The Argument from Moral Experience

It is often said that our moral experience, broadly construed to include our ways of thinking and talking about morality, has a certain objective-seeming character to it, and that this supports a presumption in favor of objectivist theories (according to which morality is a realm of facts or truths) and against anti-objectivist theories like Mackie’s error theory (according to which it is not). In this paper, I argue that our experience of morality does not support objectivist moral theories in this way. I begin by arguing that our moral experience does not have the uniformly objective-seeming character it is typically claimed to have. I go on to argue that even if moral experience were to presuppose or display morality as a realm of fact, we would still need a reason for taking that to support theories according to which it is such a realm. I consider what I take to be the four most promising ways of attempting to supply such a reason: (A) inference to the best explanation, (B) epistemic conservatism, (C) the Principle of Credulity, and (D) the method of wide reflective equilibrium. In each case, I argue, the strategy in question does not support a presumption in favor of objectivist moral theories.

性别发展的生物学取向研究述评

当前解释性别发展的理论主要有三种取向：生物学取向、社会化取向、认知取向。近年来,生物学取向日益受到关注并得到认可和接受。解释性别发展的生物学取向研究主要分为两种视角,即进化心理学和进化发展心理学、跨物种比较等远端进化解释,以及行为遗传学研究、染色体异常研究、荷尔蒙研究、大脑结构和功能研究等近端解释。本文总结阐述了这些生物学因素对性别发展的具体影响,并指出了进化心理学研究、行为遗传学研究、荷尔蒙研究、大脑结构和功能的脑成像研究在研究内容、研究方法与技术方面存在的问题,并据此展望未来研究的前景。     

犯罪行为决策的理论与研究方法

犯罪行为是犯罪人决策的结果。犯罪行为决策研究旨在通过运用认知心理学的有关原理,说明犯罪行为实施之前的行为决策过程及影响因素,其成果能为国家制定刑事政策与犯罪预防政策等提供理论依据。犯罪行为决策的理论模型主要可分为犯罪理性模型、犯罪期望效用模型和犯罪前景理论模型。犯罪行为决策的研究方法主要采用心理物理法、过程追踪法、访谈法、投射测验法和犯罪统计法等。展望未来,应进一步探讨犯罪行为决策的理性与非理性问题,并加强对犯罪行为决策的验证性研究。     

西方理论心理学研究的新特点

理论心理学研究的复兴是近年来西方心理学发展的新特点。西方理论心理学研究的重点,并不是通过理论化的简单转向来克服心理学发展中的困难,或以总体的、一般的抽象术语重新发明元理论,而是力图在提高理论研究方式的科学化水平基础上,加强对具体的、中等水平的亚理论问题的整合性学术探讨。进一步寻求心理学理论研究走向繁荣的学科内在发展机制。     

The Journal of Analytical Psychology's Internet Discussion Forum

Jan Wiener 'Confidentiality and paradox: the location of ethical space'
Hester McFarland Solomon 'Origins of the ethical attitude'     

A developmental perspective on psychotherapy process, psychotherapists' expertise, and “Meaning-Making Conflict” within therapeutic relationships: A two-part series

Part I (in this issue)—A Dialectical-Constructivist View of Human Development, Psychotherapy, and the Dynamics of Meaning-Making Conflict Within Therapeutic Relationships— reviews a dialectical-constructivist model of human development and articulates, in the language of that model, how psychotherapy, in general, works. It describes and illustrates three generic processes, which contribute to the frequent successes of an extremely diverse range of psychotherapy theories and practices. This view of psychotherapy focuses on both the client's meaning-making processes and the therapist's meaning-making processes and how they contribute together to effective psychotherapy. Part I also offers a way of understanding what is going on when therapeutic progress is blocked by conflict between the client's and the therapist's meaning-making processes. Part II—Dialectical Thinking and Psychotherapeutic Expertise: Implications for Training Psychotherapists and Protecting Clients from Theoretical Abuse—explores those experiences in which the therapist's own exercise of his or her meaning-making structures, and maintenance of the integrity of his or her theories, has a limiting or destructive impact on the value of therapy to the client. It considers the concept of “theoretical abuse” by psychotherapists as a way of characterizing the most destructive of these experiences. This serves as a rhetorical device for introducing comparisons between these phenomena and the phenomena of sexual abuse by psychotherapists, in terms of dynamics, prevalence, and appropriate strategies for prevention. Part II uses work on the development of dialectical thinking in adulthood to conceptualize how different understandings of the nature of psychotherapists' expertise increase or decrease the likelihood and severity of “theoretical abuse”. Finally, it derives implications for training psychologists and other psychotherapy professionals.     

Intentional explanations and radical theories of education

In this paper I argue that Marxist studies of schools have overlooked the power of intentional explanations to explain schooling practices and policies. This oversight is at least in part due to many radical analyses failing to distinguish between explaining the acquisition and persistence of beliefs and determining the social consequences that follow from acting on beliefs. I further contend that radical researchers examining schooling practices must develop a more rigorous and refined conception of capitalist class interests.     

Two arguments against lying

Kant and Sidgwick are at opposite extremes on whether we may tell paternalistic lies. I trace the extremism to their views about ethical concepts. Sidgwick thinks fundamental ethical concepts must be precise. Common Sense morality says we may tell paternalistic lies to children but not to sane adults. Because the distinction between a child and an adult is imprecise, Sidgwick thinks this principle cannot be fundamental, and must be based on the (precise) principle of utility, which often mandates paternalistic lies to adults. Kant thinks that ethical concepts are ideals of reason, which do not fit the world precisely because the world is imperfect. We lie to children and the insane because they are irrational, but no one is perfectly rational. We must treat all persons with the respect due to rational agents, so the pressure of the theory is toward not lying to anyone. Decisions about where to draw the line must be made pragmatically and to some extent arbitrary. But fear of this is not a good reason to abandon ethical ideals for utilitarianism.