Components of the laterality effect in letter recognition: Asymmetries in iconic storage

A partial report procedure and a backward masking paradigm were employed to explore lateral asymmetries in components of letter recognition. Stimulus displays were displaced off-centre into the left visual field (LVF) or the right visual field (RVF). Visual field differences in the effect of a delayed backward mask indicated an RVF superiority in the rate of read-out or encoding. Comparison of masked and unmasked full report also yielded estimates of iconic persistence. The persistence of these peripheral displays was surprisingly brief, although it was significantly longer in the LVF (₅₇ ms) than in the RVF (₃₄ ms). Precueing by colour and by location produced a larger partial report advantage in the RVF, reflecting a superiority in selective sampling. With postcueing no partial report effect was obtained at any delay, and this failure was attributed to the briefness of the iconic persistence.     

“Liturgy emerges from a wound”

Serious academic reflection and scholarship on the Fresh Expressions of Church (FXoC) movement in the United Kingdom is developing significantly, but there exists almost no such work in South Africa. What has been produced deals with scholars reflecting on their experiences of Fresh Expressions in the United Kingdom (Ian Nell and Rudolph Grobler, “An Exploration of Fresh Expressions as Missional Church: Some Practical-Theological Perspectives,” NGTT DEEL 55:3–4 (2017), 747–68). This is an unfortunate situation. While there has been a generous response by many churches, there has been little interest, by and large, from the Anglican Church of Southern Africa (ACSA). FXoC is, then, an under-researched entity in South Africa. This article, part of a larger study, seeks to ask questions about how liturgy might develop from below in a new ecclesial community of marginalized people.     

COVID-19, Sex,Addictions, Women's Health,Care of the Elderly,and Medical Education

Journal of Religion and Health -     

P. F. Strawson was neither an externalist nor an internalist about moral responsibility

Internalism about moral responsibility is the view that moral responsibility is determined primarily by an agent's mental states; externalism is the view that moral responsibility is determined primarily by an agent's overt behaviour and by circumstances external to the agent. In a series of papers, Michelle Ciurria has argued that most if not all current accounts of moral responsibility, including Strawsonian ones, are internalist. Ciurria defends externalism against these accounts, and she argues that, in contrast to his contemporary followers, P.F. Strawson himself was an externalist. I believe that Ciurria's reading of Strawson is problematic. The aim of this paper is to elucidate Strawson's position with regard to the internalism‐externalism issue against the background of Ciurria's reading of him. I conclude that Strawson was neither an internalist nor an externalist about moral responsibility. I draw extensively upon the whole body of Strawson's work, much of which is sadly neglected in discussions of ‘Freedom and Resentment’, although it illuminates many of the issues discussed there.