, sociality and surprise) and works with three conversation partners who use literary theory (Hans Urs von Balthasar, Mikhail Bakhtin and John Beer), to offer a positive account of SR's traditioned, critically imaginative character.     

READING WITH OTHERS: LEVINAS' ETHICS AND SCRIPTURAL REASONING

This essay explores different frameworks for learning, progressing from a relatively basic model of acquiring information through first linguistic models, and then through social interaction, leading to textual practices, and culminating with reading with others from other traditions. For this sequence there is a parallel one concerning kinds of reasoning (and the relevant sciences). But the essay focuses on providing the best account of ethical responsibility for each practice of learning: the greater the social complexity and the respect for otherness, the richer the account of the ethics of learning.     

推理结论正确性判定标准再探

本文试图探求人们在进行三段论推理加工时是否存在形式和内容双重标准。由既掌握形式逻辑推理规则又知道构成推理题的两个前提是否正确的被试所进行的推理结果支持下述观点：人们在进行三段论推理过程中,在判定推理结论的正误时,存在着与试题结构相应的两种内在的判定标准,即“形式标准”和“内容标准”。     

SOTOMAYOR'S REASONING

Justice Sonia Sotomayor was vilified for arguing that one's social identity can contribute positively to judgment or public reason. This paper considers and expands on Sotomayor's arguments, showing that identity is relevant to snap judgments and to sensation transference that affects how speakers are assessed. It further develops a hermeneutic account of identity that can make sense of its epistemic relevance without foreclosing individual variation.     

12岁儿童充分条件假言推理能力发展的个体差异研究

以三类不同题目（与生活经验密切联系、与生活经验相悖、与生活经验“脱离”）,探查了12岁普通儿童与数学成绩优异儿童充分条件假言推理能力发展的个体差异。通过对测查成绩的聚类分析,可将被试划分为四种不同的类型,从而显示出同一年龄儿童不同的推理能力发展水平：普通组儿童有关推理能力已有初步发展,但推理过程仍经常受其具体内容的束缚;数学成绩优异组儿童假设思维和演绎推理能力协调发展,“形式”从“内容”的束缚中解放出来,推理思维活动能较好地符合有关逻辑规则。这两组儿童假言推理能力的差异可能跟智能水平有关。     

A PROCESS MODEL OF CAUSAL REASONING IN COMPREHENSION

Many readers and reading theorists alike hold a "common sense" intuition that omissions and substitutions made while reading orally are caused by the reader failing to see the omitted or substituted word, or looking at it for too short a time. In this study the eye movements of college age readers were recorded while they read aloud and then analyzed to see if there is a causal relationship between "careless" eye movements and oral reading omissions and substitutions. Results indicate that, contrary to conventional wisdom, most omitted and substituted words are visually examined, and examined thoroughly, prior to being orally omitted or substituted. These findings are discussed in a context that views reading as a perceptual, interactive, and constructive process.