Machiavellianism and spontaneous cheating in competition

Seventy-two undergraduates were assigned to groups defined by the combinations of the factors opportunity to cheat (yes, no), type of competition (personal, impersonal), and subject Machiavellianism (high, low). As predicted, cheating occurred in the opportunity to cheat, impersonal competition, high Mach group and in the opportunity to cheat, personal competition, low Mach group, extending the results of previous Machiavellianism research from situations in which cheating was explicitly encouraged by another person to a situation in which cheating was undertaken at the subject's own initiative.     

Feature selection and classification: A developmental study

Two hundred and thirteen children between the ages of 4 and 16 sorted 30 complex objects freely into groups. These were either schematic faces, schematic imaginary animals, or histoform patterns and were constructed from 9 independently and continuously varying features, each with 10 levels. The three sets were equivalent in terms of underlying numerical structure. A new method of analysis of the groups formed yielded the following direct measures of subjective organization in the sorting of each child: the number of features used in sorting, the accuracy of sorting, and the number of independent dimensions of classification. Both the material and the analysis of sorting were devised on the assumption that only some of the component features of complex objects are used for classification, while others are ignored. Sorting performance differed markedly both with age and with different types of material. The improvement in sorting ability with age, except for the youngest children, could be attributed to an increase in the number of features used rather than an improvement in the accuracy of use. In contrast, the poor sorting of histoform patterns as opposed to faces and animals was due to a low level of sorting accuracy. The basic results on the development of classification confirmed previous studies, and hence suggest that it is valid to consider feature selection as a basic component of classification.     

The role of exploration in win-shift and win-stay performance on a radial maze

Win-shift spatial memory tasks in a radial maze reinforce animals for avoiding previously visited rewarded arms; win-stay tasks reinforce them for returning to those arms. Win-shift tasks have generally been found much easier to perform, and this may be explained either in terms of foraging models which postulate avoidance of locations where food has been found, or in terms of the predominance of spontaneous alternation (exploration). Experiment 1 examined spontaneous alternation behavior in the radial maze as a function of whether the first visit to an arm had been rewarded or not, and showed that alternation was more probable after nonreward than after reward in both hungry and thirsty rats (a result which conflicts with the foraging account of the win-shift superiority). Experiment 2 replicated the finding that win-stay discrimination performance was inferior to win-shift. A manipulation (lengthening the delay between initial and test choices) which weakens spontaneous alternation, reduced, but did not reverse, the win-shift superiority. In Experiment 3, in order to eliminate the influence of spontaneous alternation, versions of the win-stay and win-shift tasks were devised in which, unlike the original task, all arms were familiar at the choice trial. Under those conditions win-stay was performed better than win-shift. It is concluded that spontaneous alternation plays a major role in many spatial memory tasks, and that the results can best be accounted for by combining principles of exploration and simple associative learning, without recourse to foraging models.     

EXTINCTION,NATURAL EVIL,AND THE COSMIC CROSS

Did the God of the Bible create a Darwinian world in which violence and suffering (disvalue) are the means by which the good (value) is realized? This is Christopher Southgate's insightful and dramatic formulation of the theodicy problem. In addressing this problem, the Exeter theologian rightly invokes the Theology of the Cross in its second manifestation, that is, we learn from the cross of Jesus Christ that God is present to nonhuman as well as human victims of predation and extinction. God co‐suffers with creatures in their despair, abandonment, physical suffering, and death. What I will add with more force than Southgate is this: the Easter resurrection is a prolepsis of the eschatological new creation, and it is God's new creation which retroactively determines past creation. Although this does not eliminate the theodicy question, it lessens its moral sting.     

