Casuistry: an alternative or complement to principles?

Casuistry is a traditional method of interpreting and resolving moral problems. It focuses on the circumstances of particular cases rather than on the application of ethical theories and principles. After a brief history of casuistry, the method is explained and its relation to theory and principles is discussed.     

JUSTICE IN CHOICE BEHAVIOR

Une série d'études inter-culturelles a été consacrée à L'effet de L'équité sur le comportement de choix, dans un jeu de type Dilemme du Prisonnier. Les résultats antérieurement collectés montrent que les sujets américains choisissent de maximiser leur gain en fonction de leur niveau d'estime de soi: une distribution des récompenses en fonction du mérite semble correspondre à un besoin d'équité; mais les sujets italiens qui ont une faible estime d'eux-mêmes tendent à maximiser plus fréquemment leur gain: ils ont tendance à être “ ego-défensifs”. Dans les études qui sont présentées ici, une récompense initiale est donnée à L'un des deux partenaires, sur la base d'un “test” d'aptitude à la prédiction (Distribution Juste), ou bien la récompense est donnée arbitrairement, sans tenir compre du test (Distribution Injuste). Les sujets doivent ensuite faire une serie de cinquante choix. Les choix des sujets américains renètent un besoin d'équité dans la condition Distribution Injuste, le sujet qui a reçu une récompense choisit moins souvent de maximiser ses gains que le sujet qui n'a pas reçu de récompense; dans la condition Distribution Juste, les sujets maintiennent L'inégalité créée par la récompense initiale. Sur L'ensemble des trois échantillons italiens qui ont été étudiés séparément, on observe une tendance à minimiser L'injustice dans la condition Distribution Injuste; mais dans la condition Distribution Juste, on observe un effet de défense du moi. Différentes interprétations théoriques des résultats sont discutées.     

An apparatus for use in 2 by 2 game research

This article describes a solid state apparatus for use in 2 by 2 game research. There are two individual player’s boards and a control panel for E. Following E’s signal, each player chooses one of two responses. Their choices are immediately registered on E’s panel, but appear on each individual game board only after both have responded. Provisions are made for E to transmit false feedback.     

Pupillary response as a general measure of activation

Pupil size was measured while 30 male college students undertook five tasks respectively concerning, (a) muscle tension induced by the lifting of weights, (b) fear induced by threat of a gunshot, (c) intense stimulation induced by loud pure tones, (d) heightened attention from viewing novel pictures, and (e) pleasantness and unpleasantness in reaction to pictures that differed in terms of their affect-inducing characteristics. Highly regular relationships were found between pupil size and degree of muscle strain and between pupil size and the temporal ordering of events during threat of a gunshot. Significant effects on pupil size also were found for the other three types of stimulation.     

A Method of Comparing Student Achievement Levels at Different Colleges

Mean ability levels as measured by high school rank and scholastic aptitude test scores were computed for freshman classes at 38 colleges in Minnesota. The mean grade-point averages achieved by these freshman classes were also obtained. By comparing mean ability level with mean grade-point, a “difficulty index” was computed for each college. The validity of the index was tested by using it to predict differences in grades achieved by students who transferred from one college to another and comparing such predicted grades with those actually achieved after transfer. Difficulty indexes computed by this method predicted differences in mean grade-point averages of transfer students with surprising accuracy.     

Behavioral effects of pairing an SD with a decreasing limited-hold reinforcement schedule

Four pigeons were trained on a multiple reinforcement schedule consisting of two limited-hold schedules, one in which a discriminative stimulus (S^D) accompanied the periodic reinforcement contingency, and one in which the discriminative stimulus was omitted. The duration of the limited-hold in each component of the multiple schedule was reduced in parallel steps. It was shown that behavioral differences between the two schedules were attenuated by this manipulation of temporal parameters. When S^D was reduced in duration, three out of four pigeons responded with extremely high S^Δ rates, despite the regular pairing of S^Δ with the reinforcement contingency. These high rates qualitatively resembled the rapid rates emitted on the analogous no-S^D component.     

Can humans think their way to increased freedom?

In response to Auger's article, “Are Human Beings Free?” several points are made in favor of humans' having at least some degree of free choice or free will: (1) Although partly dependent on biological and social influences for their tastes, people may sometimes actually train themselves to change these tastes and desires. (2) Although logically people may never be totally responsible for their acts, unless we pragmatically hold them responsible for their antisocial behavior we vitiate all moral rules of the social groups in which theychoose to reside. (3) RET can hold people responsible for their wrongdoing and help them to act less wrongfully in the future by teaching them how to condemn theirdeeds andacts but not themselves as humans.