When statistical evidence is not specific enough

Synthese - Many philosophers have pointed out that statistical evidence, or at least some forms of it, lack desirable epistemic or non-epistemic properties, and that this should make us wary of...     

The mirror of physics: on how the Price equation can unify evolutionary biology

Synthese - Due to its high degree of complexity and its historical nature, evolutionary biology has been traditionally portrayed as a messy science. According to the supporters of such a view,...     

May the odds be ever in your favor: The Hunger Games and the fight for a more equal society. (Negative) Media vicarious contact and collective action

Various studies have found that reading books about positive interactions between ingroup and outgroup characters, known as media vicarious contact, can reduce prejudice. Focusing on the fantasy saga of The Hunger Games, we examined the effects of negative vicarious contact on collective action across two studies. Specifically, we tested whether reading about fantasy characters living in a postapocalyptic conflictual society with large social disparities between advantaged and disadvantaged groups leads advantaged group members to display greater willingness to engage in collective action on behalf of the disadvantaged group. Results from Study 1 (correlational survey in the United Kingdom and United States) and Study 2 (experimental intervention in Italy) revealed that reading The Hunger Games is indirectly associated with greater collective action intentions via increased anger toward injustice. In both studies social dominance orientation (SDO) acted as a moderator, but in opposite directions: mediation was significant for low-SDOs in Study 1, and for high-SDOs in Study 2. Results are discussed in relation to the importance of media vicarious contact via book reading for social change, and to the need to identify the contextual conditions allowing to anticipate the specific moderation pattern that is more likely to emerge.     

Sympathy as knowledge of the other in need: An investigation into the roles of need for closure and the moral foundations on sympathy toward immigrants

Although sympathy is a powerful other-focused motivation, not all individuals will experience sympathy when it is appropriate. Immigrants, as a disadvantaged out-group, are especially in need of sympathy and, given the tensions of the immigration debate, are at-risk for low sympathy. Indeed, past research has found that sympathy is less likely to be experienced toward disliked out-groups. In the current research, we investigated the role of need for closure (NFC), or the general desire for epistemic certainty, on the experience of sympathy toward immigrants in Italy, a nation where the immigration debate is becoming increasingly fractious. Consistent with past research on the roles of NFC and the binding moral foundations (i.e., a concern for the well-being of groups) on prejudice toward out-groups, we propose that individuals with a high NFC, and who endorsed the binding moral foundations (i.e., a concern for the well-being of groups), would be particularly likely to have decreased sympathy toward immigrants in Italy. In line with past research and our hypotheses, in three studies we found that the binding foundations mediated the NFC effect on decreased sympathy toward immigrants in Italy. Conceptually, these individuals can strongly adopt traditional cultural norms as a way to acquire stable knowledge; this can make sympathy toward immigrants less likely, as they both stand outside “traditional” morality, as well can threaten the stability of natives’ knowledge.     

从词频和新旧效应探讨再认测验中的定向遗忘

本文采用字表方式,从高低词频和新旧效应角度,探讨内隐和外显测验中定向遗忘效应的存在性及其机制问题。结果发现:(1)低频词在两种测验中都存在定向遗忘效应,而高频词仅存在于外显测验中。(2)两种测验中都存在指示记住的新旧效应,而外显测验中不存在指示忘记的新旧效应。由此推断,测验间在没有"意识和无意识"相互污染的理想情况下,只有外显测验可获得定向遗忘效应;定向遗忘的机制可能是选择性编码机制。     

The Knowledge Argument and Objectivity

In this paper I argue that Frank Jackson’s Knowledge Argument is better considered not as an argument against physicalism, but as an argument that objective theories must be incomplete. I argue that despite the apparent diversity of responses to the knowledge argument, they all boil down to a response according to which genuine epistemic gains are made when an individual has an experience. I call this the acquaintance response. I then argue that this response violates an intuitive stricture on the objectivity of theories. Therefore, the knowledge argument does show that objective theories cannot provide a complete understanding of the world. The result, however, is that both objective dualism and objective physicalism are refuted by the argument. In the end it is suggested that the notion of “subjective physicalism” is one that should be pursued.     

How Wittgenstein Defeated Russell’s Multiple Relation Theory of Judgment

In 1913 Wittgenstein raised an objection to Russell’s multiple relation theory of judgment that eventually led Russell to abandon his theory. As he put it in the Tractatus, the objection was that “the correct explanation of the form of the proposition, ‘A makes the judgement p’, must show that it is impossible for a judgement to be a piece of nonsense. (Russell’s theory does not satisfy this requirement,” (5.5422). This objection has been widely interpreted to concern type restrictions on the constituents of judgment. I argue that this interpretation is mistaken and that Wittgenstein’s objection is in fact a form of the problem of the unity of the proposition.