Vocation for planetary citizenship: Lutheran liberal arts education in the Anthropocene

The focus question of this article is, “In what ways should Lutheran higher education's teaching on vocation be revised to include the fact that we are living in a natural world massively impacted by human behavior, the Anthropocene Era?” This can be broken down into two more explicit questions: “What is the role of liberal arts education in such a changed context?” and “What resources in the Lutheran tradition can contribute to preparing students to become effective sustainability leaders?” The thesis of this article is that Lutheran liberal arts education, to foster planetary citizenship, must move students from an anthropocentric to an ecocentric understanding of vocation, preparing them to become leaders for a sustainable, interfaith society. This change can be accomplished by reaffirming the value of the liberal arts to foster sustainability education and retrieving Luther's understanding of creation to elicit wonder and appreciation of the natural world.     

Nature,nurture, and capital punishment: How evidence of a genetic–environment interaction,future dangerousness,and deliberation affect sentencing decisions

Research has shown that the low‐activity MAOA genotype in conjunction with a history of childhood maltreatment increases the likelihood of violent behaviors. This genetic–environment (G × E) interaction has been introduced as mitigation during the sentencing phase of capital trials, yet there is scant data on its effectiveness. This study addressed that issue. In a factorial design that varied mitigating evidence offered by the defense [environmental (i.e., childhood maltreatment), genetic, G × E, or none] and the likelihood of the defendant's future dangerousness (low or high), 600 mock jurors read sentencing phase evidence in a capital murder trial, rendered individual verdicts, and half deliberated as members of a jury to decide a sentence of death or life imprisonment. The G × E evidence had little mitigating effect on sentencing preferences: participants who received the G × E evidence were no less likely to sentence the defendant to death than those who received evidence of childhood maltreatment or a control group that received neither genetic nor maltreatment evidence. Participants with evidence of a G × E interaction were more likely to sentence the defendant to death when there was a high risk of future dangerousness than when there was a low risk. Sentencing preferences were more lenient after deliberation than before. We discuss limitations and future directions.     

Human left-sided cradling preferences for dogs

Photographs of men and women holding dogs were analyzed for side-holding preferences. A significant majority of women in dog-themed magazines held dogs on their left sides, similar to reports of women holding infants. Men did not show the same left-sided preference, which is also consistent with other studies. The implications of these results for various hypotheses about infant cradling behavior were discussed.     

The logic of conditionals 1

The standard use of the propositional calculus ('P.C.’) in analyzing the validity of inferences involving conditionals leads to fallacies, and the problem is to determine where P.C. may be ‘safely’ used. An alternative analysis of criteria of reasonableness of inferences in terms of conditions of justification rather than truth of statements is proposed. It is argued, under certain restrictions, that P. C. may be safely used, except in inferences whose conclusions are conditionals whose antecedents are incompatible with the premises in the sense that if the antecedent became known, some of the previously asserted premises would have to be withdrawn.