In defense of monotheistic father religion

Many questions are currently being raised, by women especially, regarding the religious, social, and psychological effects of the emphasis on God as father in Western religion. Viewed in the light of key insights from developmental psychoanalysis, patriarchal monotheism does indeed seem to confront us with a dilemma. However, a resolution of this dilemma does not appear to lie in a move toward androgyny or matriarchy. Evaluated from the point of view of its overall capacity to mediate a meaningful, unified, personal religious reality to both sexes, monotheistic father religion is still the preferable ultimate symbolic configuration.     

Perceptual cues used in reproduction of inspired volume

Man is capable of reproducing an inspired lung volume (IV) with relative precision (±3 %–8 %). To investigate the importance of cues which may be used to determine IV, we performed two experiments. In each, the subject inspired a “standard” breath (from resting end~xpired lung volume) corresponding to 25%, 50%, or 75% of inspiratory capacity (IC) and then expired nearly completely. From this expired volume, the subject either tried to reproduce the tidal volume (i.e., volume of air inspired) of the first breath (volume reproduction) or to reproduce the previous end-inspired lung volume (position reproduction). The constant error indicated that subjects overestimated tidal volume by about 200 ml. Despite this overestimation, the variability of reproduction was less for volume reproduction than for position reproduction when IV was small. The JND for volume reproduction increased linearly with increasing IV, whereas the JND for position reproduction was similar at all IVs so that the Weber ratio decreased. These observations suggest that, in the perception of inspired volume, the sensation of end-inspired position is important when the inspired volume is large, but that subjects apparently rely on some other cue to reproduce small lung volumes accurately.     

Controllability and human stress: method, evidence and theory.

Concepts are defined and evidence reviewed on whether control reduces stress in man. Individuals seem to prefer instrumental control over an aversive event, seem to prefer to administer it to themselves, and are less aroused when waiting for a controllable event. When groups without control have equal predictability, having control is still less arousing; as potential (but unexercised) control seems to be. The evidence also suggests that controllable events may hurt less. Methodological weaknesses and empirical gaps in these data are pointed out. These data are grossly inconsistent with Relevant Feedback theory and rather inconsistent with Information-seeking theory and Safety Signal theory. A Minimax hypothesis is proposed: When individuals control aversive events, they believe relief to be caused by a stable source—their own response. This belief entails that maximum future danger will be minimized. When they have no control, they believe relief to be less stable, which entails no guarantee that maximum future danger will be minimized. The data are largely consistent with the Minimax hypothesis and wholly consistent when Minimax is supplemented by the premise that aversive events hurt less when encountered against a background of relaxation.