Response to Ranganathan

This essay responds to Bharat Ranganathan's “Comment” on my essay, “The Concept of Dignity in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights” (2011). Addressing key criticisms in this “Comment,” I make the following points. First, neither the idea of inherent dignity being “imparted” to humans, nor the Universal Declaration's implication—through its use of terms such as “inherent” and “inalienable”—that humans participate in transcendent reality, necessarily presuppose a Christian metaphysics. Second, a concept such as “inherent dignity” must be affirmed to be intrinsically heuristic unless we are to assume that its meaning can be completely known within the conditions of existence; but this affirmation does not render such concepts “indeterminate of sense.” Finally, Ranganathan's distinction between“weak” and “strong” senses of transcendence is untenable. If human truths beyond all contingencies are knowable (“weak” transcendence), then there must be a real dimension of meaning that transcends all contingencies (“strong” transcendence).     

A Conversation Worth Having: Hauerwas and Gustafson on Substance in Theological Ethics

When a debate is misplaced, new problems are cast in the distorting language of the settled problems of the past while, at the same time, the participants in the debate are assimilated into communities of thought with which they have little in common. The result is that their work, and our response to it, is distorted. This article contends that the polemical debate between James Gustafson (and his followers) and Stanley Hauerwas (and his followers) is just such a misplaced debate. In fact, both can be shown to be Troeltschianhistoricists, and it is only when this commonality is recognized that their very real and deep differences can be rightly appreciated as emblematic of the true sources of disagreement at the growing edge of the discipline.     

Lifetime and 12‐Month Nonsuicidal Self‐Injury and Academic Performance in College Freshmen

We examined whether nonsuicidal self‐injury (NSSI) is associated with academic performance in college freshmen, using census‐based web surveys (N = 7,527; response = 65.4%). NSSI was assessed with items from the Self‐Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors Interview and subsequently linked with the administratively recorded academic year percentage (AYP). Freshmen with lifetime and 12‐month NSSI showed a reduction in AYP of 3.4% and 5.9%, respectively. The college environment was found to moderate the effect of 12‐month NSSI, with more strongly reduced AYPs in departments with higher‐than‐average mean departmental AYPs. The findings suggest that overall stress and test anxiety are underlying processes between NSSI membership and academic performance.