THE ENCOUNTER BETWEEN FAITHS AND AN ‘AESTHETIC ATTITUDE’

This paper contains a discussion of the idea of using what could loosely be called an ‘aesthetic attitude’ (stemming largely from Kantian notions of disinterest and explicitly articulated by such writers in the 20^th century as Edward Bullough and Jerome Stolnitz) in the context of the encounter between religions. The ‘problem’ that is addressed is formulated as an attempt to find a space in which the participation of those with committed faith positions (e.g. conservative evangelicals) in sympathetic and empathetic meeting with other faiths can be facilitated. To this end, the paper is critical of the use of spirituality (or inter‐spirituality) as an oft‐suggested mode by which religions meet and ‘converse’ in depth‐encounters. That is, it is argued that the language of inter‐spirituality that is employed by some interfaith writers often betrays liberal assumptions that are unsettling for more committed religious persons. Thus, it is suggested that by changing the language of encounter from ‘inter‐spirituality’ to a more aesthetic (or playful) mode of discourse, one is creating a different, but nonetheless experientially recognisable, space of empathetic meeting and encounter that might be deemed ‘safer’.     

Issues in the Pharmacological Induction of Emotions

abstract   In this paper, we examine issues raised by the possibility of regulating emotions through pharmacological means. We argue that emotions induced through these means can be authentic phenomenologically, and that the manner of inducing them need not make them any less our own than emotions arising 'naturally'. We recognize that in taking drugs to induce emotions, one may lose opportunities for self-knowledge; act narcissistically; or treat oneself as a mere means. But we propose that there are circumstances in which none of these concerns arise. Finally, we consider how the possibility of drug-regulation might affect duties to feel emotions.     

The Effects of Vocalics and Nonverbal Sensitivity on Compliance A Replication and Extension

An interaction between receiver ability to decode vocalic cues and speaker vocalic patterns in obtaining compliance was investigated in this study. Expectancy theory was offered as an explanation for this interaction. Because changes in vocalic patterns can violate expectations, receivers make consistent interpretations of these vocalic cues, and evaluations of these interpretations may be affected by decoder predispositions toward communication that, in turn, produce differential perceptions of source reward. Respondents were interviewed by trained encoders who used neutral, pleasant, and hostile vocal patterns. Compliance was assessed by asking for a donation of time to communication research. Follow-up surveys measured perceived relational messages, interviewer credibility, vocal pleasantness, and the degree to which the vocalic pattern was expected. The predicted disordinal interaction between decoding ability and voice condition was found. Decoding ability did not correlate with predispositions, nullifying source reward as a factor in the evaluation of vocalic violations. It was suggested that preferences for vocalic patterns influenced evaluations: Good decoders may have preferred affiliative cues and thus complied more with pleasant voices, whereas poor decoders may have preferred assertive patterns and complied more with hostile voices.