Evidentialism and pragmatic constraints on outright belief

Evidentialism is the view that facts about whether or not an agent is justified in having a particular belief are entirely determined by facts about the agent’s evidence; the agent’s practical needs and interests are irrelevant. I examine an array of arguments against evidentialism (by Jeremy Fantl, Matthew McGrath, David Owens, and others), and demonstrate how their force is affected when we take into account the relation between degrees of belief and outright belief. Once we are sensitive to one of the factors that secure thresholds for outright believing (namely, outright believing that p in a given circumstance requires, at the minimum, that one’s degree of belief that p is high enough for one to be willing to act as if p in the circumstances), we see how pragmatic considerations can be relevant to facts about whether or not an agent is justified in believing that p—but largely as a consequence of the pragmatic constraints on outright believing.

Comments on Wayne Martin, <Emphasis Type="Italic">Theories of Judgment</Emphasis>

Martin offers an intriguing account of nineteenth century challenges to the traditional theory of judgment as a synthesis of subject and predicate (the synthesis theory)—criticisms motivated largely by the problem posed by existential judgments, which need not have two terms at all. Such judgments led to a theory of “thetic” judgments, whose essential feature is to “posit” something, rather than to combine terms (as in synthetic judgment). I argue, however, that Kant’s official definition of judgment already implicitly recognizes the importance of positing, and that its (otherwise confusing) abstract generality actually affords Kant’s own logic an adequate way to accommodate existential judgments within the traditional synthesis theory. Preservation of a synthetic account of judgment is also found to be independently important for Kant’s larger aims in the theory of cognition.

The social behavior and reputation of the attributionally complex

Attributional complexity (AC, [Fletcher, G. J. O., Danilovics, P., Fernandez, G., Peterson, D., & Reeder, G. D. (1986). Attributional complexity: An individual differences measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 875–884]) is a construct designed to describe individual differences in the motivation and preference for complex attributions for behavior. Scores on the Attributional Complexity Scale (ACS) have been found to be related to a lesser propensity to error and greater accuracy in social judgment. However, little is known concerning how people who score higher on this scale (the attributionally complex) actually behave or are viewed by others. Participants (n = 178) completed the ACS, their behavior as videotaped during a social interaction was rated by four observers, and they were described by two acquaintances along numerous personality characteristics. Behavior of individuals higher in AC was directly observed to be relatively open, positive, expressive, and socially skilled. Although AC was unrelated to academic achievement or SAT scores, those higher in AC tended to be described by peers as having social wisdom, thoughtfulness, empathy, and openness. The behaviors and personality characteristics associated with AC likely contribute to good social judgment.     

Japanese Adults’ Sex Role Attitudes and Judgment Criteria Concerning Gender Equality: The Diversity of Gender Egalitarianism

This study investigated how societal conditions have influenced Japanese gender egalitarianism by analyzing sex and age group differences in attitudes towards sex roles and “gender equality judgment criteria,” the theoretical framework used to capture the diversity of gender egalitarianism. Questionnaire surveys were mailed to 1,000 randomly sampled Japanese adults in their 30s to 60s (501 valid responses). The results show that the most egalitarian sex role attitudes and greatest consideration given to gender equality judgment criteria were seen in women and in the 40s age group. This age group difference could be attributed to societal conditions during adolescence and young adulthood, including the questioning of the homemaker role during the women’s movement in Japan and the passage of laws concerning equal employment opportunities for both sexes in 1985. This article is based on the doctoral dissertation of the first author with some amendments and revisions. A part of this article was presented at the 43rd Annual Convention of the Japanese Society for Social Psychology.     

Can religious arguments persuade?

In his famous essay “The Ethics of Belief,” William K. Clifford claimed “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.” (Clifford’s essay was originally published in Contemporary Review in 1877; it is presently in print in Madigan (1999)). One might claim that a corollary to Clifford’s Law is that it is wrong, always, everywhere, and for anyone, to withhold belief when faced with sufficient evidence. Seeming to operate on this principle, many religious philosophers—from St. Anselm to Alvin Plantinga—have claimed that non-believers are psychologically or cognitively deficient if they refuse to believe in the existence of God, when presented with evidence for His existence in the form of relevant experience or religious arguments that are prima facie unassailable. Similarly, many atheists fail to see how believers can confront the problem of evil and still assert their belief in a benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient Creator. In this paper, I propose to explain why religious arguments so often fail to persuade (I take the term ‘religious argument’ to include arguments whose conclusions are either assertions or denials of religious claims). In doing so, I first offer an account of persuasion and then apply it to religious arguments. I go on to argue that at least some religious arguments commit a form of question-begging, which I call “begging the doxastic question.”~An argument begs the doxastic question, on my account, when a subject would find the argument persuasive only if she antecedently believes the argument’s conclusion. This form of question begging is not, strictly speaking, a case of circularity and thus, is not a fallacy; rather, it would explain why one coming to the argument would fail to be persuaded by it unless he already accepted its conclusion. This has the effect, when applied to religious argumentation, that religious arguments are rarely persuasive, which raises the further question: what good are religious arguments? I end by suggesting some non-persuasive functions of religious argument. Finally, I suggest that a full understanding of religious argumentation should give evidentialists pause, for religious beliefs look less like belief states that are sensitive to evidentiary states and more like framework principles or fundamental commitments.     

