A Brief History of Jungian Splits in the United Kingdom

The institutionalizing of analytical psychology in the United Kingdom has its origins in the Analytical Psychology Club founded on 15 September 1922. It became increasingly apparent that professionalization of the Jungian movement was essential and this led to the formation of the Society of Analytical Psychology in 1946. This was followed in 1951 by the founding of the British Association of Psychotherapists. The Association of Jungian Analysts split off from the Society of Analytical Psychology in 1975–6, and this was followed in 1982 by the split between the Association of Jungian Analysts and the Independent Group of Analytical Psychologists. The Berlin Congress of 1986 saw the beginnings of a liaison body for the four London societies, which came to be called the Umbrella Group. This has organized joint conferences and workshops, but the split in 1992 between the United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy and the British Confederation of Psychotherapists has posed a new threat to the growing harmony between the London societies. In the face of this threat, the Umbrella Group has not been able to articulate a common policy and strategy about the Jungian presence in the United Kingdom.     

Murray Sidman and Patient H. M.: The role of behavior analysis in the emergence of collaborative modern neuroscience

The intersection of the lives of 2 essential individuals in science, behavior analyst Murray Sidman (1923-2019), and Henry G. Molaison also known as Patient H.M. (1926-2008), warrants examination as it highlights the role of behavior analysis and other disciplines in the emergence of modern neuroscience and a collaborative approach to science. This paper describes the historical context and content of two publications by Sidman in which Molaison served as a research participant. The goal of the present paper is to emphasize this little-known facet of Sidman's rich career and to highlight the pioneering role of behavior analysis, and particularly the work of Murray Sidman, in the emergence of collaborative modern neuroscience.     

What Makes a Basic Structure Just?

In his multi-faceted attack on Rawls’s account of justice, G.A. Cohen has argued that the notion of basic structure is necessarily insensitive to the importance of informal social norms to social justice. The paper argues that the most plausible account of the basic structure is not blind to informal social norms in any meaningful sense. Whereas informal, non-legally coercive institutions are not part of the basic structure as such, their careful consideration is necessary for the assessment of whether the basic structure itself is indeed just. This claim is based on an account of what it means for normative principle to apply to institutions, which I expound in detail throughout the paper. Principles apply to institutions, I argue, not in that they restrain their conduct, but in that they indicate which social conditions they should bring about.

Problems for Linguistic Solutions to the Paradox of Analysis

G. E. Moore opined that the paradox of analysis might be avoided if it could be shown that sentences expressing conceptual analyses convey information not only about concepts, but also about the expressions they use. If so, "to be a brother is to be a male sibling" and "to be a brother is to be a brother" might express the same proposition, and yet not be identical in information value as the paradox suggests. How sentences might do this, Moore could not see. Many philosophers have pointed out an obvious way in which sentences might be said to convey information about the expressions they use. Some have suggested this information might be used to develop Moore's intuition and resolve the paradox of analysis. I argue that this approach fails. I present a version of the paradox of analysis that resists this sort of solution.     

Science,Values and Loves: Theologies as Expressive Constructions

Invited to write “a manifesto for [my] own theological position”, I begin with science and human rights as excellent examples of universalist aspirations of modernity. Modern individualism is important too, as particular existential loves shape each life. Science, morality, and personal loves are interwoven in theologies, as creative constructions. The sciences are important, as we need not only individual authenticity but also accountability. My position presented here is science-inspired naturalistic theism. It is not “religious naturalism”, given the categorical difference between facts and values. It is not “natural theology”, as inductive approaches do not reach that far. It comes closer to a “theology of nature”, but it does not assume the epistemic claims involved. I consider theologies to be important expressive constructions.     

DRD4基因与亲社会行为的关联及其潜在脑机制

DRD4基因是亲社会行为的重要候选基因,且与环境交互影响亲社会行为的发生发展。通过梳理既有研究,本文从性别差异、亲社会行为的不同类型及发展动态性等角度探讨了亲社会行为遗传研究存在分歧的原因,并在此基础上探索了DRD4基因作用于亲社会行为的潜在脑机制。未来研究应采用纵向设计探究DRD4基因影响亲社会行为的发展动态性问题,并深入探索其性别差异;采用多质多法分析考察不同类型亲社会行为遗传机制的差异性;采用影像遗传学设计揭示“DRD4基因—脑—亲社会行为”作用机制。