Effects of naloxone on acquisition and extinction of jump-up avoidance behavior in rats

Two experiments were carried out to assess the effects of the opioid antagonist, naloxone, on the acquisition and extinction of shock avoidance by rats in the jump-up apparatus. In Experiment 1 naloxone pretreatment facilitated acquisition but had no effect on extinction of avoidance behavior. In the second experiment the effect of naloxone on acquisition was replicated and in addition, it was shown that naloxone enhanced freezing when a response prevention or flooding procedure was introduced. Again naloxone failed to alter the course of extinction, nor did it interact with the effects of flooding which, by itself, facilitated extinction. The results suggest that naloxone's effects are limited to increasing the functional intensity of the US, and provide further support for the dissociation between extinction of avoidance behavior and other indices of fear.     

Mark Twain's life‐long fascination with phrenology

Samuel Langhorne Clemens (Mark Twain; 1835–1910), American humorist and writer, followed scientific and medical developments, and relished exposing questionable practices and ideas. In his youth, he pondered how phrenologists were assessing character, and in 1855 he copied sections of a phrenology book and a skull diagram into a notebook. Later, in London, he had two phrenological examinations by Lorenzo Fowler—one without and the other after identifying himself. Following his “test,” which produced contrasting results, he began to ridicule phrenologists and phrenology in Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, and other works. He underwent at least two more head readings in the United States, and in Eddypus, an unfinished work from 1901 to 1902, he maintained that phrenologists base their insights primarily on how people dress and answer questions. Although now lampooning the craniological tenets of phrenology, Twain never seemed to reject the idea of distinct faculties of mind associated with specialized brain organs.     

Reign of God,Trinity, or Promise? Alternative Missiological Keys for Engaging Religious Pluralism

The fact of religious pluralism demands a theological response. Recent models for engaging religious pluralism overcome the shortcomings of traditional models. However, they inadequately address the categories of sin and divine hiddenness, while struggling to articulate a coherent relationship between dialogue and proclamation. The classic Lutheran tradition offers three fruitful resources (the gospel as promise, the law/gospel distinction, and the hiddenness of God) for engaging religious pluralism and balancing interreligious dialogue and gospel proclamation.