Philosophy, Psychology, and Public Policy Aspects of Well-Being All Wrapped in One Book Designed to Ruffle Your Feathers

This is a book review of Daniel M. Haybron’s book titled The Pursuit of Unhappiness: The Elusive Psychology of Well-Being, published by Oxford University Press, 2008.

Philosophers on the "Art-of-Living"

Art-of-living is a classical notion in philosophy that is currently receiving renewed interest. Art-of-living refers to a kind of self-direction with a view to the good life. This paper surveys modern philosophical thought on this subject. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

孟子荀子教育思想比较

孟子和苟子分别以“性善论”和“性恶论”为教育思想的道德基础。在教育方法上孟子强调由内而外,“反求诸己”的自我教育;而苟子强调外在的礼义教化,“隆礼”、“尊师”。他们教育的目的都是为了实现儒家的“仁政”。     

人为什么要有道德?(上)

本文从道德哲学的角度提出“人为什么要有道德?”的问题,并尝试给出某种解答。通过“善(好)生活”、“利益(关系)”和“人性(潜能)”三个核心概念,作者力图阐明道德之于人类生活的内在性,并从人类的生活目的、行为方式和人性潜能三个基本方面,揭示人类道德生活所内含的美德一目的论与规范一道义论之双重维度。     

Moral Expertise?: Constitutional Narratives and Philosophical Argument

Using the bench trial of Colorado's Amendment 2 as an example, this article focuses on the more general question of expert testimony in moral philosophy. It argues that there is indeed expertise in moral philosophy but argues against admitting such expert testimony in cases dealing with what John Rawls terms \"constitutional essentials\" and 'matters of basic justice.\" Developing the idea of public reason inherent in the Rawlsian concept of political liberalism, the article argues that philosophers can and should speak out on public issues, if they do so with due respect for certain restrictions, but that they should not serve as expert witnesses on core constitutional questions, since doing so suggests that they claim a type of authority that would require fellow citizens to defer to their views. Such claims to authority in basic ethical matters threaten the mutual respect for divergent comprehensive doctrines that lies at the core of political liberalism. Philosophers have a duty to serve the public good, and they perform this service in fruitful ways. But they should refuse a public role that appears incompatible with equal respect for the committed ethical searching of their fellow citizens.     

The Overclaiming Questionnaire: A good way to measure faking?

We evaluated the validity of the Overclaiming Questionnaire (OCQ) as a measure of job applicants’ faking of personality tests. We assessed whether the OCQ (a) converged with an established measure of applicant faking, Residualized Individual Change Scores (RICSs); (b) predicted admission of faking and faking tendencies (Faking Frequency, Minimizing Weaknesses, Exaggerating Strengths, and Complete Misrepresentation); and, (c) predicted the aforementioned measures as strongly as RICSs did. First, 261 participants were instructed to respond honesty to an extraversion measure. Next, in a mock job application, they filled out the extraversion measure again, as well as the OCQ. The OCQ only weakly predicted RICSs (r = .17), Faking Admission (r = .18), and Faking Frequency (r = .15), and it failed to correlate significantly with Minimizing Weaknesses, Exaggerating Strengths, and Complete Misrepresentation. Moreover, the OCQ performed significantly worse than RICS in predicting Faking Admission, Faking Frequency, Minimizing Weaknesses, Exaggerating Strengths, and Complete Misrepresentation. We urge caution in using the current version of the OCQ to measure faking, but speculate that the innovative approach taken in the OCQ might be more effectively exploited if the OCQ content were tailored to the specific job that applicants are being tested for.