Life is a collection of moments, some light and pleasant, some dark and unpleasant, some neutral. Character strengths contribute to the full range of human experiences, influencing and creating positive opportunities while also helping us to endure the mundane and embrace and navigate the struggles. Some researchers have argued that thriving, which casts a wider net on the human experience than constructs such as flourishing or resilience, constitutes strong well-being and performance at times of both adversity and opportunity (Brown et al. 2017). With this and the many findings in the science of character in mind, six character strengths functions are theorized and then applied across time orientations, making the case for the integral role of character strengths in these matters of thriving. Three opportunity functions are offered, including priming in which character strengths prompt and prepare for strengths awareness and use; mindfulness in which character strengths serve in synergy with mindful awareness of the present reality; and appreciation in which character strengths use expresses value for what has occurred. The three adversity functions include: buffering – character strengths use prevents problems; reappraisal – character strengths explain or reinterpret problems; and resilience – character strengths support the bounce-back from life setbacks. Several applications of these six functions for vocational and educational settings are explored.
According to the New Angle, any explanation of the Knobe effect must be gradable and asymmetric. It has been argued that only Hindriks’ approach meets both criteria. First, we argue that Holton’s hypothesis also meets the criteria. Second, we show that the authors are not justified in taking the criteria to be empirically justified. We have failed to replicate the asymmetry result in two experiments. Moreover, gradability can be objective or epistemic. We show that the New Angle presupposes objective gradability. In our experiments, the patterns of responses to questions about epistemic and objective gradability are the same, irrespective of whether the feature is objectively gradable (e.g., blameworthiness) or not (e.g., intentionality). Our results thus question the extent to which the New Angle is empirically grounded. Moreover, they raise doubt whether the answers to questions about epistemic and objective gradability can be taken at face value at all.
Studies in Philosophy and Education - This article addresses the issue of the disciplinary status of Educational Studies, which both in the theoretical discourse and in the practice of this area is... 相似文献
This paper contributes to the debate concerning determinants of willingness to take entrepreneurial risks and proposes a new approach to this issue. Our theoretical model predicts that entrepreneurs differ from non-entrepreneurs in their willingness to accept business risks because the former produce more vivid and more positive mental images of the consequences of risk taking than the latter. We investigated the psychological processes behind willingness to take business and non-business risks in groups of entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs. First, we measured basic risk attitudes. Next, participants were presented with risky scenarios and asked to: (1) produce mental images; (2) evaluate their positivity and vividness; and (3) assess fearfulness evoked by the scenarios as well as risk level and willingness to take risk. Entrepreneurs did not differ from non-entrepreneurs in either their basic risk attitudes or willingness to take non-business risks. However, entrepreneurs declared a greater readiness to take business risks and produced more positive and vivid mental images of business risks. We found that an indirect effect of vividness of mental imagery on declared business risk taking only occurred for entrepreneurs. On a theoretical level, our results show that mental imagery might determine entrepreneurs’ willingness to take business risk. 相似文献
