Alternating Between Masculine and Feminine Pronouns: Does Essay Topic Affect Readers' Perceptions?

Authors are routinely advised to avoid using masculine pronouns to refer to both men and women. Some style guides recommend alternating between masculine and feminine pronouns instead. Unfortunately, previous research with gender-neutral text indicates that readers perceive alternating pronouns to be biased in favor of women. We tested readers' perceptions of alternating pronouns in an essay on a traditionally feminine topic, on a traditionally masculine topic, and on a gender-neutral topic. There were four versions of each essay. One version alternated between masculine and feminine pronouns, a second version used paired masculine and feminine pronouns throughout the passage (e.g., ‘he or she’), and the remaining two versions used exclusively masculine pronouns or feminine pronouns. Readers overestimated the frequency of feminine pronouns in alternating text except when they occurred in an essay on a traditionally feminine topic. Readers also thought alternating pronouns were gender-biased and low in overall quality.     

The Price of Being Conciliatory: Remarks about Mellon's Model for Hospital Chaplaincy Work in Multi-Faith Settings

The intimate connection, within Christianity, of theology andethics is invoked, and the ethical differences between Christiandenominations are exposed, as they present themselves inMellon'scase studies, in order to call attention to the unsolvable dilemmain which hospital chaplains find themselves, if they understandtheir role in a merely conciliatory fashion as that of a "comforter,mediator, educator, ethicist, and counselor". As witnessed bythe Calvinist and Anabaptist traditions Mellon introduces, conceptssuch as "the patient's good" can mean radically different thingsin these theological contexts. Attempting to merely mediatebetween such positions in a spirit of merely generic prayerand on the basis of a merely psychological notion of well-beingposes a risk to chaplains' spiritual integrity and faithfulnessto their mission.     

WHOSE RIGHTS,AND WHAT's THE DIFFERENCE? A CRITIQUE OF BETH SINGER'S “HUMAN RIGHTS: SOME CURRENT ISSUES”

Abstract: In this article I argue against the rights‐based framework defining the abortion debate, and do so by considering the views of Beth Singer, a philosopher whose work conveys a broadly pragmatist formulation of traditional rights‐based language. Although Singer's schema presents a fruitful vantage point from which to consider the abortion question through the discourse of rights, even Singer's use of the language of rights ultimately fails adequately to address the subject. I challenge Singer's view by taking up John Dewey's concept of reflective morality, elucidated in his 1932 Ethics.     

Concept Cartesianism,Concept Pragmatism,and Frege Cases

This paper concerns the dialectal role of Frege Cases in the debate between Concept Cartesians and Concept Pragmatists. I take as a starting point Christopher Peacocke’s argument that, unlike Cartesianism, his ‘Fregean’ Pragmatism can account for facts about the rationality and epistemic status of certain judgments. I argue that since this argument presupposes that the rationality of thoughts turn on their content, it is thus question-begging against Cartesians, who claim that issues about rationality turn on the form, not the content, of thoughts. I then consider Jerry Fodor’s argument that ‘modes of presentation’ are not identical with Fregean senses, and argue that explanatory considerations should leads us to reject his ‘syntactic’ treatment of Frege cases. Rejecting the Cartesian treatment of Frege cases, however, is not tantamount to accepting Peacocke’s claim that reasons and rationality are central to the individuation of concepts. For I argue that we can steer a middle course between Fodor’s Cartesianism and Peacocke’s Pragmatism, and adopt a form of Pragmatism that is constrained by Fregean considerations, but at the same time denies that concepts are constitutively tied to reasons and rationality.

儿童基于心理本质论的种族认知及其影响因素

心理本质论将类别成员视为由共同的本质所决定,且这些本质对应着一些表面的不可改变的属性。其中,种族本质论就是心理本质论的一种。研究种族本质论的发展对于了解儿童的种族认知具有重要意义。种族本质论者认为,种族具有遗传不变性、有较强的归纳强度和标签具有客观性等特征。但是,基于不同特征的种族本质论的发展存在差异。类属语言、社会文化背景和群体地位,均可能影响儿童种族本质论的发展。这些影响因素提示,可通过减少类属语言的描述和促进民族融合等方式改变儿童的种族本质论。比较儿童对种族本质论的建构与自然世界的建构之间的差异,方便我们探索类别学习跨领域的一致性问题。如何确保种族本质论的发展是适宜的,这需要未来开展一些干预性的研究。     

