COHERENTISM AND THE EPISTEMIC JUSTIFICATION OF MORAL BELIEFS: A CASE STUDY IN HOW TO DO PRACTICAL ETHICS WITHOUT APPEAL TO A MORAL THEORY

This paper defends a coherentist approach to moral epistemology. In “The Immorality of Eating Meat” (2000), I offer a coherentist consistency argument to show that our own beliefs rationally commit us to the immorality of eating meat. Elsewhere, I use our own beliefs as premises to argue that we have positive duties to assist the poor (2004) and to argue that biomedical animal experimentation is wrong (2012). The present paper explores whether this consistency‐based coherentist approach of grounding particular moral judgments on beliefs we already hold, with no appeal to moral theory, is a legitimate way of doing practical ethics. I argue (i) that grounding particular moral judgments on our core moral convictions and other core nonmoral beliefs is a legitimate way to justify moral judgments, (ii) that these moral judgments possess as much epistemic justification and have as much claim to objectivity as moral judgments grounded on particular ethical theories, and (iii) that this internalistic coherentist method of grounding moral judgments is more likely to result in behavioral guidance than traditional theory‐based approaches to practical ethics. By way of illustrating the approach, I briefly recapitulate my consistency‐based argument for ethical vegetarianism. I then defend the coherentist approach implicit in the argument against a number of potentially fatal metatheoretical attacks.     

Lines of advance in psychoanalytic psychotherapy

Freud's 1919 paper is taken as a starting-point to review how far we have advanced towards fulfilment of his prophetic remarks about the need to develop psychoanalytic psychotherapy for the masses. A glance is taken back to some of the circumstances and characters involved in Budapest where the paper was given at the 1918 congress, where there was much talk about the need to do something about the war neuroses. Similar pressures led to the founding of the Tavistock Clinic and Cassel Hospital in the UK, long before the start of the NHS. The pressures of both world wars advanced the applications of psychoanalysis; the next wave of pressures may come from NHS changes and entry into Europe. The history of psychoanalytic psychotherapy in the UK is also considered via looking briefly at the history and development of psychoanalytic publications, of the Tavistock Clinic, of psychoanalytic training, of child psychotherapy and the emergence of adult (non-medical) psychotherapy. There have always been tensions between exponents of the pure gold of analysis and the needs of its wider applications. More flexible arrangements and boundaries are necessary if we are to spread psychoanalysis beyond London and to fulfil Freud's own hopes about the large-scale application of psychoanalytic therapy.     

RITALIN UPDATE: IMPLICATIONS FOR READING TEACHERS

Ritalin (methylphenidate hydrochloride) is a powerful stimulant drug frequently prescribed for children exhibiting hyperactive behavior, poor attention span, and/or distractibility. Reading teachers and other educators have a particular interest in Ritalin since they frequently have students in their classes taking this medication. The researchers in this study were interested in determining how Ritalin is prescribed for children in educational settings, what dosages seem appropriate, and specifically, what effect Ritalin has on reading achievement. Implications for reading teachers are discussed.     

Equality in Law and Philosophy

This article discusses various arguments for and against treating equality as a fundamental norm in law and political philosophy, combining prior arguments to the effect that equality is essentially an empty idea with arguments that treat it as a non‐empty but mistaken value that should be rejected. After concluding that most of the arguments for treating equality as a fundamental value fall victim to one or both of these arguments, it considers more closely arguments made by philosophers such as Ronald Dworkin and Thomas Nagel that base a duty of promoting equality on the fact that governments impose a legal order on persons without their consent. It concludes that these arguments are mistaken: if the legal order imposed by government is justified then imposing it is not wrongful and generates no duty of equal treatment, while if that order is not justified no requirement of equality of treatment would cure the lack of justification. It concludes that equality should not be a value in law or political theory, but in some cases other considerations (such as alleviating poverty and distress, promoting accuracy and substantive justice, avoiding arbitrariness, and other values) may justify particular rules that are sometimes mistakenly thought to be based on equality.     

Test-Retest Properties of the Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) Score

The test-retest properties of the Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) scale and two subscales were examined under two conditions: (a) a naive condition, in which respondents were uninformed as to the meaning of the scale and (b) an informed condition, in which the scale was explained to respondents between administrations. The results support the hypothesis that the test-retest stability of the total LPC score would decrease significantly when respondents understood the scale. The stability of the interpersonal subscale exhibited a decrease similar to that of the total scale score, whereas the stability of the task subscale remained constant even when the scale was explained.     

THE DIVERSITY–VALIDITY DILEMMA: OVERVIEW AND LEGAL CONTEXT

Due to racioethnic and sex subgroup differences on predictor scores in many selection procedures, it is difficult for organizations to simultaneously maximize the validity of their selection procedures and hire a diverse workforce. One response to this diversity–validity dilemma is to revise the selection procedures, an approach developed by Ployhart and Holtz (this issue, 2008) . A second possible response is to use affirmative action to increase workforce diversity, an approach developed by Kravitz (this issue, 2008) . This paper briefly presents the legal context that motivates and constrains these approaches. We begin by defining key terms, describing adverse impact, and outlining the burden of proof in adverse impact cases. We then turn to the use of racioethnic minority and female preferences, summarizing some key court decisions and the conditions under which private and public employers may use preferences.     

Missing a romantic partner: A prototype analysis

In this study, a prototype analysis of romantic missing was conducted. College‐age participants in the United States generated features of missing a partner (Study 1) and rated their centrality (Study 2). In a reaction time task, participants made category judgments for central features more quickly than for noncentral features (Study 3). In recognition and recall tasks, central features were more salient in participants’ memory, and participants evaluated individuals experiencing central features in vignettes as missing their partners more (Study 4). A prototype‐based measure of missing administered to individuals in long‐distance relationships (Study 5) correlated with commitment and attachment dimensions but only weakly with loneliness. Finally, level of missing differed based on whether individuals were in a geographically distant (vs. proximal) relationships (Study 6).     

WATCHING THE DETECTIVES: SEASONAL STUDENT EMPLOYEE REACTIONS TO ELECTRONIC MONITORING WITH AND WITHOUT ADVANCE NOTIFICATION

The present paper tested procedural justice hypotheses about seasonal high school and college student employees' reactions to electronic monitoring with video cameras. Study 1, a field study, explored (a) whether employees receiving advance notification of monitoring offered more favorable justice judgments than employees who did not, and (b) whether employees who saw monitoring procedures and/or consequences as fair returned to the organization the following summer. Results supported the hypotheses: employees viewed monitoring procedures as fairer if they received advance notice. Fairness judgments predicted reemployment Study 2, a scenario-based laboratory experiment, also found that advance notice elicited greater justice beliefs. In addition, Study 2 examined how variations in justification for the monitoring affected justice beliefs. Either strong or weak justifications produced greater procedural justice beliefs than no justification.