Emotional reactions to scandals: When does moral character make a difference?

A scandal can evoke public outrage when it is widely publicized and involves an individual who is perceived to have a high level of cultural representativeness. Two experiments showed that when the scandalous target's moral character was highlighted, emotional responses towards the target were least negative when the scandal was widely circulated and when the target was seen as a representative of his culture. These results suggest that when a cultural symbol is implicated in a widely‐circulated scandal, the negative emotions directed towards the scandalous individual can be alleviated when the public remains confident in his or her commitment to morality.     

Morality, Self-Interest, and Two Kinds of Prudential Practical Rationality

In this article it is assumed that human goodness is to be judged with respect to how well one does at practical reasoning. It is acknowledged that (1) there is a difference between moral practical reasoning (MPR) and prudential practical reasoning (PPR) and (2) what these would recommend sometimes conflict. A distinction is then made between absolute PPR and relative PPR and it is argued that doing well at absolute PPR is always consistent with MPR. It is also argued that since it is more reasonable to assess prudential practical rationality in terms of the absolute standard than the relative standard, there is no conflict between the demands of MPR (morality) and PPR (self-interest).

Book reviews

Kast, Verena. Father-Daughter, Mother-Son: Freeing Ourselves from the Complexes that Bind Us
Edinger, Edward F. Melville's Moby-Dick: An American Nekyia
Edinger, Edward F. The New God Image: A Study of Jung's Key Letters Concerning the Evolution of the Western God Image
Dreifuss, Gustav & Riemer, Judith. Abraham, The Man and the Symbol
Storr, Anthony. Feet of Clay: A Study of Gurus
Taylor, Eugene. William James on Consciousness Beyond the Margin
Shulman, Helene. Living at the Edge of Chaos: Complex Systems in Culture and Psyche     

默认网络的神经机制、功能假设及临床应用

认知神经科学的迅速发展使得研究者对大脑的功能有了深刻的认识。近些年来, 研究者对大脑在进行外在注意任务时产生的负激活有了更多的了解, 默认网络(Default Mode Network)的概念被提出, 并引起了很多神经科学家的关注, 关于默认网络的相关理论也已提出。当前综述对默认网络的研究历史, 概念理论, 个体和种系发展, 及其与疾病的关系以及临床应用等方面进行了概括总结。未来研究可从默认网络的个体发展, 种系差异, 与其他大脑网络(如注意网络, 视觉网络, 执行控制网络)的关系以及与具体疾病的关系等角度入手进行研究, 共同来探讨默认网络的神经机制。     

趋避道德动机调节方式的作用

道德动机是推动人们产生和完成具有道德意义和行为的内在动因。在解释道德动机的各种理论中, 道德动机模型(Model of Moral Motive, MMM)是一种比较综合的理论。该模型透过一个新颖的视角, 强调趋避两种动机调节方式在自我、他人和群体背景下产生的道德动机。通过对MMM模型综合性的分析, 并且横向比较了道德基础理论(MFT)和行为/结果双系统模型这两个具有代表性的道德理论, 挖掘出了MMM模型的比较优势, 如强调利他、聚焦于自我的道德动机、群体道德与意识形态之间的联系等。由于MMM模型是基于西方道德观提出的, 未来的研究重点应着重于西方道德动机的心理与脑机制与国人的异同以及文化差异对道德动机的影响。     

COMPLEX IDENTITY: GENES TO GOD

Unraveling the complex notion of “self” and “other” necessitates a layered approach that explores biology, namely genetics; philosophy, namely event phenomenology; and culture, namely religion. This essay examines (1) the latest paradigm shift occurring in the genetic sciences due to the increased knowledge of epigenetic effects on gene expression and how our DNA functions in concert with the cellular apparatus, the body, and the environment; (2) the incorporation of relationality into a philosophical understanding of self; and (3) finally, what religion adds to this exploration of self. Thus, providing a glimpse at how these different approaches to identity help us understand the “self.”     

Right-Based Morality and Hohfeld's Relations

The paper begins by defending the Hohfeldianaccount of rights (as equivalence relations) from thecharge that it cannot capture their specialsignificance, and thus cannot be used in a right-basedmoral theory. It goes on to argue that, because of amisunderstanding of this relational account, theconception of right-based morality that has emerged inrecent years has been variously flawed from theoutset. A particular form of explanatory priority waswrongly taken to be essential, and then eitherincoherently combined with equivalence, or taken to bea reason for rejecting equivalence where right-basedthinking is concerned. In fact, this form of priorityis not sufficient for establishing a right-based moraltheory. It is also not necessary, since theHohfeldian analysis can be shown to be entirelyadequate to meeting the original aims of thoseproposing this approach to ethics.     

Scientia Iuris - An Unsolved Philosophical Problem

Legal dogmatics in Continental European law (scientia iuris, Rechtswissenschaft) consists of professional legal writings whose task is to systematize and interpret valid law. Legal dogmatics pursues knowledge of the existing law, yet in many cases it leads to a change of the law. Among general theories of legal dogmatics, one may mention the theories of negligence, intent, adequate causation and ownership. The theories produce principles and they also produce defeasible rules. By means of production of general and defeasible theories, legal dogmatics aims at obtaining a system of law that is both internally coherent and harmonized with its background in morality and (political) philosophy. Legal dogmatics is necessary in the context of constitutional constraints on the majority rule. Only if the courts act on the basis of Reason they can be a legitimate counterpart of the majority rule. And Reason cannot be exhausted by particular decision making. It also needs a more abstract deliberation, given by expert jurists. However, legal dogmatics has been a target of several kinds of criticism: empirical, morally-political, epistemological, logical, and ontological. The position taken in this article is to answer such criticism by mutually adjusting philosophy and the practices of the law.