Psychiatric diagnoses, ‘thought styles’, and ex post facto fact fallacies

Living in two-way, dialogical relations with our surroundings, rather than in monological, one-way causal relations with them, means that we can no longer treat ourselves as inquiring simply into a world of objective ‘things’ already existing in the world around us. We need to see ourselves instead as always acting ‘from within’ a still-in-process world of flowing streams of intermingling activities affecting us as much, if not more, than we can affect them. In such a world as this, instead of discovering pre-existing things in our inquiries, we continually bring such ‘things’ into existence. So, although we may talk of having discovering certain nameable ‘things’ in our inquiries, the fact is, we can only see such ‘things’ as having been at work in people’s activities after they have performed them. This, I want to argue, is also the case with all our diagnostic categories of mental distress – thus to see the ‘things’ they name as the causes of a person’s distress is to commit an ex post facto fact fallacy. Something else altogether ‘moves’ people in the performance of their actions than the nameable ‘things’ we currently claim to have discovered in our inquiries.     

On Failing to be Cartesian: Reconsidering the ‘Impurity’ of Descartes’s Meditation

Abstract

This paper begins from the observation that in the Meditations, Descartes never achieves the ‘pure’, thoroughly decontextualized kind of thinking he famously promoted. Some commentators have used this observation to promote pure inquiry more diligently and to criticize Descartes for failing to achieve it. Other commentators have simply called for greater historical fairness and urged that we renew our efforts to understand how Descartes’s inquiry actually does operate. This paper, although sympathetic with this second group of commentators, argues that in revisiting the tensions between what Descartes actually accomplished and what he said he was trying to accomplish, we should see a contemporary lesson, not just better historical understanding. It is argued that in spite of the strong presence in his writings of the imagery of the ‘Cartesian’ ideal of a perfectly presuppositionless philosophical standpoint, not only does Descartes himself never become a Cartesian, but his own practice provides perhaps the best evidence against the very possibility of the Cartesian ‘project of pure inquiry’ to which he aspired.     

And so indeed are perfect cheat

Ethical discourse and fallacy theory come together in a natural way over concepts such as bias, prejudice, preconceived opinion, prototypical and stereotypical thinking, dogmatism and loyalty. By and large, these are concepts that have not been sufficiently worked up to bear the theoretical weight either of ethics or of logic. The present paper seeks to ameliorate this situation. It proposes that situations describable by any such concepts partition into (a) the rationally and morally regrettable and (b) the rationally and morally impeccable, and in any event, unavoidable. Finding (b) will come as a surprise to some theorists.[A]ll the artificial and figurative application of Words Eloquence hath invented are for nothing else but to insinuate wrongIdeas, move the Passions, and thereby mislead the Judgment; and so indeed are perfect cheat; And therefore, however laudable or allowable Oratory may render them in Harangues and popular Addresses, they are certainly, in all Discourses that pretend to inform or instruct, wholly to be avoided. ...John Locke,Essay on Human Understanding, Book III.     

Two Contemporary Examples of Christian Love

It is a mark of arrogance to try to minister in a liturgicalor ritual way to individuals of other religions. A hospitalchaplain is not a generic brand, all-purpose religious figurecapable of fulfilling the religious needs of any. A chaplainshould not try to fill in for specific religious ministers,but rather, he should see himself as a human companion to thosewho need human love and care. In doing this, he can surely bemotivated, informed, and sustained by his inner, spiritual life,but should not see himself as replacing the patient's own religiouspastor. Excellent examples of how to carry out pastoral dutiesin pluralist communities come from two contemporary Christians:Mother Theresa and Father Porphyrios. Both of whom remainednon-judgmental toward those for whom they cared, while maintaininga strict view of the historical teachings of Christianity andobedience to them.     

Can societal language amendments change gender representation? The case of Norway

This study investigates the influence of stereotypical information and the grammatical masculine on the representation of gender in Norwegian by applying a sentence evaluation paradigm. In this study participants had to decide whether a second sentence containing explicit information about the gender of one of more of the characters (e.g. . . . one of the women . . . ) was a sensible continuation of a first sentence introducing a role name (e.g. The spies came out . . . ). Participants' representations were biased by the stereotypicality of the role names when reading female (e.g. nurses) and male (e.g. pilots) stereotyped role names (replicating findings from the English sample in a previous publication), but male biased when reading neutral role names (replicating findings from the French and the German samples in a previous publication).