Reason and Emotion in the Ethics of Self‐Restraint

In this essay I argue that Reinhold Niebuhr's ethics of self‐restraint, though promising, is based on an incomplete and imprecise moral psychology. Although Niebuhr claims that reason cannot provide a sufficient grounding to motivate self‐restraint, he does not disclose which human capacity might serve this purpose. I suggest that we can address this oversight by strengthening Niebuhr's tentative embrace of David Hume, and by developing a concept of the emotions in order to explain how human beings can cultivate a stable inclination to self‐restraint. This project is informed by and in the service of feminist critiques of Niebuhr and social concerns.     

Against Substitutive Harm

Frances Kamm's Principle of Secondary Permissibility (PSP) specifies a class of exceptions to the general rule not to kill as a means. The principle allows us to harm as a means some of those who would have been otherwise harmed as side effects. ‘For example, suppose it is impermissible to paralyze A's legs as a means to a greater good. It would still be permissible to do this as the alternative to permissibly killing A as a mere indirect side effect.’ I argue that, despite of its great appeal, PSP is incorrect; it is simply not true that the victims of substitutive harm are not worse off than they would otherwise permissibly have been. In fact, there is no moral difference between the purportedly substitutive harm licensed by PSP (and its extension) and the standard sort of harming as means repudiated by nonconsequentialists.     

On Stage with Gunk

A structure is temporally gunky just in case all of its temporal parts have proper temporal parts. Joshua Stuchlik [2003] objects to the stage theory of persistence from temporal gunk by arguing that the former requires instantaneous entities while the latter precludes them. It is argued here that stage theory can accommodate temporal gunk by invoking short-lived persisting stages. However, a new and more serious problem for stage theory is not far to seek. The short-lived stages that are needed to accommodate gunk accord with stage theory only if they are appropriately qualitatively static. The problem is that, unless stage theory abandons much of its dialectical force, some of the required stages fail this condition. Thus, Stuchlik is right that gunk shows a large class of worlds not to be stages, but wrong about which worlds these are.     

A caveat on the Savage–Dickey density ratio: The case of computing Bayes factors for regression parameters

The Savage–Dickey density ratio is a simple method for computing the Bayes factor for an equality constraint on one or more parameters of a statistical model. In regression analysis, this includes the important scenario of testing whether one or more of the covariates have an effect on the dependent variable. However, the Savage–Dickey ratio only provides the correct Bayes factor if the prior distribution of the nuisance parameters under the nested model is identical to the conditional prior under the full model given the equality constraint. This condition is violated for multiple regression models with a Jeffreys–Zellner–Siow prior, which is often used as a default prior in psychology. Besides linear regression models, the limitation of the Savage–Dickey ratio is especially relevant when analytical solutions for the Bayes factor are not available. This is the case for generalized linear models, non-linear models, or cognitive process models with regression extensions. As a remedy, the correct Bayes factor can be computed using a generalized version of the Savage–Dickey density ratio.     

Using multidimensional item response theory to evaluate how response styles impact measurement

Multidimensional item response theory (MIRT) models for response style (e.g., Bolt, Lu, & Kim, 2014, Psychological Methods, 19, 528; Falk & Cai, 2016, Psychological Methods, 21, 328) provide flexibility in accommodating various response styles, but often present difficulty in isolating the effects of response style(s) from the intended substantive trait(s). In the presence of such measurement limitations, we consider several ways in which MIRT models are nevertheless useful in lending insight into how response styles may interfere with measurement for a given test instrument. Such a study can also inform whether alternative design considerations (e.g., anchoring vignettes, self-report items of heterogeneous content) that seek to control for response style effects may be helpful. We illustrate several aspects of an MIRT approach using real and simulated analyses.     

Mission and People with Disabilities

This article begins with a few thoughts and some historical and canonical encounters about how lay and ordained people with disabilities have been involved in Orthodox mission work in the past. It then presents two concrete contemporary situations in which people with disabilities are involved in Orthodox ordained ministry work despite the persisting tradition that disabled people not be ordained. The first example is taken from the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church, where the involvement of people with disabilities in both ordained and lay ministry provides significant support for a church that lives in a delicate situation. The second example is taken from the Romanian Orthodox Church and presents the case of Father Theophilus P?r?ian, one of the most prominent contemporary Romanian Orthodox monastic figures, who served as an ordained priest despite his disability. This article pleads for a deeper involvement of disabled people in both ordained and lay ministry in Orthodox churches.