Can Pragmatists Be Moderate?

In discussions of whether and how pragmatic considerations can make a difference to what one ought to believe, two sets of cases feature. The first set, which dominates the debate about pragmatic reasons for belief, is exemplified by cases of being financially bribed to believe (or withhold from believing) something. The second set, which dominates the debate about pragmatic encroachment on epistemic justification, is exemplified by cases where acting on a belief rashly risks some disastrous outcome if the belief turns out to be false. Call those who think that pragmatic considerations make a difference to what one ought to believe in the second kind of case, but not in the first, ‘moderate pragmatists’. Many philosophers – in particular, most advocates of pragmatic and moral encroachment – are moderate pragmatists. But moderate pragmatists owe us an explanation of exactly why the second kind of pragmatic consideration makes a difference, but the first kind doesn’t. I argue that the most promising of these explanations all fail: they are either theoretically undermotivated, or get key cases wrong, or both. Moderate pragmatism may be an unstable stopping point between a more extreme pragmatism, on one hand, and an uncompromising anti-pragmatism on the other.     

Therapist attentiveness and negative capability in dialogical family meetings for psychosis

Jaakko Seikkula (2008) has pointed towards the importance of practitioners working in the present moment in dialogical therapy. Extrapolating from Seikkula's work, this article considers the significance of the qualities of therapist attentiveness, generosity and negative capability in dialogical family meetings for psychosis. It is proposed that these qualities are of particular importance when family meetings occur in crisis situations, as when under pressure practitioners can easily be drawn into prematurely interventionist stances that may unintentionally promote chronicity for the person experiencing psychosis. The value of co‐working arrangements in enabling practitioners to maintain attentiveness and negative capability in this work is also considered.     

Relative importance of perceptual and mnemonic variance in human temporal bisection

We investigated the relative contributions of perception and reference memory to behavioural variability in a temporal discrimination with human subjects. We used two temporal bisection tasks. In both tasks each trial consisted of a sequential presentation of three intervals, two standards, and a probe, and subjects were asked to judge the similarity of each probe against the two standards. In a "single bisection", the standards' duration was constant across trials. In a "roving bisection", the two standards were trial unique. We compared our results with the predictions from a model related to Scalar Expectancy Theory, with the added assumption that the decision process minimizes the expected number of errors given the information available. The model shows that if errors in reference memory were dominant the psychometric function should be identical for single and roving tasks, and if perceptual errors were dominant the psychometric function should be steeper for the single than for the roving bisection. As we found that psychometric functions were steeper for the single than for the roving tasks, we concluded that perceptual errors are dominant.     

FEMINISM AS LIFE RAFT

We looked at relationships between academic women's feminist identity and their perceptions of discrimination. From a sample of self-labeled feminist professors of psychology who had participated in the Feminist Teaching Project, we examined previously transcribed interviews and also collected new, auxiliary information. We expected to find that our respondents would view feminism as both provoking discrimination and helping them cope with discrimination. We found that experiences with gender discrimination were common among our sample, but that feminism in isolation was not perceived by our respondents as a provocation for problems. Rather than making it hard for women to swim in academic waters, feminism seemed to serve as a life raft for many professors.     

Causal Contribution in War

Revisionist approaches to the ethics of war seem to imply that civilians on the unjust side of a conflict can be legitimate targets of defensive attack. In response, some authors have argued that although civilians do often causally contribute to unjustified global threats – by voting for war, writing propaganda articles, or manufacturing munitions, for example – their contributions are usually too ‘small’, or ‘remote’, to make them liable to be intentionally killed to avert the threat. What defenders of this view lack, however, is a theory of causal contribution. This article sketches and defends a theory of causal contribution. We then apply it to the kinds of situation that defenders of the view are interested in. We argue, however, that since degrees of causal contribution turn out to be sensitive to particular features of the situation that are extrinsic to the agent's action, whether an agent makes a small or a large contribution to a threat may not only be very difficult to discern but in many cases may not line up very well with the kinds of intuition about liability that defenders of the view want to uphold.     

Special Treatment? Flexibilities in the Politics of Regenerative Medicine’s Gatekeeping Regimes in the UK

ABSTRACT

Emerging flexibilities are apparent in gatekeeping regimes applicable to regenerative medicine products, raising issues about the extent to which and forms in which such flexibilities might promote emerging products as a sector warranting special treatment, in the context of recent policy developments in the UK and wider European Union. Concepts of ‘gatekeeping’, ‘gatekeeping regimes’ and ‘gateways’ can point to the ways in which regulatory institutions, health technology assessment organisations, and national planners and purchasers of health services together define and control entry to the medical product marketplace and the adoption of products into the public health-care system. Flexibilities in existing regimes and new gateways are a way of maintaining ‘connection’ between gatekeeping regimes and technoscientific innovation in order to steer innovation pathways. The gateways concept has affinity with that of Callon’s ‘obligatory passage points’. A wide set of recent policy documents show that the measures promoted exhibit a range of alternative gateways that are being constructed around central, legal, restrictive gatekeeping regimes. However, it would be easy to overestimate the significance of these developments as relaxations that would favour innovative producers and their products on a large scale with wide public health impacts. The concepts of gatekeeping regimes and gateways enable understanding of hybrid developments of exceptions and exemptions to dominant regimes which bridge across the arenas of market regulation, health technology assessment and health-care system planning. These arenas are being drawn closer together as a means of politically managing stakeholders’ aims in the UK, EU and other innovating biomedical health systems globally.