Effing the Ineffable: The Logocentric Fallacy in Argumentation

Words, just because they are words, are not inherently clear. The message they contain becomes clear to those who speak the language and are familiar with the issues and contexts. If the message lacks linguistic clarity the recipient of the message will typically make a query that will bring forth further information intended to clarify. The result might be more words, but it might also involve pointing or drawing, or words that utilize other modes such as references to context, history, and so on. If the ambiguity derives from an inconsistency between, say, words and behaviour, one may look to either mode for clarity. Communication, we must accept, actually occurs in messages, and our ability to transmit information may be limited by any number of factors. When we focus entirely on discursive aspects of communication we limit both the ways in which we receive and ways in which we transmit information. The logocentric fallacy is committed when language, especially in it's most logical guise, is seen to be the only form of rational communication.     

Collective Guilt and Collective Guilt Feelings

Can collectives feel guilt with respect to what they have done? It hasbeen claimed that they cannot. Yet in everyday discourse collectives areoften held to feel guilt, criticized because they do not, and so on.Among other things, this paper considers what such so-called collectiveguilt feelings amount to. If collective guilt feelings are sometimesappropriate, it must be the case that collectives can indeed beguilty. The paper begins with an account of what it is for a collectiveto intend to do something and to act in light of that intention.According to this account, and in senses that are explained, there is acollective that intends to do something if and only if the members of agiven population are jointly committed to intend as a body to do thatthing. A related account of collective belief is also presented. It isthen argued that, depending on the circumstances, a group's action canbe free as opposed to coerced, and that the idea that a collective assuch can be guilty of performing a wrongful act makes sense. The ideathat a group might feel guilt may be rejected because it is assumed thatto feel guilt is to experience a ``pang'' or ``twinge'' of guilt –nothing more and nothing less. Presumably, though, there must becognitions and perhaps behavior involved. In addition, the primacy, eventhe necessity, of ``feeling-sensations'' to feeling guilt in theindividual case has been questioned. Without the presumption that it isalready clear what feeling guilt amounts to, three proposals as to thenature of collective guilt feelings are considered. A ``feeling ofpersonal guilt'' is defined as a feeling of guilt over one's own action.It is argued that it is implausible to construe collective guiltfeelings in terms of members' feelings of personal guilt. ``Membershipguilt feelings'' involve a group member's feeling of guilt over what hisor her group has done. It is argued that such feelings are intelligibleif the member is party to the joint commitment that lies at the base ofthe relevant collective intention and action. However, an account ofcollective guilt in terms of membership guilt feelings is found wanting.Finally, a ``plural subject'' account of collective guilt feelings isarticulated, such that they involve a joint commitment to feel guilt asa body. The parties to a joint commitment of the kind in question may asa result find themselves experiencing ``pangs'' of the kind associatedwith personal and membership guilt feelings. Since these pangs, byhypothesis, arise as a result of the joint commitment to feel guilt as abody, they might be thought of as providing a kind of phenomenology forcollective guilt. Be that as it may, it is argued the plural subjectaccount has much to be said for it.     

Beneficial factors in family discussion groups of a psychiatric day clinic: perceptions by the therapeutic team and the families of the therapeutic process

This paper reports a pilot investigation of the perception of helpful events by the therapeutic team and the families in two family discussion groups (FDGs) of a psychiatric day clinic. All participants of the FDG, including therapists and observers, filled in questionnaires measuring events helpful for the individual, for the family and for the group after each FDG session. The results showed that the therapeutic team and the families diverged in their overall perception of which factors were important in family discussion group therapy. The therapeutic team saw the relational climate and the structural aspects of the group (including group involvement and support from the group), and specific therapeutic interventions as more helpful than the families. The process aspects in the group members (including the experiencing of communality and gaining insight) were, on the other hand, more frequently mentioned by the families than by the therapeutic team. The clinical implications of these findings and suggestions for future research are discussed.     

Signal functions in discriminated avoidance behavior

Four rats were trained to lever press under a discriminated avoidance/escape schedule in which separately signalled safe and warning periods were 100 sec and 32 sec respectively. The auditory and not the visual component of the compound warning signal became associated with the discriminative control of lever pressing. Avoidance behavior also came under temporal control, in that the probability of lever pressing increased as the warning period progressed. Timing began with the onset of the warning signal rather than the offset of the safe signal. However, after the warning signal had been progressively eliminated, timing began with the offset of the safe signal. When neither signal was normally available, the temporal distribution of avoidance behavior changed markedly. Drifts in the temporal distribution of lever pressing occurred throughout the study; these were manipulated for two animals.     

The matching problem

Tables of the exact distributions of number of matches are given for small decks having the same number of cards in each suit. Several approximate distributions are considered for use with larger decks, and some indication of the goodness of the approximations is given.The calculations for this paper were done while the writer was working on a project sponsored by funds from the Ford Foundation. The writer wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. Frederick Mosteller for his constant help and encouragement during the writing of this paper.     

Mechanisms Mediating Children’s Perceived Maternal Nonsupportive Reactions to Sadness and Children’s Social and Emotional Functioning

This study examined whether children’s perceptions of maternal nonsupportive reactions to sadness (active discouragement and non-response) influenced children’s loneliness and classroom popularity indirectly through their effects on children’s sadness inhibition and self-perception of social competence. Participants were children in grades 3–6 from a university affiliated public elementary school (N = 175; 53 % females; 37 % racial/ethnic minority). Children reported on the frequency of their mother’s active discouragement and non-response of their sadness, as well their own sadness inhibition, self-perceived social competence, and loneliness. Classroom peers reported on children’s popularity. Results indicated that perceived maternal non-response to sadness was indirectly related to classroom popularity and loneliness through the effect on children’s self-perception of social competence. In contrast, perceived maternal active discouragement of sadness was indirectly related to children’s classroom popularity through the effect on children’s sadness inhibition. These results support the consideration of active discouragement and non-response as distinct constructs and indicate the likelihood of different pathways of influence in predicting emotional and social outcomes such as loneliness and classroom popularity.