THE SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY AND THE RHETORIC OF EXCESS

If militarism violates the ideals of liberty and justice in one way, and rapidly increasing social stratification violates them in another, then American democracy is in crisis. A culture of democratic accountability will survive only if citizens revive the concerns that animated the great reform movements of the past, from abolitionism to civil rights. It is crucial, when reasoning about practical matters, not only to admit how grave one's situation is, but also to resist despair. Therefore, the fate of democracy depends, to some significant degree, on how we choose to describe the crisis. Saying that we have already entered the new dark ages or a post‐democratic era may prove to be a self‐fulfilling prophecy, because anyone who accepts this message is apt to give up on the hard work of organizing and contestation that is needed to hold political representatives accountable to the people. This paper asks how one might strike the right balance between accuracy and hope in describing the democracy's current troubles. After saying what I mean by democracy and what I think the current threats to it are, I respond to Romand Coles's criticisms of reservations I have expressed before about rhetorical excess in the works of Stanley Hauerwas, Alasdair MacIntyre, and Richard Rorty. This leads to a discussion of several points raised against me by Hauerwas. A digression offers some of my reasons for doubting that John Howard Yoder's biblical scholarship vindicates Hauerwas's version of pacifism. The paper concludes by arguing that Sheldon Wolin's work on the evisceration of democracy, though admirably accurate in its treatment of the dangers posed by empire and capital, abandons the project of democratic accountability too quickly in favor of the romance of the fugitive.     

Retroactive interference in rats: Independent effects of time and similarity of the intervening event with respect to acquisition

Events occurring during the retention intervals for a 5-min delayed alternation task were used to investigate the factors that influence retroactive interference. Appetitive reinforcement in an E-maze was employed to train rats on the delayed alternation task consisting of a forced-choice (target event) trial followed by a free-choice (test) trial. Occasional probe trials added a potentially interfering event either at the beginning, middle, or end of the retention period. These events also varied in similarity to the target events, ranging from low similarity to the converse of the target event. Interference increased both with the interval between the target and intervening events and with the similarity between the converse of the target event and the intervening event; however, there was no tendency, significant or otherwise, towards an interaction between stimulus similarity and the interval between the target and intervening events. Control groups demonstrated that the interference was of an associative nature and that the interval between the intervening event and the test trial was little consequence. These results are discussed in terms of two separate types of interference: similarity interference which depends on stimulus similarity of the intervening event to the converse of the target event but not on the temporal location of the intervening event, and processing interference which depends on the temporal location of the intervening event but not on its similarity to the converse of the target event.     

BIOMEDICAL ETHICS: MUSLIM PERSPECTIVES ON GENETIC MODIFICATION

Technology pertaining to genetically modified foods has created an abundance of food and various methods to protect new products and enhance productivity. However, many scientists, economists, and humanitarians have been critical of the application of these discoveries. They are apprehensive about a profit‐driven mentality that, to them, seems to propel the innovators rather than a poverty‐elimination mentality that should be behind such innovations. The objectives should be to afford the most benefit to those in need and to prevent hunger around the world. Another major concern is the safety of genetically modified food. Muslims, as well as those in other religious communities, have been reactive rather than proactive. Muslims must connect scientific knowledge and ethical behavior based on faith. In Islam, there is no divide between the two. God has commanded us to seek knowledge and make discoveries to better our lives and our environment. We are trustees of this world and everything in it. The poor, the sick, and the wayfarers have a right to be fed and cared for. God reminds Muslims continuously that the earth and all the heavens belong to God; therefore, no one should feel hunger, no one should suffer or be prevented from sharing this bounty.