The experience machine and the expertise defense

Recent evidence suggests that participants without extensive training in philosophy (so-called lay people) have difficulties responding consistently when confronted with Robert Nozick’s Experience Machine thought experiment. For example, some of the participants who reject the experience machine for themselves would still advise a stranger to enter the machine permanently. This and similar findings have been interpreted as evidence for implicit biases that prevent lay people from making rational decisions about whether the experience machine is preferable to real life, which might have consequences for one of the strongest objections to philosophical hedonism (the view that pleasure is the only intrinsic value). Against this consequence, it has been argued that expert philosophers are immune to such biases (the so-called expertise defense). In this paper, I report empirical evidence against this expertise defense.     

品格优势及其影响结果

品格优势是积极心理学中的一个核心概念, 具体指通过认知、情感和行为反映出来的一组积极人格特质, 也是促进个体身心健康与幸福感, 缓解抑郁与压力的良好资源。通过实验干预等方法的研究表明, 品格优势对个体(积极体验、身心健康、员工创造力、工作呼唤)和组织(工作绩效、领导力、组织有效性)均能产生积极的影响。不过, 目前品格优势与积极构念的关系研究较多, 而品格优势要素之间及其与才干优势之间的关系研究很少, 研究方法也较为单一。未来研究应重点关注以上问题。     

Trauma,resilience and healthy and unhealthy forms of dissociation

This paper outlines the difference between healthy and unhealthy forms of dissociation following, and in response to, traumatic experience, in particular the experience of refugees, calling on 30 years’ experience in working with refugees in voluntary and public sectors, including 20 years at the Refugee Therapy Centre, London. It differentiates dissociation from repression, and looks at some of the specific traumatic experiences associated with refugees’ displacement and situation, particularly relating to loss. Four key characteristics of resilience are described: ‘psychic space’, ‘sense of self’, and the use of a ‘listening other’ and ‘healthy dissociation/resiliency’. Two vignettes are given to illustrate the difference between healthy and unhealthy dissociation.     

Self‐ and cross‐citations in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis and the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior: 2004‐2018

We examined self‐ and cross‐citations in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA) and the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (JEAB) from 2004 through 2018. Mean annual levels of self‐citations for JABA and JEAB were 40.1% and 28.7%, respectively. Overall, 5.1% of JABA citations were JEAB articles, and 2.3% of JEAB citations were JABA articles. Although overall cross‐citation levels were relatively low, 28.7% of the JABA articles reviewed had at least one JEAB citation, and 27.5% of the JEAB articles reviewed had at least one JABA citation. Authors in both journals cited articles addressing the topics of matching and motivating operations. The extent to which the basic and applied sectors of behavior analysis interact depends on how the interaction is measured. Nonetheless, the degree of interaction is growing, which is a good thing for the discipline.     

Philosophical Expertise and Philosophical Methodology

In recent years a new discussion on the nature of philosophical expertise has emerged: whether philosophers possess a special kind of expertise, what such expertise would entail, how to measure it, and related concerns. The aim of the present article is to clarify certain related points across these debates in the hope of paving a clearer path forward, by addressing the following. (1) The expertise defense, which seems central to many discussions on methodology and expertise, has been misconstrued at times. (2) Questions of expertise and methodology could be separated more clearly. (3) The study of expertise may be important in its own right; however, there may be good reasons to give priority to methodological concerns. (4) Finally, when viewed in light of methodological concerns, a new project emerges when engaging with recent contributions to the expertise debate. The present article attempts a brief outline of this project.     

Questions for a Millennium: Religion and Science from the Perspective of a Scientist

This essay addresses a series of eight questions about what religion can do for science. It explores the secular role of religion in contemporary science and the need for greater synthesis between science and religion. It concludes that, for survival in the twenty-first century, religion cannot exist without acknowledging and using the enormous information pool of science, and science can no longer shun or ignore religion. Humankind will always need the large, synthetic explanations that religion provides of why we are here and what we ought to do and believe. The world needs to mark this new millennium with a sense of respect, cooperation, and even synthesis between science and religion.     

Laboratory Ritual: Experimentation and the Advancement of Science

Technical achievement in laboratories requires millennia–old ritual formulations; the methodological expectations and presuppositions of scientists stem not only from investigations of the last three centuries but also from the ritual knowledge making that has governed human religion. Laboratory research is a form of human ritual open to interpretation in the manner of religious ritual. The experiments of the laboratory are fact–gathering ventures, but the integration of that knowledge into our general understanding of a universe of information networks is the process of knowledge making, and it is the highest achievement of all rituals, be they religious or scientific. Ritual theory offers insight into the nature of scientific experimentation.     

现代医学存在自身缺陷的依据、原因、现象及其后果

目的 探讨现代医学理论体系存在的自身缺陷、根本原因和现象以及由此而产生的后果。方法 明确指出现代医学的理论主体就是实验医学,指出现代医学理论体系所存在的自身缺陷是由于过于依赖实验医学的研究方法而造成的,通过对世界医学发展史上医学与哲学之间关系上的变化进行深入分析,全面阐述了现代医学在对人体研究上的片面性和不完整性,指出现代医学理论之所以存在自身缺陷的根本原因就是没有科学地认识实验医学和经验医学各自的优点并加以合理地利用,列举了现代医学理论存在自身缺陷在基础与临床方面的具体现象及其后果。结论 现代医学理论体系存在着难以自我完善的自身缺陷,并使其发展举步维艰。     

对"心理学危机论"的思考

对当前心理学界存在的心理发展的多种危机论进行了分析,认为,心理学的危机并非源于当前的心理学科本身,而在于心理学者的主观认识和实际工作中。要改变心理学发展缓慢的现状,必须打破心理学者之间过分独立的学术研究活动和学术交流活动,消除存在于心理学者之间的成见,找寻存在于心理学自身和存在于社会需求中的发展机遇．     

Using Brief Experimental Analysis to Select Oral Reading Interventions: An Investigation of Treatment Utility

This study examined the treatment utility of brief experimental analysis for selecting skill-based oral reading interventions that targeted acquisition and fluency. Two second and one third grade student served as participants. The potentially most and least effective instructional packages identified from the brief experimental analysis for each student were alternated during an extended analysis phase. The instructional components that were compared were based on an ease of implementation hierarchy, with the brief experimental analysis used to select the hypothesized most effective instructional package for oral reading. Visual analysis of extended analysis data revealed that the hypothesized most effective combination of instructional components identified from the brief analysis produced greater initial gains in reading for two children (i.e., over 29 and 21 intervention days) and greater gains in reading throughout the extended analysis phase for the third child. Thus, the investigation provided preliminary evidence for the treatment utility of using brief experimental analysis to select effective and efficient oral reading instructional interventions. Implications, limitations, and future research topics are discussed.