Judge not? The pedagogical puzzle of right interpretation and wrong interpretation

When studying the reception history of the Bible, should students be asked to suspend judgment on a particular interpretation for the sake of the pedagogical goals of the course? Or is their judgment essential to the process of learning and understanding? This essay explores the pedagogical puzzle of right interpretation and wrong interpretation through the context of my classroom, where neither the troubling events of a nation in turmoil nor our own social, religious, and cultural locations as readers could be bracketed from the learning environment, despite my best efforts. In particular, this essay integrates the approach outlined by Gary Weissman, who argues for an embrace of student misreading in his book The Writer in the Well. His suggestion that misreading and rewriting are fundamental to the process of understanding is provocative, and its application to biblical studies presents special challenges, but this paper argues for its relevance to the pedagogical puzzle at hand.     

Does morality predict aggressive driving? A conceptual analysis and exploratory empirical investigation

Risky and aggressive driving is an important cause of traffic casualties and as such a major health and cost problem to society. Given the consequences for others, risky and aggressive driving has a clear moral component. Surprisingly, however, there has been little research on the relation between morality and risky and aggressive driving behavior. In this study we aim at addressing this gap. First, we present a conceptual analysis of the relationship between moral values and aggressive driving behavior. For this purpose, we extend Schwartz’s integrated model of ethical decision making and apply it to the context of aggressive driving. This conceptual analysis shows that moral decision-making processes consist of several stages, like moral awareness, moral judgment and moral intent, each of which are influenced by individual and situational factors and all of which need to materialize before someone’s generally endorsed moral value affects concrete behavior. This suggests that the moral value-aggressive driving relationship is rather indeterminate. This conceptual picture is confirmed by our empirical investigation, which tests to what extent respondents’ moral values, measured through the Moral Foundation Questionnaire, are predictive of respondents’ aggressive driving behavior, as measured through an aggressive driving behavior scale. Our results show few and rather weak empirical relationships between moral values and committed aggressive driving behaviors, as was expected in light of our conceptual analysis. We derive several policy implications from these results.