Love and Justice: a Paradox?

Three claims about love and justice cannot be simultaneously true and therefore entail a paradox: (1) Love is a matter of justice. (2) There cannot be a duty to love. (3) All matters of justice are matters of duty. The first claim is more controversial. To defend it, I show why the extent to which we enjoy the good of love is relevant to distributive justice. To defend (2) I explain the empirical, conceptual and axiological arguments in its favour. Although (3) is the most generally endorsed claim of the three, I conclude we should reject it in order to avoid the paradox.     

Embodied representation of the body contains veridical spatial information

In two experiments, the extent to which mental body representations contain spatial information was examined. Participants were asked to compare distances between various body parts. Similar to what happens when people compare distances on a real visual stimulus, they were faster as the distance differences between body parts became larger (Experiment 1), and this effect could not (only) be explained by the crossing of major bodily categories (umbilicus to knee vs. knee to ankle; Experiment 2). In addition, participants also performed simple animate/inanimate verification on a set of nouns. The nouns describing animate items were names of body parts. A spatial priming effect was found: Verification was faster for body part items preceded by body parts in close spatial proximity. This suggests automatic activation of spatial body information. Taken together, results from the distance comparison task and the property verification task showed that mental body representations contain both categorical and more metric spatial information. These findings are further discussed in terms of recent embodied cognition theories.     

Caffeine increases false memory in nonhabitual consumers

Insight into caffeine's equivocal effects on memory can be derived from work suggesting both emotional arousal and psychosocial stress increase false memory rates without increasing veridical memory. This study investigated how a range of caffeine doses affect veridical and false memory formation in nonhabitual consumers. A double-blind, repeated-measures design with caffeine (0 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, 400 mg caffeine) was used to examine memory using the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm. Results showed that caffeine modulated arousal levels, peaking at 200 mg and returning to near baseline levels at 400 mg. Main effects of caffeine demonstrated higher critical lure recall and recognition ratings (i.e., false memory) as a function of dose, again peaking at 200 mg. Those who showed the highest arousal increases as a function of caffeine also tended to produce the highest false recall and recognition rates. Veridical memory was not affected. Results demonstrate that consumption of as little as 100 mg of caffeine elicits reliable inverted-U shape changes in arousal and, in turn, false memories in individuals who do not habitually consume caffeine.