ON THE "USE" OF NEOPRAGMATISM

Abstract. The present article continues an earlier critique of Robbins's and Rorty's neopragmatism. Their skepticism about the traditional concept of correspondence and about the criteria for truth are both unjustified, and their own assertion of meaning as usefulness either presupposes a prior notion of linguistic reference or fails to qualify as a sufficient criterion for knowledge. The difficulties with neopragmatism have implications for two other areas of the religion/science discussion, postmodernism and empirical Theology. Postmodernism shares neopragmatism's mistakes regarding the philosophy of language and can be rejected without endangering one's empiricism, humanism, or naturalism. By contrast, the strengths of empirical Theology, and of religious empiricism in general, can be preserved without Robbins's proposed ban on metaphysics.     

BELIEF VS. COMMITMENT, VALIDITY VS. VALUE: A RESPONSE TO WARD GOODENOUGH

Abstract. This paper is on Ward Goodenough's recent article (27: 3), suggesting that his points can be clarified by reiterating the distinction between the realms of meaning and relevance. Religion's "truth" is in the form of its ualue; the "proof" which it requires is uindication; and the resulting "faith" must be understood as commitment.     

On the processing of arguments

This paper is concerned with the processing of informal arguments, that is, arguments involving probable truth. A model of informal argument processing is presented that is based upon Hample's (1977) expansion of Toulmin's (1958) model of argument structure. The model postulates that a claim activates an attitude, the two components forming a complex that in turn activates reasons. Furthermore, the model holds occurrence of the reason, or possibly the claim and the reason, activates values. Three experiments are described that provide support for the model.This research was supported by the Mellon Foundation and by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement of the Department of Education via an award for the Center for the Study of Learning to the Learning Research and Development Center. The contents of the paper are not necessarily the position of any of these organizations.     

Being unreasonable: Perelman and the problem of fallacies

Most work on fallacies continues to conceptualize fallacious reasoning as involving a breach of a formal or quasi-formal rule. Chaim Perelman's theory of argumentation provides a way to conceptualize fallacies in a completely different way. His approach depends on an understanding of standards of rationality as essentially connected with conceptions of universality. Such an approach allows one to get beyond some of the basic problems of fallacy theory, and turns informal logic toward substantive philosophical questions. I show this by reinterpreting three so-called fallacies - theargumentum ad baculum, equivocation and composition/division - in the light of Perelman's account.     

Self-Monitoring negative statements

We examined the effects of a self-monitoring program on reducing the frequency of negative statements of a student with mild mental retardation who was enrolled in a self-contained classroom at a middle school. A changing criterion design was used within a multiple baseline design across two classroom periods. Additionally, the frequency of positive statements was reported. The results showed a decrease in the number of negative statements, and an increase in the number of positive statements. Maintenance data collected up to 8 weeks after the program ended indicated that the student continued to emit positive rather than negative statements. The use of this procedure to decelerate undesirable behavior is discussed.     

STIMULUS (INSTRUCTIONAL) FADING DURING EXTINCTION OF SELF-INJURIOUS ESCAPE BEHAVIOR

Three individuals with developmental disabilities were exposed to a series of assessment conditions to identify the source of reinforcement for their self-injurious behavior. In each case, self-injury occurred most often in instructional (demand) situations containing a brief time-out from the task contingent on self-injury, indicating that the behavior was an escape response (i.e., maintained by negative reinforcement). Treatment was implemented in a multiple baseline across subjects design and consisted of extinction (prevention of escape) plus instructional fading (initial elimination of instructions followed by their gradual reintroduction). Results showed that the combined treatment produced immediate and large reductions in self-injury that were maintained as the frequency of instructions was increased across sessions to match the original baseline rate of presentation. Results of a component analysis conducted with 1 subject suggested that stimulus fading accelerated the behavior-reducing effects of extinction.     

Linking qualitative and quantitative methods in cross-cultural survey research: Techniques from cognitive science

Survey research with diverse cultural and ethnic minority groups is a complex and challenging endeavor that confronts the researcher with problems related to linguistic and conceptual equivalence and measurement as well as problems related to difficulties that respondents have with the sociocultural dimensions of the survey/interview process. One way to improve the quality of cross-cultural surveys and to insure that the findings are culturally relevant and accurate is to combine qualitative and quantitative methods. This paper proposes that certain qualitative techniques from cognitive science, specifically cognitive anthropology and cognitive psychology, are particularly well suited to being combined with survey research. These techniques provide information corresponding to the underlying thought processes of respondents and enable researchers to better understand how different cultural and ethnic groups construe the world. The information obtained can be used improve the formulation of survey questions, design and structure questionnaire formats to coincide with the way particular groups organize concepts, and help researchers understand difficulties respondents may have with the survey/interview process. In addition, the techniques produce data that are easily codifiable and more manageable than traditional qualitative techniques including participant observation and in-depth interviews.