Development of the Japanese Version of the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale (GCBS-J)

Generic conspiracist belief refers to the general tendency toward conspiracist ideation independent of specific event-based conspiracy theories. The present research aimed to develop a Japanese version of the Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale (GCBS-J). In two studies, we examined the factor structure, reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity of the GCBS-J. In Study 1 (N = 600), exploratory factor analysis with a split-half subsample proposed a two-factor solution dissociating extraterrestrial conspiracy from other conspiracist ideations. Subsequent confirmatory factor analysis with the other split-half subsample confirmed the two-factor structure. Study 1 also established convergent validity by indicating strong positive correlations with other measures of conspiracist belief. Study 2 (N = 178) added further evidence to indicate a positive correlation with related psychological constructs, such as paranormal beliefs. Study 2 also confirmed temporal test–retest reliability and the discriminant validity of the GCBS-J by indicating no association with an unrelated construct, namely Big-Five personality traits. These findings suggest that the GCBS-J is a useful tool for assessing generic conspiracist beliefs within Japanese samples.     

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。     

Why is loving a thief not the same as loving all men for the Mohists?

The purpose of this article is to explain the Mohists’ perceived inconsistences of the following three propositions in the Mojing since we attribute to them an unconditional love toward human beings: (A) A thief is a man. Killing a thief is not killing men. (B) A thief is a man. Loving a thief is not loving men. (C) Zang is a man. Loving Zang is loving men. The attribution of unconditional love toward human beings is not unusual to the Mohists when we render the Mohist idea of jian’ai as universal love. My interpretation first suggests that we can consistently interpret the Mohist ethical position as intentional utilitarianism. Second, I claim that Mohist universal love includes some generality, though it does not have to mean universality without exception. This Mohist generality will be explained through the generic use of nouns.     

Merleau-Ponty and McDowell on the Transparency of the Mind

Abstract

McDowell and Merleau-Ponty share a critical attitude towards a certain Cartesian picture of the mind. According to the picture in question nothing which properly belongs to subjectivity can be hidden to the subject herself. Nevertheless there is a striking asymmetry in how the two philosophers portray the problematic consequences of such a picture. They can seem to offer exact opposite views of these consequences, which, given the almost identical characterization of the transparency claim, is puzzling. I argue that a closer look at the prima facie puzzling asymmetry dissolves the apparent disagreement and reveals a deeper agreement concerning both the nature and the origin of the problems haunting the Cartesian picture in question. Both McDowell and Merleau-Ponty argue that on the picture of the relation of between mind and world in question, we lose our grip on the very idea of a perceptual appearance. Furthermore, the two authors regard a certain conception of nature as conceived in the image of science, as one of the crucial elements in making the picture of the mind in question look attractive.     

Meta Ain't Always Betta': Conceptualizing the Generic Chaplaincy Issue

Generic chaplaincy is the result of a devaluing of religiousworship and belief to the merely instrumental and experiential.It is an expectable consequence of non-belief in the uniqueobject that would render religious worship intrinsically meaningfuland valuable. Generic chaplaincy has no place because all desireGod, yet not all have found Him in the fullness with which Hehas revealed Himself to us, or even in the fullness with whichwe may be aware of Him through natural reason. In consequence,not all are equally aware of God. A chaplaincy that challengespatients respectfully, and encourages spiritual growth and awareness,including the overcoming of sin and error, is appropriate.     

Cardinality without Enumeration

We show that the notion of cardinality of a set is independent from that of wellordering, and that reasonable total notions of cardinality exist in every model of ZF where the axiom of choice fails. Such notions are either definable in a simple and natural way, or non-definable, produced by forcing. Analogous cardinality notions exist in nonstandard models of arithmetic admitting nontrivial automorphisms. Certain motivating phenomena from quantum mechanics are also discussed in the Appendix.     

Speaking Your Mind: Large Inarticulateness Constitutional and Circumstantial

When someone is asked to speak his mind, it is sometimes possible for him to furnish what his utterance appears to have omitted. In such cases we might say that he had a mind to speak. Sometimes, however, the opposite is true. Asked to speak his mind, our speaker finds that he has no mind to speak. When it is possible to speak one's mind and when not is largely determined by the kinds of beings we are and by the kinds of resources we are able to draw upon. In either case, not speaking one's mind is leaving something out whose articulation would or could matter for the purposes for which one was speaking in the first place. Inarticulation is no fleetingly contingent and peripheral phenomenon in human thinking and discourse. It is a substantial and dominant commonplace. In Part One I attempt to say something about what it is about the human agent that makes inarticulateness so rife. In Part Two, I consider various strategies for making the unarticulated explicit, and certain constraints on such processes. I shall suggest, among other things, that standard treatments of enthymematic reconstruction are fundamentally misconceived.     

Two Important but Almost Never Related Beliefs

Engelmann believes in two general strong beliefs. On one side, Engelmann believes in probabilistic skepticism. That the existence has its maximum probability or there is no existence at all is not possible. The other probabilities of existence are always possible. On the other hand, instead of elements that constitute a beginning arrived at by an unknown division, the Gestalt theory begins with wholes or Gestalten. These Gestalten can be divided in parts but each part can be only a part of his specific Gestalt. The majority of probabilistic skeptics and the majority of Gestalt theory followers do not believe they can be together accepted. On the contrary Engelmann is a member of a small group that both beliefs occur simultaneously. Bibace’s questions were each answered by Engelmann. In some questions Engelmann harmonize with Bibace, in others they disagree.

汉语第三人称单数代词对人物性别判定的影响

采用启动范式考察汉语第三人称单数代词对人物性别判定的影响.实验l发现,“他”导致被试更多地将人物判定为男性,“她”使被试产生更多的女性意象,中性句引起的偏差较小.PMB程度无性别差异.实验2表明,“他”导致被试更多地将中性人物判定为男性,将部分女性误判为男性.     

Exposing the conjuring trick: Wittgenstein on subjectivity

Since the publication of the Philosophical Investigations in 1953, Wittgenstein's later philosophy of mind has been the subject of numerous books and articles. Although most commentators agree that Wittgenstein was neither a behaviorist nor a Cartesian dualist, many continue to ascribe to him a position that strongly resembles one of the alternatives. In contrast, this paper argues that Wittgenstein was strongly opposed to behaviorism and Cartesianism, and that he was concerned to show that these positions implicitly share a problematic assumption. This assumption is a seemingly innocent idea that subjectivity, or mind, is some kind of object or thing. The paper provides a detailed survey of Wittgenstein's critique of Cartesianism and behaviorism, as well as an outline of Wittgenstein's alternative account of subjectivity.