Disagreement and Intellectual Scepticism

Several philosophers have recently argued that disagreement with others undermines or precludes epistemic justification for our opinions about controversial issues (e.g. political, religious, and philosophical issues). This amounts to a fascinating and disturbing kind of intellectual scepticism. A crucial piece of the sceptical argument, however, is that our opponents on such topics are epistemic peers. In this paper, I examine the reasons for why we might think that our opponents really are such peers, and I argue that those reasons are either (a) too weak or (b) too strong, implying absurd conclusions. Thus, there is not a compelling case for disagreement-based intellectual scepticism.     

Peer Disagreement and Two Principles of Rational Belief

This paper presents a new solution to the problem of peer disagreement that distinguishes two principles of rational belief, here called probability and autonomy. When we discover that we disagree with peers, there is one sense in which we rationally ought to suspend belief, and another in which we rationally ought to retain our original belief. In the first sense, we aim to believe what is most probably true according to our total evidence, including testimony from peers and authorities. In the second, we aim to base our beliefs only on objective evidence and argumentation, even if that lowers the probability of their being true. The first principle of rational belief tends to serve the short-term epistemic interests of individuals, while the second tends to serve the long-term epistemic interests of both individuals and groups. The best way to reconcile these principles in cases of peer disagreement is to associate them with two corresponding species of belief, here called perception and opinion.     

Feedback on health status and peer popularity influences social risk decision-making processes in adolescents and young adults

Cognitive and dual-processes models, involving cognitive and socio-emotional components, for adolescents’ risky behaviour have been proposed. This study tested their predictions by manipulating the presence or absence of feedback about gains and losses in health and peer popularity in a decision-making task with peers. Risky (e.g., taking or refusing a drug) and ambiguous decisions (e.g., eating hamburger or hotdog) were examined in 256 adolescents (aged 13–14; 15–16; 17–18) and young adults (aged 19–20). Participants made more risky choices and required less decision time when receiving feedback about the negative consequences on health and positive consequences on peer popularity. Decision times were comparatively larger for risky than for safe options in late adolescence and young adulthood. Results supported the dual-processes model showing that, though late cognitive changes were observed that could eventually lead to the selection of safe options, feedback gains in peer popularity outweighed unhealthy consequences leading to risky decisions.     

苔花盛开如牡丹？农村留守儿童负性生活事件与心理健康的关系

以1368名农村留守儿童为被试,通过问卷调查探讨农村留守儿童的负性生活事件与心理健康的关系,并检验心理韧性、同伴依恋的链式中介作用。结果发现：（1）农村留守儿童负性生活事件与其心理健康呈负相关关系,心理健康在性别、民族、年级和父母外出状况上差异显著;（2）农村留守儿童负性生活事件不仅能直接预测其心理健康,而且还通过同伴依恋、心理韧性发挥链式中介作用。     

同伴侵害与青少年抑郁:社会退缩的中介作用与师生关系的调节作用

研究表明同伴侵害是青少年抑郁的重要风险因素,然而其中介机制和调节机制仍有待进一步探究。本研究采用问卷法对834名青少年进行调查,考察了社会退缩在同伴侵害与青少年抑郁关系中的中介作用,以及师生关系在这一关系中的调节作用。结果发现：（1）社会退缩显著中介同伴侵害与青少年抑郁的关系;（2）师生关系显著调节中介路径“同伴侵害→社会退缩→青少年抑郁”,具体而言,相较于高水平师生关系的青少年群体而言,同伴侵害通过社会退缩影响抑郁的中介效应在低水平师生关系的青少年群体中更高。     

The Academic Productivist Regime: Affective Dynamics in the Moral-Political Economy of Publishing

With proliferating neoliberal modes of science governance, publishing has become more important. Recent studies point to researchers’ feeling of exhaustion and anxiety as responses to academic performance regimes. Yet how affects underpin publishing in scientific cultures and communities, and what this implies for STS scholarship has remained underexplored. Drawing on insights from ethnographic fieldwork and the cultural studies of affect, this article traces the role of emotions, including hope, contempt, and excitement for understanding the new academic productivist regime at a Czech research institution. While junior researchers’ orientations are fostered through rendering publications objects of hope, a moral-political economy intersects with geopolitical history and values of research organization to shape the publication practices of many senior scientists. An affective labor of combat and equanimity is necessary for managing these orientations that are corporeally energized by a dynamic of thrill. This four-pronged approach makes palpable how emotions render scientists’ bodies hopeful, combative and excited while intersecting with ideals of meritocratic research organization and assessment. Frustration and failure are never entirely absent but serve as an immanent driving force for a publishing culture that thrives on adrenaline, combativeness, and hope. This makes it difficult to leverage failures towards criticism of the academic productivist regime—both for the scientists differently affected within the institution and STS researchers. Different engagements with this regime require a more capacious accounting for the pleasure and thrill generated by the uncertainty of publication outcome as well as by unacknowledged practices of care.     

学校归属感与青少年手机依赖的关系:学习焦虑的中介效应与同伴关系的调节效应

为探讨学校归属感对青少年手机依赖的影响及其作用机制,基于阶段环境匹配理论,本研究采用问卷法对山东省青岛市65所中学3355名高二年级学生进行调查。结果表明:(1)在控制了性别和上网时间后,学校归属感对青少年手机依赖具有显著的负向预测作用;(2)学习焦虑在学校归属感与青少年手机依赖之间起部分中介作用;(3)学校归属感对青少年手机依赖的直接作用、学习焦虑的中介作用均受到同伴关系的调节,且相对于同伴关系水平低的个体,学校归属感对手机依赖、学校归属感对学习焦虑以及学习焦虑对手机依赖的作用都在同伴关系水平高的个体中更强。本研究有利于揭示学校归属感是如何影响青少年手机依赖的,以及在何种条件下对青少年手机依赖的影响更强/更弱,对移动互联网时代预防青少年手机依赖有一定启示意义。     

集体仪式促进群体情绪感染的机制

近年来, 诸多学者将研究视角投向群体情绪感染, 即群体内部成员间的情绪感染交互过程。群体情绪感染不仅包括个体间的直接情绪感染, 而且受到群体认同、共同行为以及集体规则等多方面因素的影响。基于集体仪式的过程框架, 分析集体仪式的三要素即同步动作、共享注意和共享意义与群体情绪感染的关系, 能更清楚阐述群体情绪感染的发生与增强过程：集体仪式通过自我定型和自我锚定增强群体认同, 在认同基础上的身份融合促进个体关注群体身份, 导致个体的自我表征发生转化, 社会自我的突出使其更容易接受群体的观点和情感表达, 最终增强了群体情绪感染。未来研究应进一步考察群体情绪感染的影响因素并丰富其测量方法。