THE CHANGING CULTURAL CONTEXT OF THE INSTITUTE ON RELIGION IN AN AGE OF SCIENCE AND ZYGON

Since Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science was founded 49 years ago and since one of its co‐publishers, the Institute on Religion in an Age of Science (IRAS), was founded 60 years ago, there have been significant developments in their various cultural contexts—in science, in religion, in culture, in academia, and in the science and religion dialogue. This article is a personal remembrance and reflection that compares the context of IRAS in 1954 when it was first organized with the context of IRAS and Zygon today. It considers the contemporary niche of IRAS in relation to the developments that have occurred over the past 60 years.     

Perceptual interference and hemispheric specialization

Two experiments evaluated the effect of stimuli presented at fixation on the recognition of faces or random shapes presented to the left or right visual half-field (VF). Increasing the processing demands of the center stimulus produced a large, linear decrease in recognition from both VFs for both faces and shapes. Recognition of random shapes was decreased more in the right visual field by center digits and in the left VF by center faces and shapes. In addition, interference was found between the VF faces and the center digits to the left of fixation. It was concluded that differences in the processing capacity of the two hemispheres are a function of the verbal-nonverbal nature of the stimuli at a later stage in processing but that the two hemispheres may also differ along other perceptual dimensions at an earlier stage of visual recognition.     

The cognitive structure of social categories

Support for the prototype theory of categorization was found in a study of the structure of social categories. Though occupational terms such as DOCTOR are socially defined, they do not have the classical structure their clear definitional origins would predict. Conceptions of social categories are richer and more complex than those of physical object categories and subjects agree upon them. Comparison of various instructions for eliciting attributes of categories showed that whether subjects are asked to define a term, give characteristics, or describe ways they recognize members of categories, the attributes they list contribute to a prototype structure. These data provide evidence against the view that prototype structure is relevant only to an identification procedure and not to the core of concepts, as has been suggested.