TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY AFTER AND WITH—BUT NOT AGAINST—AQUINAS?

Gilles Emery, Trinity in Aquinas , O.P. (Ypsilanti, Michigan: Sapientia Press, 2003), ix +361 pp.
Matthew Levering, Scripture and Metaphysics: Aquinas and the Renewal of Trinitarian Theology (Malden, Massa-chusetts: Blackwell, 2004), x +254 pp
Timothy L. Smith, Thomas Aquinas' Trinitarian Theology: A Study in Theological Method (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2003), xiii +258 pp.     

ROSS ON DESERT AND PUNISHMENT

Abstract:  W. D. Ross thinks it is good, other things equal, that people get what they deserve. But he denies that "the principle of punishing the vicious, for the sake of doing so, is that on which the state should proceed in its bestowal of punishments." Ross offers two main arguments for this denial: what I call the "scope argument" and the "state's purpose argument." I argue that both fail. In doing so, I illuminate Ross's distinctive views about desert and the state.     

THE DEVELOPMENT OF LISTENER-ADAPTED COMPLIANCE-RESISTING STRATEGIES

The study investigates the development of compliance-resisting behaviors as a function of the underlying level of perspective-taking reflected in the structure of subjects' strategies. First-, fourth-, and tenth-grade children generated compliance-resisting strategies in response to three communication situations. Each task situation was associated with a different age/status agent (mother, peer, younger child). Additionally, each scenario varied the type of strategy used to gain compliance (simple request, incentive request, altruistic request). Results support a significant positive association between the three major independent variables (age of subject, type of request, and agent of request) and the degree of perspective-taking evidenced in subject-generated compliance-resisting strategies.     

The dominance dilemma: Do women really prefer dominant mates?

Previous research has led to a widely accepted conclusion that heterosexual women prefer mates who are high in dominance. Three experiments designed to distinguish dominance from prestige and examine moderating contextual factors challenge this conclusion. College women at 2 U.S. universities evaluated hypothetical, potential mates described in written vignettes. Participants in Study 1 preferred a high‐prestige to a high‐dominance target. With dominance and prestige manipulated independently in Study 2, participants preferred high to low prestige but also preferred low to high dominance. Participants in Study 3 preferred high to low dominance, but only (a) when displayed in the context of an athletic competition and (b) in ratings of attractiveness and desirability as a short‐term (vs. long‐term) mate.