Whorf and Wittgenstein. Language, world view and argumentation

Whorf and Wittgenstein are perhaps the most famous names in linguistics and philosophy associated with the assumption that language plays a decisive role in shaping our view of reality. After a critical discussion of Whorf's linguistic relativity principle I conclude that it is not language as a system, but the use of language according to the rules of language games which connects language thought and world view, especially if some particular usage becomes the commonly accepted norm. This traditional norm also enters argumentative discourse in the form of background assumptions occuring in the premises of arguments. Thus, traditional points of view and prevailing ideologies in a society, even if challenged in discussions, can become reinforced and stabilized. This is illustrated with a critical analysis of the role and function of tautological utterances in argumentative discourse, which only apparently are compelling means of argumentation.     

A COLLATERAL EFFECT OF REWARD PREDICTED BY MATCHING THEORY

Matching theory describes a process by which organisms distribute their behavior between two or more concurrent schedules of reinforcement (Herrnstein, 1961). In an attempt to determine the generality of matching theory to applied settings, 2 students receiving special education were provided with academic response alternatives. Using a combined simultaneous treatments design and reversal design, unequal ratio schedules of reinforcement were varied across two academic responses. Findings indicated that both subjects allocated higher rates of responses to the richer schedule of reinforcement, although only one responded exclusively to the richer schedule. The present results lend support to a postulation that positive reinforcement may have undesirable collateral effects that are predicted by matching theory (Balsam & Bondy, 1983).     

Aggravated and mitigated opening utterances

Four types of aggravated opening utterances (insult, command, accusation, refusal without a reason) and four types of mitigated opening utterances (request, indication of shared responsibility, reaffirmation, and refusal with a reason) were investigated. Ordinary social actors rated each of the mitigated opening utterances higher than aggravated opening utterances on specific appropriateness, general appropriateness, and effectiveness. Hence, the type of opening employed to initiate an argumentative episode influences judgments of appropriateness and effectiveness.     

May the force be with you

This paper is a critical assessment of argumentum ad baculum, or appeal to force. Its principal contention is that, contrary to common opinion, there is no general fallacy of ad baculum. Most real-life ad baculums are, in fact, fairly strong. A basic logical form for reconstructed ad baculums is proposed, and a number of heterodoxical conclusions are also advanced and argued for. They include that ad baculum is not necessarily a prudential argument, that ad baculum need not involve force, violence, or threats, and that one can argue ad baculum to oneself. The starting point of the paper, however, is a critical evaluation of three ad baculums from the exercise sets of Irving Copi's well-known Introduction to Logic.     

父母自主支持对青少年积极情绪适应的影响:基本心理需要满足的中介与调节作用模型

本研究旨在考察父母自主支持对青少年积极情绪适应的影响及其作用机制。采用生活满意度问卷、积极情感消极情感量表、父母自主支持量表、自尊量表以及基本心理需要量表对1912名初中生被试进行调查。结果表明：（1）父母自主支持对青少年生活满意度、积极情绪、自尊和基本心理需要满足有显著正向预测作用;（2）基本心理需要满足在父母自主支持对青少年生活满意度、自尊和积极情绪影响中的中介作用显著;（3）基本心理需要满足在父母自主支持与积极情绪、生活满意度之间起着调节作用。本研究结果揭示了基本心理需要满足在父母自主支持和积极情绪适应之间的“双重作用”。     

Show Me the Argument: Empirically Testing the Armchair Philosophy Picture

Many philosophers subscribe to the view that philosophy is a priori and in the business of discovering necessary truths from the armchair. This paper sets out to empirically test this picture. If this were the case, we would expect to see this reflected in philosophical practice. In particular, we would expect philosophers to advance mostly deductive, rather than inductive, arguments. The paper shows that the percentage of philosophy articles advancing deductive arguments is higher than those advancing inductive arguments, which is what we would expect from the vantage point of the armchair philosophy picture. The results also show, however, that the percentages of articles advancing deductive arguments and those advancing inductive arguments are converging over time and that the difference between inductive and deductive ratios is declining over time. This trend suggests that deductive arguments are gradually losing their status as the dominant form of argumentation in philosophy.     

Japanese preschoolers’ evaluation of circular and non-circular arguments

Observational and experimental data have revealed that preschoolers possess some argumentation skills, both in the production and the evaluation of arguments. However, these skills might have been fostered by the particular cultural context of Western middle- and upper-classes families, to which most children studied belong. Some data suggests that children in other cultures possess at least some of these skills, but no experimental data had been gathered in Eastern cultures. These cultures are supposed to frown on argumentation, and might thus be less conducive to the early development of argumentation skills. We test the emergence of argument evaluation skills in Japanese 5-year-olds by presenting them with a choice between endorsing a strong, perceptual argument, and a weak, circular argument. A first experiment revealed a trend in the direction of the strong argument. A second experiment that addresses some methodological concerns of the first demonstrates a significant tendency to follow the strong argument. These results are similar to those previously gathered in two other cultures (Swiss and Maya), and suggest that some basic argumentation skills are early developing across cultures.     

试论心身疾病的中医病机

心身疾病是指那些心理一社会因素在疾病的发生和发展中起重要作用的躯体疾病。其概念决定了心身疾病不具有专业领域性,不同心身疾病有着不同的病理变化。发掘其病理共性、找寻规律性,对该学科发展的标准化方向至关重要。该文从中医基本病机层次,探讨了心身疾病的发生、发展与变化的机理,试图对科研与临床操作提供有益思路。     

WHOSE INTERESTS ARE THEY,ANYWAY?

This review both praises Richard Miller's book--a thoughtful, judicious, and comprehensive analysis of bioethics for the pediatric age group, notably the first effort worthy of the name--and points out the work still to be done in this area, work firmly based in and illuminated by Miller's ground-breaking thesis. Specifically, the book rightly compels us to recognize obligations of beneficence as primary and to refocus on the child's basic interests, rather than putative "best" interests. There remains much to be done in defining and discerning basic interests and in distinguishing whose interests are on the table when decisions are being made for seriously ill and dying children.