大众印象中诸葛亮人格特征的心理传记学研究

本研究采用人格形容词评定法对诸葛亮的人格进行了定量研究。因素分析结果表明,诸葛亮在大众印象中主要表现出"忠义"、"沉稳"、"严谨"、"贤明"和"守信"五大人格特征,并通过对该评定结果与收集到的其他资料进行相互印证,从而全面描绘诸葛亮在大众印象中的人格特征。     

注意和非注意条件下的整体和局部性质加工

以往关于整体和局部知觉的研究通常要求被试直接对出现在复合刺激整体或局部水平上的靶目标做反应,因此复合刺激与任务相关并被注意。该研究通过测量复合字母的整体和局部性质对随后出现的探测刺激的启动效应来研究在非注意条件下整体和局部性质加工的差异。实验一发现复合刺激的整体和局部性质对探测刺激产生负启动效应,但二者没有显著差异。实验二缩短了启动刺激与探测刺激之间的时间间隔,复合刺激的整体和局部性质对探测刺激都不再产生启动效应。在实验一、二中,当要求被试直接对复合刺激做反应时,其分辨局部性质的错误率都比分辨整体性质的错误率高。根据这些结果,讨论了在注意和非注意下的整体和局部性质加工的差异。     

老年人错误记忆的情绪效价和时间效应

基于信号检测论的框架, 考察不同的情绪效价以及时间间隔如何交互影响老年人在图片再认任务中的辨别力(d′)和判断标准(β), 进而影响其错误记忆。以21名老年人(女性14名)为被试, 平均年龄67.17 ± 5.03岁。根据中国老年人对国际情绪图片库(International Affective Picture System, IAPS)中图片评定的情绪参数, 选出积极、消极和中性图片各60张作为学习材料。另选积极、消极和中性图片各30张作为每次再认测验的干扰材料, 并且两次再认测验的干扰材料不同。短时间隔条件让老年人在图片记忆编码半个小时后完成对图片的再认测验; 长时间隔条件则为在三周后完成对图片的再认测验。结果发现: 1)在短时间隔条件下, β和d′共同影响虚报率; 而在长时间隔条件下, 只有β影响虚报率, d′不影响虚报率; 2)无论是在短时还是长时间隔条件下, 积极图片与消极图片的判别力d′都没有显著差别; 3)在短时间隔条件下, 老年人对消极图片的β更低、虚报率更高; 在长时间隔条件下, 老年人对积极图片的β更低、虚报率更高。研究结果表明: 老年人的错误记忆受判别力d′和判断标准β的影响。情绪效价通过作用于老年人的反应倾向(判断标准β)、而非记忆质量(判别力d′)来影响其错误记忆。时间间隔可以调节情绪效价对老年人判断标准β和错误记忆的作用, 使之随时间发生反转。老年人的“积极效应”在错误记忆中可能表现为随着时间的流逝, 老年人更愿意将积极信息报告为经历或学习过的信息。     

面部表情的跨文化表达与识别研究述评

近年来面部表情的跨文化研究显示出更多的跨文化一致性和差异性证据。自发面部表情的表达和识别、组内优势效应以及面部表情信息的上下不对称性已成为该领域的研究热点。方言理论、中国民间模型和EMPATH模型从三种不同的角度对面部表情跨文化研究的结果进行了理论解释。而表达规则和解码规则以及语言效应是面部表情跨文化表达与识别的重要影响因素。今后, 面部表情跨文化的表达和识别研究应更加关注面部表情特征信息和影响因素这两个方面。     

心境对未来事件发生概率判断的影响

本研究采用短影片人为诱发心境的方法,用正性和负性两种情绪事件作为刺激材料,在控制人格变量的前提下,探讨了大学生在不同心境下对未来事件发生概率的判断中是否存在心境一致性效应。结果表明：（1）愉悦心境会增加做出积极判断的倾向,悲伤心境会增加做出消极判断的倾向;（2）无论是在愉悦心境还是在悲伤心境中,被试在对未来事件发生概率的判断上不存在性别差异。结果支持心境对未来事件发生概率判断有所影响,即诱发的心境与未来事件的效价存在一致性效应。