The Ontological Backlash: Why did Mainstream Analytic Philosophy Lose Interest in the Philosophy of History?

This paper seeks to explain why mainstream analytic philosophy lost interest in the philosophy of history. It suggests that the reasons why the philosophy of history no longer commands the attention of mainstream analytical philosophy may be explained by the success of an ontological backlash against the linguistic turn and a view of philosophy as a form of conceptual analysis. In brief I argue that in the 1950s and 1960s the philosophy of history attracted the interest of mainstream analytical philosophers because the defence of the autonomy of historical explanation championed by the likes of Collingwood, Dray, Melden, Winch, Von Wright and others was in tune with the predominant conception of philosophy as a conceptual enterprise concerned primarily with clarifying different explanatory practices. As this conception of philosophy as an essentially conceptual enterprise became recessive, the purely methodological non-reductivism advocated by defenders of the autonomy of history was accused of ontological escapism and the discussion concerning the autonomy of psychological explanations became the province of the philosophy of mind and action.     

Reaction times as a measure of uncertainty

In this article, a method is presented to analyse relationships between detection or discrimination frequencies and reaction times in psychophysical tasks. It is shown in three empirical data sets that reaction time decreases as a linear function of the absolute value of the logit transforms of the response probabilities. Such a function stresses the characteristic uncertainty associated with subjects' responses and the relation between their response parameters and the response criterion used by the subjects.     

Associations of spontaneous self-affirmation with health care experiences and health information seeking in a national survey of US adults

Objective: Self-affirming – such as by reflecting on one’s strengths and values – reduces defensiveness to threatening information, reduces negative effects of stereotype threat and promotes prosociality. These outcomes may promote physical health, highlighting a need to examine the role of self-affirmation in medical and health contexts.

Design: Data were collected as part of the nationally representative, cross-sectional, 2013 Health Information National Trends Survey. Items were completed by 2731 respondents.

Main Outcome Measures: Respondents answered questions about spontaneous self-affirmation tendencies, perceptions of providers and health care, involvement in medical appointments, health information seeking and engagement in medical research.

Results: Spontaneous self-affirmation was associated with more positive perceptions of communication with one’s provider, better perceived quality of care, greater likelihood of asking questions in a medical appointment, greater information seeking for oneself and multiple indices of surrogate information seeking (i.e. seeking information for others). Four of eight significant associations remained significant when controlling for optimism. The associations of self-affirmation with aspects of the patient–provider relationship were not modified by factors likely to be associated with stereotype threat (e.g. race or BMI).

Conclusion: Spontaneous self-affirmation was related to positive outcomes in health contexts. Experimental research is needed to further explore the causal nature of these associations.     

An Idiographic Approach to Estimating Models of Dyadic Interactions with Differential Equations

We present an idiographic approach to modeling dyadic interactions using differential equations. Using data representing daily affect ratings from romantic relationships, we examined several models conceptualizing different types of dyadic interactions. We fitted each model to each of the dyads and the resulting AICc values were used to classify the most likely configuration of interaction for each dyad. Additionally, the AICc from the different models were used in parameter averaging across models. Averaged parameters were used in models involving predictors of relationship dynamics, as indexed by these parameters, as well as models wherein the parameters predicted distal outcomes of the dyads such as relationship satisfaction and status. Results indicated that, within our sample, the most likely interaction style was that of independence, without evidence of emotional interrelations between the two individuals in the couple. Attachment-related avoidance and anxiety showed significant relations with model parameters, such that ideal levels of affect for males were negatively influenced by higher levels of avoidance from their partner while their own levels of anxiety had positive effects on their levels of dyadic coregulation. For females coregulation was negatively influenced by both time in the relationship and their partner’s level of avoidance. Analysis involving distal outcomes showed modest influences from the individual’s level of ideal affect.     

The touch of King Midas: Collingwood on why actions are not events

It is the ambition of natural science to provide complete explanations of reality. Collingwood argues that science can only explain events, not actions. The latter is the distinctive subject matter of history and can be described as actions only if they are explained historically. This paper explains Collingwood’s claim that the distinctive subject matter of history is actions and why the attempt to capture this subject matter through the method of science inevitably ends in failure because science explains events, not actions. It argues that Collingwood’s defence of the methodological autonomy of history vis-à-vis natural science is not based on a commitment to human exceptionalism, i.e. the exclusion of human beings and their doings from the rest of nature, but on the view that explanations which appeal to norms are different in kind from explanations which appeal to empirical regularities. Given the close relationship between the method and the subject matter of a form of inquiry, actions elude any attempt to explain them through the scientific method because the application of this method entails that what is thus explained is not an action but an event.     

The Challenges of the Schooling from Cultural Psychology of Education

Education is in the core of societal change in all its different forms—from kindergartens to vocational schools and lifelong learning. Education—understood as goal-oriented personal movement—re-structures personal lives both inside school and outside the school. This special issue stems from the Cultural Psychology of Education (Marsico Culture & Psychology, 21(4), 445–454, 2015a, b, Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 40(4), 754–781, 2017)—a new approach to the field of education that examines how educational experience is culturally organized. This special issue is focused on the work of schooling as a crucial scientific arena to investigate. It is the follow up of an international workshop host by the Centre for Cultural Psychology (at Aalborg University, Demark) that was very thought provoking and from where several outcomes came out. Some of them are the papers here presented that tried to illuminate the different dimensions of the educational context in the East and West society with specific attention to the Chinese and Scandinavian educational practices. The dialogue between Chinese, European and North American scholars offered a complex view of the current educational challenges in the age of globalization. In this paper I try to focus on some of the most debated and challenging aspects in educational psychology worldwide: diversity, values and practical usability of psychology at school. I re-read these “hot topics” with the help of the themes developed by the authors of this special issue and in light of Cultural Psychology of Education. Then, I conclude by proposing a new agenda for the education of the future.     

Mononormativity,Polypride, and the “Mono–Poly Wars”

Both in everyday life and scholarly discourse, monogamists and polyamorists tend to unfavorably portray one another as somehow flawed, misguided, or, in a word, “inferior.” This article documents and critically examines two pairs of interlocked psychosocial attitudes—monopride/polyphobia and polypride/monophobia—mediating this predicament of mutual competition in the context of Western mononormative culture. The ideological nature of these “mono–poly wars” is demonstrated through a brief review of empirical literature on the psychological health and relationship quality of monogamous and polyamorous individuals and couples. The article concludes by outlining a critical pluralist approach that eschews universalizing hierarchies between monogamy and polyamory, and provides tools for making qualitative distinctions within and among relational styles.     

The Two Faces of Familism: A Cross-Cultural Research in India and Italy

In the present research, we developed a familism scale comprised of two dimensions, namely support obligations and traditional norms, in order to examine cross-cultural and gender differences in a group of Indian (n = 107) and of Italian students (n = 106). We hypothesised and found that support obligations were judged more important than traditional norms in both groups. Moreover, the Indian participants considered both dimensions of familism more important than did their Italian counterparts. Indian women gave greater importance to traditional norms than Indian men did, while Italian women gave greater importance to support obligations than Italian men did. The social implications of cross-cultural and gender differences in familism are discussed.