The Barbour – Smith – Gilkey Paradox: Historical Relativity in Natural Science and Historical Religion

This paper is about the relation of historical relativity and religious certainty. To live in history and to live with historical relativity is to admit that we are subject to the limitations of creaturehood: we know right and wrong, truth and falsity, relative to our own time and place, history and culture, but we do not know any truth or right that is non-relative to time and place. The differences between historical and naturalistic discourses of explanation are radical, and usually overlooked by scientists.     

决策的三参照点理论:从原理到应用

三参照点理论(Tri-Reference Point Theory,Wang,2008a; Wang& Johnson,2012)以底线、现状和目标为参照点,将决策结果空间划分为失败、损失、获益和成功4个功能区域.根据3个参照点的心理权重的排序:底线＞目标＞现状,该模型继而推导出跨越不同区域的以现状为分界的双S-型的价值函数,以及据此产生的对于跨越不同参照点的预期结果的偏好转换、和损失-获益及失败-成功的两种不对称性.总之,风险决策的基本任务在于,在使得达到目标的可能性最大化的同时使底线不保的可能性最小化.三参照点理论将统计学和金融学中的均值与方差(均差)分析与行为决策研究中的参照点效应有机地结合在一起;在面对不同的风险选项时,通过分析各个预期结果的均差分布与3个参照点之间的关系作出适应性的决策.本文介绍了三参照点理论的基本推论、运行原则、实证检验、以及它与期望效用理论和前景理论相比较的异同之处.同时我们也探讨了三参照点理论对实践中管理决策的指导意义和多重启示.     

An eye‐tracking study on information processing in risky decisions: Evidence for compensatory strategies based on automatic processes

Many everyday decisions have to be made under risk and can be interpreted as choices between gambles with different outcomes that are realized with specific probabilities. The underlying cognitive processes were investigated by testing six sets of hypotheses concerning choices, decision times, and information search derived from cumulative prospect theory, decision field theory, priority heuristic and parallel constraint satisfaction models. Our participants completed 40 decision tasks of two gambles with two non‐negative outcomes each. Information search was recorded using eye‐tracking technology. Results for choices, decision time, the amount of information searched for, fixation durations, the direction of the information search, and the distribution of fixations conflict with the prediction of the non‐compensatory priority heuristic and indicate that individuals use compensatory strategies. Choice proportions are well in line with the predictions of cumulative prospect theory. Process measures indicate that individuals thereby do not rely on deliberate calculations of weighted sums. Information integration processes seem to be better explained by models that partially rely on automatic processes such as decision field theory or parallel constraint satisfaction models. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

THE VARIETY OF PANENTHEISMS

Abstract. In this article I review the efforts of eighteen scientists and theologians, recorded in this book, to describe the relation of God to the universe during a conference sponsored by the John Templeton Foundation at Windsor Castle in 2001. Theologians from several branches of Christian faith articulate their understanding of panentheism, revealing a considerable diversity. I deal with each author in relation to six issues: the way God acts, how God's intimate relation to the world is to be described, the relation of God to spacetime, whether God is dependent upon the world, what type of language is used, and the problem of dipolar panentheism. I identify significant differences between these authors, suggest where fruitful dialogue is possible, and distinguish between intelligibility and plausibility in comparing dipolar panentheism with other types.     

The Potential of Anamnestic Comparative Self-Assessment (ACSA) to Reduce Bias in the Measurement of Subjective Well-Being

