BRIDGE OVER TROUBLED WATERS? THE MOST “CENTRAL” MEMBERS OF PSYCHOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY ASSOCIATIONS CA. 1900

There are many different ways to assess the significance of historical figures. Often we look at the influence of their writings, or at the important offices they held with disciplinary institutions such as universities, journals, and scholarly societies. In this study, however, we took a novel approach: we took the complete memberships, ca. 1900, of four organizations—the American Psychological Association, the Western Philosophical Association, the American Philosophical Association, and the Southern Society for Philosophy and Psychology—and visualized them as a network. We then identified individuals who “bridged” between two or more of these groups and considered what might be termed their “centrality” to the psychological‐philosophical community of their time. First, we examined these figures qualitatively, briefly describing their lives and careers. Then we approached the problem mathematically, considering several alternative technical realizations of “centrality” and then explaining our reasons for choosing eigenvector centrality as the best for our purposes. We found a great deal of overlap among the results of the qualitative and quantitative approaches, but also some telling differences. J. Mark Baldwin, Edward Buchner, Christine Ladd Franklin, and Frank Thilly consistently emerged as highly central figures. Some more marginal figures such as Max Meyer, and Frederick J. E. Woodbridge, Edward A. Pace, Edward H. Griffin played interesting roles as well.     

Influences in the Decision‐Making Process for Careers As a Speech‐Language Pathologist or an Audiologist

This study consisted of data obtained from 297 surveys about career decision‐making influences for students and professionals in speech‐language pathology and audiology. Decision‐making factors were similar across both professions, with personal factors being the most influential. Employment and education factors were also critical in making professional decisions. Early course work played a significant role in the career paths of people in these professions.     

A European Initiative: Irigaray,Marx, and Citizenship

This article presents Irigaray as a philosopher committed to sociopolitical change by discussing her political thought and her engagement with the European Parliament. It traces her recent work with the ex‐Communist Party in Italy back to her early critique of Marx and her subsequent attraction to Hegel's civil definition of the person. The failure of her European Parliament initiative suggests that her thinking is in advance of its possible realization.     

An observational study of humor use while resolving conflict in dating couples

This research focused on whether affiliative and aggressive humor use was associated with relationship satisfaction and with greater perceived closeness, problem resolution, and emotional distress following a conflict discussion task. Ninety‐eight dating couples from a large Texas University participated in this research. Both partners independently completed questionnaires about their relationship perceptions, participated in a videotaped conflict resolution task, and then answered some additional questions. The results revealed that individuals whose partners used more affiliative and less aggressive humor during the discussion were more satisfied with their relationship and reported an increase in perceived closeness and better problem resolution following the discussion. These results highlight the importance of both positive and negative forms of humor in the regulation of close relationships.     

Spinoza’s Arguments for the Existence of God*

It is often thought that, although Spinoza develops a bold and distinctive conception of God (the unique substance, or Natura Naturans, in which all else inheres and which possesses infinitely many attributes, including extension), the arguments that he offers which purport to prove God’s existence contribute nothing new to natural theology. Rather, he is seen as just another participant in the seventeenth century revival of the ontological argument initiated by Descartes and taken up by Malebranche and Leibniz among others. That this is the case is both puzzling and unfortunate. It is puzzling because although Spinoza does offer an ontological proof for the existence of God, he also offers three other non‐ontological proofs. It is unfortunate because these other non‐ontological proofs are both more convincing and more interesting than his ontological proof. In this paper, I offer reconstructions and assessments of all of Spinoza’s arguments and argue that Spinoza’s metaphysical rationalism and his commitment to something like a Principle of Sufficient Reason are the driving force behind Spinoza’s non‐ontological arguments.