Rhetoric and “doing philosophy”

By drawing new distinctions labelled appeal and response to replace traditional rhetorical modes of written discourse, the essay sketches a new perspective about what philosophers are doing rhetorically in doing philosophy. To think of philosophers as simply engaged in argument is an oversimplification and a distortion of what philosophers do. Crucial to doing philosophy are four activities: (1) definition and redefinition of problems and issues that form both the focus of the canonical historical literature of philosophy and what goes on in contemporary philosophy as a discipline, (2) the development and use of formal languages and technical vocabularies to abbreviate and label complexity and to disambiguate and precise distinctions necessary to deal with problems and issues, (3) the development and exploration of argumentative appeals for acceptance or refutation of answers to questions raised by the philosophical problematic, and (4) the development and exploration of explanatory responses to questions raised by the problematic. In so far as these four activities are driven and sanctioned by the current, self-defining philosophical problematic, contemporary philosophy as a body of knowledge is historical, cumulative, and marked by progress, and the doing of philosophy is fundamentally the making of written appeals and responses about its problematic.     

Choice with delayed and probabilistic reinforcers: effects of variability, time between trials, and conditioned reinforcers.

In a discrete-trials procedure with pigeons, a response on a green key led to a 4-s delay (during which green houselights were lit) and then a reinforcer might or might not be delivered. A response on a red key led to a delay of adjustable duration (during which red houselights were lit) and then a certain reinforcer. The delay was adjusted so as to estimate an indifference point--a duration for which the two alternatives were equally preferred. Once the green key was chosen, a subject had to continue to respond on the green key until a reinforcer was delivered. Each response on the green key, plus the 4-s delay that followed every response, was called one "link" of the green-key schedule. Subjects showed much greater preference for the green key when the number of links before reinforcement was variable (averaging four) than when it was fixed (always exactly four). These findings are consistent with the view that probabilistic reinforcers are analogous to reinforcers delivered after variable delays. When successive links were separated by 4-s or 8-s "interlink intervals" with white houselights, preference for the probabilistic alternative decreased somewhat for 2 subjects but was unaffected for the other 2 subjects. When the interlink intervals had the same green houselights that were present during the 4-s delays, preference for the green key decreased substantially for all subjects. These results provided mixed support for the view that preference for a probabilistic reinforcer is inversely related to the duration of conditioned reinforcers that precede the delivery of food.     

Fixed-ratio pausing: Joint effects of past reinforcer magnitude and stimuli correlated with upcoming magnitude

Pigeons responded on fixed-ratio schedules ending in small or large reinforcers (grain presentations of different duration) interspersed within each session. In mixed-schedule conditions, the response key was lit with a single color throughout the session, and pausing was directly related to the past reinforcer (longer pauses after large reinforcers than after small ones). In multiple-schedule conditions, different colors accompanied the ratios ending in small and large reinforcers, and pausing was affected by the upcoming reinforcer as well as the past one. Pauses were shorter before large reinforcers than before small ones, but they continued to be longer after large reinforcers than after small ones. The influence of the past reinforcer was modulated by the magnitude of the upcoming reinforcer; in the presence of the stimulus before the small reinforcer, the effect of the past reinforcer was enhanced relative to its effect in the stimulus before the large reinforcer. These results show that pausing between ratios is jointly determined by two competing factors: past conditions of reinforcement and stimuli correlated with upcoming conditions.     

Constructing the exact significance level for a person fit statistic

This paper uses an extension of the network algorithm originally introduced by Mehta and Patel to construct exact tail probabilities for testing the general hypothesis that item responses are distributed according to the Rasch model. By assuming that item difficulties are known, the algorithm is applicable to the statistical tests either given the maximum likelihood ability estimate or conditioned on the total score. A simulation study indicates that the network algorithm is an efficient tool for computing the significance level of a person fit statistic based on test lengths of 30 items or less.     

影响频度记忆的几个因素

本研究通过两个实验探讨了刺激呈现频度、刺激的形式及其性质、加工深度、操作难度、意向性诸因素对频度记忆的影响,结果表明频度编码并不是一个独立、自动的加工系统,对其它识记过程有影响的因素同时也能改变被试的频度估计水平;意向的作用主要体现在当识记任务有一定难度且又缺乏有效的回忆线索时,能够在有限的范围内提高频度估计的水平;记忆痕迹的深度和广度对于频度信息的提取来说是两个彼此关联的线索。此外,本文还就频度记忆领域几个主要理论观点作了简要评述。     

记忆训练对改善少年、青年和老年人认知功能的作用

本工作采用“位置法”(method of loci)对24例少年、24例青年和22例老年被试进行了记忆训练研究。以毕生发展的观点比较认知训练对改善不同年龄人记忆的作用,进而探讨发展的认知功能储备能量的年龄差异和训练的迁移效应。结果表明认知干预措施可在一定程度上改善老年人的记忆,同时也显示了在发展的储能和对图形的迁移效应方面,老年人明显不如青、少年,而青年与少年则彼此相近。     

谈谈个人对智力落后儿童早期干预的看法

本文作者根据从事智力落后儿童的早期干预教学研究的实践经验对当今在我国开展早期干预的必要性以及早期干预的目的、设置的理由、内容、方式、对象、教师的条件、效果的评价以及开展的步骤等9个问题,提出了自己的看法。     

量词肯定句和否定句的理解

本研究试图探索人们对舍有“所有”、“每一个”、“有一些”等量词的肯定句、否定句和双重否定句的理解。要求成人被试尽快判断呈现在计算机屏幕上的句子和哪一幅图画的内容相符。结果表明,影响反应时的因素为(1)句子的表层结构和它的底层意义的一致程度;(2)句子的意义和从图画中得出的命题的一致程度;(3)句子中使用的量词。结果还表明,否定句的判断时间不一定全都比肯定句的长。     

个人化设计在临床研究中的应用——从个体角度研究个体差异

本文从有关研究证据的基础上,介绍了个人化设计的理论基础和实验设计,并在此基础上讨论了个人化设计在临床研究领域中的应用价值,总结出一种适合临床病人使用的研究程序。个人化设计允许对个体的个人价值进行分析,并能同时研究不同刺激信息的作用,在个体水平上分析个体差异。通过简化了的实验程序,个人化设计为解决临床研究中的问题提供了一种新的思维方式。文中还对相关研究法的局限进行了讨论。     

Aristotle and the tradition of rhetorical argumentation

The first part of this paper contends that argumentation is central and essential to Aristotle's Rhetoric, and recounts a number of arguments in support of that view, particularly the recognition that deliberative rhetoric or the rhetoric of counsel is the primary concern of Aristotle's work. The second part of the paper reviews the work that follows in this present volume to show that the other writers' views fit in perfectly with this thesis.