The (In)validity of Self‐Construal Scales Revisited

This paper offers a critical rejoinder in the discussion concerning the viability of self‐construal scales. It is our contention that the existing data reported in our previous article (Levine et al., 2003) and elsewhere are more than sufficient to justify the conclusion that self‐report scales purporting to measure interdependent and independent self‐construals as 2 orthogonal constructs lack validity. The arguments to the contrary offered by Gudykunst and Lee (2003) and Kim and Raja (2003) are disputed. Additional data (N = 1,013) show that neither age, occupation, sample size, standardization, nor a 2nd‐order structure can account for the problems we documented previously. Although we see potential utility in the self‐construal construct, we believe that the 3 primary scales fail to meet reasonable and accepted social scientific standards. Difficult conceptual problems will need to be solved prior to the development of new and improved measures.     

Tradition,Authority, and Immanent Critique in Comparative Ethics

Drawing on resources from pragmatist thought allows religious ethicists to take account of the central role traditions play in the formation and development of moral concepts without thereby espousing moral relativism or becoming traditionalists. After giving an account of this understanding of the concept of tradition, I examine the ways in which understandings of tradition play out in two contemporary examples of tradition‐based ethics: works in comparative ethics of war by James Turner Johnson and John Kelsay. I argue that a pragmatist approach to tradition‐based ethics allows for a nuanced and flexible understanding of moral traditions, and one that holds great promise for international consensus‐building around shared ethical norms for the use of armed force.