REDEEMING A CRUCIFORM NATURE

Christopher Southgate recognizes that the natural world is both ambiguous, mixing goods and bads, and simultaneously dramatically creative, such creativity resulting from just this ambiguous challenge of environmental conductance and resistance. Life is lived in green pastures and in the valley of the shadow of death. Perhaps this is the only way God could have created the values found on Earth, by means of such disvalues, as a Darwinian natural selection account suggests. Generating Earth's biodiversity requires struggle, success, and failure—and such an only way would constrain a powerful, loving God. But Southgate judges this too uncaring of suffering individuals, the products of evolution sacrificed to the systemic process. Perhaps God through Jesus redeems all the sacrificed individuals—pelicans in a pelican heaven—but redemption of all the bullfrogs and acorns becomes an incredible hope. Nature is a cruciform creation, where life persists in perpetual perishing. Life is forever conserved, regenerated, redeemed.     

Choice is Not True or False: The Domain of Rhetorical Argumentation

Leading contemporary argumentation theories such as those of Ralph Johnson, van Eemeren and Houtlosser, and Tindale, in their attempt to address rhetoric, tend to define rhetorical argumentation with reference to (a) the rhetorical arguer’s goal (to persuade effectively), and (b) the means he employs to do so. However, a central strand in the rhetorical tradition itself, led by Aristotle, and arguably the dominant view, sees rhetorical argumentation as defined with reference to the domain of issues discussed. On that view, the domain of rhetorical argumentation is centered on choice of action in the civic sphere, and the distinctive nature of issues in this domain is considered crucial. Hence, argumentation theories such as those discussed, insofar as they do not see rhetoric as defined by its distinctive domain, apply an understanding of rhetoric that is historically inadequate. It is further suggested that theories adopting this understanding of rhetoric risk ignoring important distinctive features of argumentation about action.

Hiring bias and the disabled interviewee: Effects of manipulating work history and disability information of the disabled job applicant

Ninety MBA students were randomly assigned to one of six experimental conditions in a 3(levels of disability) × 2(levels of employment history) design. Levels of disability (Physical, Psychiatric, and No Disability) and levels of employment history (Good and Poor) were manipulated by giving the subjects bogus information on a job application form prior to hearing a taped job interview. Subjects then rated the quality of the interview and stated the probability that they would hire the interviewee. Evaluations of the interview and hiring probabilities were different between the experimental groups. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.     

CRITICAL AFTERWORD

This Afterword looks back over both parts of the discussion of “God and the World of Signs”—“Semiotics and the Emergence of Life” in the previous issue of Zygon and “Semiotics and Theology” in this issue. Three central questions in this extended debate are identified: What is the nature of biological organisms and biological evolution? What is the relationship between the natural world and the Triune God of the Christian theological tradition? What should be the goals of Science/Religion Studies? I summarize the answers that Christopher Southgate and Andrew Robinson have given in their program and the challenges raised by their critics. Their strengths and weaknesses are assessed. In the conclusion I ask readers to imagine that this particular research program were to be taken as a model program in science‐and‐religion research (with some tweaking) and then consider the features of the program that could function as standards for scholars working in other areas of the dialogue.     

EVOLUTIONARY THEODICY,REDEMPTION, AND TIME

Of the many problems which evolutionary theodicy tries to address, the ones of animal suffering and extinction seem especially intractable. In this essay, I show how C. D. Broad's growing block conception of time does much to ameliorate the problems. Additionally, I suggest it leads to another way of understanding the soul. Instead of it being understood as a substance, it is seen as a history—a history which is resurrected in the end times. Correspondingly, redemption, I argue, should not be seen as an event which redeems some future portion of time. God's triumph is over all of history, not just some future temporal portion.     

The Four Horsemen of New Atheism: A Select Bibliography

Between 2004 and 2007, four authors – Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens – published books critical of religion and promoting atheism. What set these works apart was that they were all published by major publishers and received critical acclaim. Three of the books would even go on to make the New York Times Best Seller list. Together, the four authors became know as the Four Horsemen of New Atheism. This article presents a brief overview of New Atheism and The Four Horsemen of New Atheism, author biographies, and reviews of the Four Horsemen’s works from 2004–2007, which, collectively, outline the core ideas of the New Atheists.