Rabbi and Magister: Overlapping intellectual models of the twelfth-century renaissance

Elka Klein’s writings have illuminated reciprocal and distinctive characteristics of the social and intellectual lives of Jewry in Iberia and by comparison Northern Europe during the High Middle Ages. This article honors her insights, by comparing the development of biblical hermeneutics at the Abbey of St. Victor in Paris and in the writings of Abraham ibn Ezra. Hugh of St. Victor’s introduction to the study of Scripture, Didascalicon, provides a program for the individual student to integrate all branches of human knowledge into the search for Divine Wisdom that may be found only in Scripture. The innovation in Hugh’s program is the emphasis on the “literal” or “historical” sense of Scripture as the solid basis for the development of theological study. Grammar and rhetoric were stepping stones that led the young theologians to higher levels of Divine Wisdom. The introduction to Abraham ibn Ezra’s commentary on the Pentateuch constitutes a parallel point of orientation for twelfth-century Jewish readers. A close reading of ibn Ezra’s prologue maps the hermeneutical approaches that different communities – Christian, rabbinic Jewish, and Karaite – utilized in their expositions of the Pentateuch. After critiquing each community, ibn Ezra offers his own approach that builds an overall framework for correct interpretation on the foundation of grammar and the rabbinic oral tradition. From this perspective, the article demonstrates that during this period Jews and Christians, both in Iberia and Northern Europe, focused on harmonizing reason and revelation. Both communities used grammar as the primary criterion for evaluating the accumulation of traditional sources. Both approaches intended to develop students, who were capable of understanding that “reason is the angel that mediates between God and humanity.”     

What is Epistemological Violence in the Empirical Social Sciences?

This article discusses the meaning of epistemological violence in the empirical social sciences. It is argued that the concept is closer to personal than to structural violence in that it has a subject, an object, and an action, even if the violence is indirect and nonphysical: the subject of violence is the researcher, the object is the Other, and the action is the interpretation of data that is presented as knowledge. Using a hypothetical example, the problem of interpretation in empirical research on the Other is discussed. Epistemological violence refers to the interpretation of social-scientific data on the Other and is produced when empirical data are interpreted as showing the inferiority of or problematizes the Other, even when data allow for equally viable alternative interpretations. Interpretations of inferiority or problematizations are understood as actions that have a negative impact on the Other. Because the interpretations of data emerge from an academic context and thus are presented as knowledge, they are defined as epistemologically violent actions. Problems, consequences, and practices surrounding this concept are discussed.     

Creative Problem Solving in Small Groups: The Effects of Creativity Training on Idea Generation,Solution Creativity,and Leadership Effectiveness

This investigation evaluated the degree to which creativity training, idea generation instruction, and creative process impacted idea production, creativeness of solutions, and leadership effectiveness. Three sets of hypotheses were tested with a 114 groups of adults. First, groups whose members had some (i.e., one CPS course) or advanced training (i.e., graduate-level study in creativity or creativity professionals) were significantly more effective at idea generation than groups without training. Furthermore, leaders with some and advanced training were perceived to be significantly more effective than those with no creativity training. With respect to creativeness of solutions, the advanced training groups outperformed all others. The second set of hypotheses focused on the effectiveness of idea generation instruction (i.e., instructions without brainstorming, brainstorming, and brainstorming with criticism). Analysis revealed no significant difference for idea generation instruction relative to idea production or creativeness of solutions. The final set of hypotheses examined the use of a simple process structure for groups without prior creativity training (i.e., distinct phases for idea generation and solution development). Analysis revealed that those meetings that followed a simple process structure out performed groups that did not follow a process for both idea generation and creativeness of solutions. Further results are presented and implications discussed.