Background: The conventional question (CQ) on subjective well-being (SWB) is e.g. “How is life?”, with ratings between e.g. ‘Best’ and ‘Worst possible’. Disadvantages may be casualness of responses and biases of proximate, peer or cultural relativity. Alternatively, with Anamnestic Comparative Self-Assessment (ACSA), the scale anchors are the respondents’ self-defined memories of their best and worst periods in life. Thus ACSA uses life review and experiential scale anchors. Objective: To compare the validity, sensitivity and responsiveness of the CQ and ACSA. Method: ACSA and the CQ were administered in parallel to 2584 university-hospital patients suffering from a wide range of psychiatric and somatic diseases. Results: ACSA and CQ did not measure the same construct (r = 0.50). CQ ratings were almost normally distributed, whereas ACSA ratings were overall lower, and clearly positively skewed, suggesting greater sensitivity to the respondents’ diseased state. Contrary to CQ, ACSA ratings of critically ill patients with end-stage liver disease were very low. After life-saving liver transplantation, ACSA ratings increased significantly more than CQ ratings, suggesting better responsiveness of ACSA to objective change. Trait-like socio-demographic variables such as sex, age, and marital status influenced CQ, but not ACSA ratings. Conclusion: In between-subject studies, depending on one’s study objectives, ACSA should be considered as a complement or an alternative to conventional SWB instruments. The CQ is probably preferable when socio-demographic variables are study endpoints. In longitudinal or intervention studies and for intercultural comparisons, ACSA, which reduces the need for correction of several biases or confounders, seems more useful.     

Do people make decisions under risk based on ignorance? An empirical test of the priority heuristic against cumulative prospect theory

Brandstätter, Gigerenzer, and Hertwig [Brandstätter, E., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2006). The Priority Heuristic: Making choices without trade-offs. Psychological Review, 113(2), 409–432] put forward the priority heuristic (PH) as a fast and frugal heuristic for decisions under risk. According to the PH, individuals do not make trade-offs between gains and probabilities, as proposed by expected utility models such as cumulative prospect theory (CPT), but use information in a non-compensatory manner and ignore information. We conducted three studies to test the PH empirically by analyzing individual choice patterns, decision times and information search parameters in diagnostic decision tasks. Results on all three dependent variables conflict with the predictions of the PH and can be better explained by the CPT. The predictive accuracy of the PH was high for decision tasks in which the predictions align with the predictions of the CPT but very low for decision tasks in which this was not the case. The findings indicate that earlier results supporting the PH might have been caused by the selection of decision tasks that were not diagnostic for the PH as compared to CPT.     

Axiomatizing Relativistic Dynamics without Conservation Postulates

A part of relativistic dynamics is axiomatized by simple and purely geometrical axioms formulated within first-order logic. A geometrical proof of the formula connecting relativistic and rest masses of bodies is presented, leading up to a geometric explanation of Einstein’s famous E = mc ². The connection of our geometrical axioms and the usual axioms on the conservation of mass, momentum and four-momentum is also investigated.     

心肌保护基因治疗进展及展望

心肌保护基因治疗的研究目前仍停留在动物实验阶段。本文从哲学的角度论述了心肌保护基因治疗研究的进展与优点,以及存在的安全性、局限性与伦理学方面的问题,并就目前其它领域基因治疗的进展对其作了进一步的展望。     

社会偏好中的框架效应

社会偏好中的框架效应是指, 个体在决策中受到选择方案框架形式的影响而表现出合作、互惠及利他行为及倾向改变的现象, 是框架效应在社会偏好领域的运用。预期理论、错误知觉说、心理动力模型、情绪维护理论以及解释水平理论分别从价值函数、知觉偏差、内部心理动力、情绪及认知表征角度解释了社会偏好中的框架效应, 心理距离、价值取向、人格特质和文化等因素对社会偏好中的框架效应具有重要影响。未来的研究需要从社会偏好中的框架效应的心理机制与神经机制、研究范式及外部效度改进等方面作进一步探讨。     

经验决策：概念、研究和展望

传统风险决策研究范式中, 决策信息是事先限定的, 即在决策之前呈现各个决策选项的概率和收益, 被试基于这些信息进行决策。已有研究表明, 在传统风险决策任务中人们会高估小概率事件(rare event)。然而最近出现的一种基于不完整信息的决策形式, 即经验决策却对这一发现提出了挑战。研究发现, 人们在进行经验决策时会表现出对小概率事件的低估, 经验决策和传统决策形式之间存在差异。本文主要介绍经验决策的概念及其研究, 并从学习和不确定程度等角度对两种决策形式进行再认识, 以进一步理解经验决策并提出展望。