“自杀”：一个重要的伦理问题

自杀现已成为人类死亡十大原因之一 ,而且呈现出低龄化的趋势 ,越来越引起社会的关注。因而 ,从政治、经济、社会、疾病、文化等多视角来寻找自杀的外部原因 ,对探究这个重要的伦理问题是有益的。     

社会经济地位与留守儿童社会适应的关系:歧视知觉的中介作用

本研究旨在考察歧视知觉(包括个体和群体歧视知觉)在社会经济地位和留守儿童社会适应之间的中介作用.542名10~18岁留守儿童参加了本次调查,测量工具包括社会经济地位(三个指标:父母职业,父母受教育程度和家庭经济),个体和群体歧视知觉量表,积极和消极情感量表,自尊量表和问题行为量表.结果发现:(1)留守儿童社会经济地位与其社会适应之间有着显著的正相关;(2)相对于个体歧视知觉,留守儿童群体歧视知觉在家庭社会经济地位和社会适应之间的中介作用更为显著;(3)留守儿童群体歧视知觉中介模型不存在显著的性别差异,但高群体歧视知觉的男生比同类别的女生更容易产生社会适应问题.     

Duties and Responsibilities Towards the Poor

Thomas Pogge has argued that we have strong negative duties to assist the global poor because we harm them through our contribution to the global economic order. I argue that Pogge’s concept of harm is indeterminate. The resources of any group will typically be affected by at least two economic schemes. Pogge suggests that the responsibility for any affected group’s shortfall from a minimum standard ought to be shared between the contributing schemes. I argue that shared responsibility can be interpreted in two different ways. Unfortunately, both interpretations are problematic. Lastly, I suggest a strategy for amending this problem.

Triangulating Political Responsibility: The Motivated Formation of Responsibility Judgments

This article analyzes the process through which partisan bias arises during the formation of citizens' judgments of political responsibility. Informed by theories of motivated political reasoning, it argues that exposure to partisan cues motivates partisans to pursue directional goals, goals which bias the cognitive processing of information and, in turn, overall judgments of responsibility. It further argues that the nature of this biased processing will be such that partisans devalue information inconsistent with their partisan affect. Using a pair of experiments, I test these hypotheses by manipulating both objective evidence concerning gubernatorial responsibility for a state's fiscal imbalance and the presence of partisan cues. Findings support both sets of expectations. The results also suggest that the effects of partisan bias are greater in judgments tied to institutional actions than in those tied to institutional roles and expectations.     

The smell of cooperativeness: Do human body odours advertise cooperative behaviours?

Several physical features influence the perception of how cooperative a potential partner is. While previous work focused on face and voice, it remains unknown whether body odours influence judgements of cooperativeness and if odour-based judgements are accurate. Here, we first collected axillary odours of cooperative and uncooperative male donors through a public good game and used them as olfactory stimuli in a series of tasks examining whether and how they influence cooperative decision-making in an incentivized economic game and ratings of cooperativeness. Our results show that having access to the donor's body odours provided a strategic advantage to women during economic decisions (but not to men): with age, women were more likely to cooperate with cooperative men and to avoid interacting with uncooperative men. Ratings of cooperativeness were nonetheless unrelated to the donors’ actual cooperativeness. Finally, while men with masculine and intense body odours were judged less cooperative, we found no evidence that donors’ actual cooperativeness was associated with less masculine or less intense body odour. Overall, our findings suggest that, as faces and voices, body odours influence perceived cooperativeness and might be used accurately and in a non-aware manner as olfactory cues of cooperativeness, at least by women.     

A Just Global Economy: In Defense of Rawls

In The Law of Peoples, John Rawls does not discuss justice and the global economy at great length or in great detail. What he does say has not been well-received. The prevailing view seems to be that what Rawls says in The Law of Peoples regarding global economic justice is both inconsistent with and a betrayal of his own liberal egalitarian commitments, an unexpected and unacceptable defense of the status quo. This view is, I think, mistaken. Rawls’s position on global or international economic justice is richer, more nuanced, and generally more compelling than his critics have been willing to acknowledge. My aim in this essay is to sympathetically set out, and then defend against two common families of objection to, Rawls’s position on global or international economic justice. Objections of the first sort reject Rawls’s position as inadequately attentive to the material and economic interests of individual persons worldwide. Objections of the second sort reject it as inadequately attentive to the material and economic interests of well-ordered peoples. Throughout the paper I develop several arguments implicit in The Law of Peoples but not well-developed there as well as offer some additional arguments of my own consistent with the spirit of The Law of Peoples and Rawls’s work more generally. I conclude with some brief remarks expressing two worries I have about Rawls’s position – one concerning global public goods, the other concerning the formation of a morally adequate and effective political will within the international context under contemporary conditions. I wish to thank Alyssa Bernstein, Allen Buchanan, Samuel Freeman, John Hardwig, John Mandle, Rex Martin, Jim Nickel, Walter Riker, Kok-Chor Tan, and Leif Wenar for helpful comments or instructive conversation regarding earlier drafts of this paper.     

THE CAPABILITIES OF PEOPLE WITH COGNITIVE DISABILITIES

Abstract: People with cognitive disabilities are equal citizens, and law ought to show respect for them as full equals. To do so, law must provide such people with equal entitlements to medical care, housing, and other economic needs. But law must also go further, providing people with disabilities truly equal access to education, even when that is costly and involves considerable change in current methods of instruction. The central theme of this essay is what is required in order to give such people political and civil rights on a basis of genuine equality.     

SHARING THE WEALTH: FACTORS INFLUENCING RESOURCE ALLOCATION IN THE SHARING GAME

Students chose between two allocation options, one that gave the allocator more and another participant still more (the “optimal” choice) and one which gave the allocator less and the other participant still less (the “competitive” choice). In a within‐subjects design, students' behavior patterns were significantly correlated across the two rounds of decision‐making; however, students allocated more optimally when the allocation involved real rather than hypothetical money, suggesting that both motivational context and individuals' personality and/or experience influence preference patterns. The nature of the putative other participant did not affect the allocation: students allocated in a comparable fashion whether the other participant was said to be male, female, or a computer.     

GLOBAL JUSTICE AFTER THE FALL Christian Realism and the "Law of Peoples"

In The Law of Peoples John Rawls casts his proposals as an argument against what he calls “political realism.” Here, I contend that a certain version of “Christian political realism” survives Rawls's polemic against political realism sans phrase and that Rawls overstates his case against political realism writ large. Specifically, I argue that Rawls's dismissal of “empirical political realism” is underdetermined by the evidence he marshals in support of the dismissal and that his rejection of “normative political realism” is in tension with his own normative concessions to political reality as expressed in The Law of Peoples. That is, I contend that Rawls, himself, needs some form of political realism to render persuasive the full range of normative claims constituting the argument of that work.