DEVELOPMENT OF OBJECTIVE CRITERIA TO EVALUATE THE AUTHENTICITY OF REVELATION

Science has been dazzlingly successful in explaining nature. Scientific advances also have led to certain undesirable, though unintended, side effects, one of which is alienation from the spiritual. Revelation comes from the Divine. But what is the status of authenticity of a particular piece claimed to be revelation? What is its historical validity and current state of preservation? This essay proposes to develop a list of rational criteria, in consultation with all stakeholders, for addressing the subject. The aim is to bring objectivity into this discourse by placing it more on the turf of reason rather than basing it on considerations of faith and prior allegiance.     

IS THEOLOGY RESPECTABLE AS METAPHYSICS?

Theology involves inquiry into God's nature, God's purposes, and whether certain experiences or pronouncements come From God. These inquiries are metaphysical, part of theology's concern with the veridicality of signs and realities that are independent from humans. Several research programs concerned with the relation between theology and science aim to secure theology's intellectual standing as a metaphysical discipline by showing that it satisfies criteria that make modern science reputable, on the grounds that modern science embodies contemporary canons of respectability for metaphysical disciplines. But, no matter the ways in which theology qua metaphysics is shown to resemble modern science, these research programs seem destined for failure. For, given the currently dominant approaches to understanding modern scientific epistemology, theological reasoning is crucially dissimilar to modern scientific reasoning in that it treats the existence of God as a certainty immune to refutation. Barring the development of an epistemology of modern science that is amenable to theology, theology as metaphysics is intellectually disreputable.     

ENGAGING SCIENCE IN THE MODE OF TRUST: HANS KÜNG'S THE BEGINNING OF ALL THINGS

In 2006 Swiss theologian Hans Küng added his distinctive and important voice to the science/theology discussion in his work Der Anfang aller Dinge. I summarize here the general contours of Küng's argumentation and briefly evaluate his proposals, especially in relation to his earlier publications. English translations are provided for German citations. After summarizing Küng's response to the question of the search for a unified theory of everything, I present his answer to the question of how theology and science should be related. This leads to a summary of his extensive meditation on science and the question of God's existence from a theological‐philosophical perspective. After examining his thesis concerning creation and evolution, I discuss matters more anthropological and trace the final elements of Küng's argument as they relate to eschatology and science. Finally, I evaluate the general thrust of his argumentation with special reference to his previous publications.     

IS THERE A FUTURE FOR THE DIALOGUE?

The title question was raised by Philip Hefner in an editorial in the March 2007 issue of Zygon, and answered in various ways in sixteen guest editorials in the June, September, and December 2007 issues. In this article, after defining some pertinent concepts, I comment on these essays. I review critical statements made by the guest editorialists and survey their proposals for further dialogue topics. I conclude with my own views on the future of the dialogue and the role of Zygon therein.     

The science of religious beliefs

Why have humans, throughout history and across cultures, shown a strong tendency to believe in the existence of superhuman intentional agents and attached this belief to notions of morality, misfortune, and the creation of the world? The answer emerging from the cognitive science of religion appears to be that explicit beliefs are informed and constrained by the natural and cross-culturally recurrent operation of implicit cognitive systems. Successful god concepts resonate with the expectations of these implicit systems but also have attention-demanding and inferentially-rich properties that allow their integration into various areas of human concern. Theological concepts may deviate from these natural cognitive moorings but require special cultural scaffolding, such as Whitehouse's two Modes of Religiosity, to do so and constitute additions to, rather than replacements of the religious beliefs supported by implicit cognitive systems.     

医学教育一席谈——与哈佛医学院Sara Fazio医生谈临床教学

公众中医药素养是公众科学素养的重要组成部分,了解公众中医药素养具有重要意义。通过对吉林省公众中医药素养的调研,考察了吉林省公众对中医药理论体系特点和哲学基础的理解,对中医药概念和术语的理解,对中医药社会影响的认识和理解,得出吉林省公众中医药素养水平指数为2．76。     

自杀意念高中生的社会信息编码特征

采用两因素混合实验设计, 以日常用词为实验材料, 选取不同自杀意念得分的高中生为被试, 通过三个实验考察自杀意念高中生的社会信息编码特征。研究结果发现:(1)自杀意念高分组被试对出现在消极词位置的探测刺激的反应时显著短于出现在积极词位置的探测刺激的反应时; 自杀意念低分组被试对出现在积极词位置的探测刺激的反应时显著短于出现在消极词位置的探测刺激的反应时。(2)在知觉加工水平上, 自杀意念高分组被试对消极词、积极词及中性词的回忆量之间无显著差异; 自杀意念低分组被试对三类词的回忆量之间也不存在显著差异。(3)在语义加工水平上, 自杀意念高分组被试的消极词回忆量显著高于积极词回忆量; 自杀意念低分组被试的积极词回忆量显著高于消极词回忆量。研究结论如下：高自杀意念高中生存在对消极信息的注意偏向和语义加工偏向, 但不存在知觉加工偏向; 低自杀意念高中生存在对积极信息的注意偏向和语义加工偏向, 但不存在知觉加工偏向。     

大学生在社会困境中的公平决策:社会价值取向的影响

通过两项研究考查大学生在社会困境中的行为决策及公平感体验,检验社会价值取向的影响作用,有效被试分别为85名和84名。结果表明:(1)亲社会者比亲自我者更倾向做公平决策;信息对称比不对称条件更促进被试做公平决策;女生比男生更倾向做公平决策。(2)性别在社会价值取向与信息对称性对公平决策的影响中起调节作用,社会价值取向显著影响男生的公平决策,信息对称性显著影响女生的公平决策。(3)社会价值取向显著影响个体对不公平的容忍度,亲社会者更不容忍不公平行为。(4)对于利己的不公平行为,被试都倾向接受,亲社会者并不比亲自我者体验到更强的内疚情绪;对于不利己的不公平行为,被试都倾向拒绝,且产生较强的不公平感及气愤情绪。     

动机性信息加工理论及其在工业与组织心理学中的应用

“团队作为信息加工者的观点”认为, 团队执行复杂任务需要经过一系列认知决策, 哪些信息被共享, 以及信息共享和整合的质量, 共同决定团队效能的高低。动机性信息加工理论则进一步提出, 认知动机和社会动机共同决定了哪些信息被共享, 以及信息共享和整合的质量。认知动机决定信息加工的深度, 社会动机决定信息加工的方向, 两种动机共同决定决策质量。这一理论可以很好地整合谈判和创造力领域的研究结果, 并在团队效能领域得到很好的应用。动机性信息加工理论是对双过程模型和“团队作为信息加工者观点”的发展和整合, 并为决策质量的影响因素提供新的分类框架和研究思路。     

Shanahan on Symbolization

In his article ‘A New View of Language, Emotion and the Brain,’ Dan Shanahan claims that the post-war Cognitive Turn focused mainly on information processing and that little attention was paid to the dramatic role played by emotion in human cognition. One key argument in his defence of a more comprehensive view of human cognition rests upon the idea that the process of symbolization—a unique capacity only developed by humans—combines, right from the start, information processing and feelings. The author argues that any theory ignoring this fact would miss the whole point, just as mainstream cognitive science has done since Noam Chomsky published Syntactic Structures, exactly 50 years ago.