The just world hypothesis as an argumentative resource in debates about unemployment benefits

The concept of the “just world” is established as a key explanation for how people make sense of inequality so that those deemed to score high in belief in a just world are more likely to hold prejudicial beliefs and to blame people in poverty for their situations. However, this is an inadequate explanation for such complicated and controversial issues. To better understand talk about the just world and the controversial issue of the distribution of unemployment benefits (an issue of inequality), a discursive psychological approach to the just world is used. Therefore, a discourse analysis focusses on 2 feature length British televised discussions about benefit claimants called “The Big Benefit Row: Live” (Channel 5 3/2/2014) and “Benefits Britain: the Debate” (Channel 4 17/2/2014). The analysis demonstrates that people draw on both just and unjust world arguments simultaneously and also topicalise what counts as just so as to support their positions on unemployment benefits, rather than in the consistent way that just world theory would predict. It is therefore argued that the just world should be recast as a cultural value that facilitates arguments about benefits, rather than an internally held belief.     

From wealth to well-being? Money matters,but less than people think

While numerous studies have documented the modest (though reliable) link between household income and well-being, we examined the accuracy of laypeople's intuitions about this relationship by asking people from across the income spectrum to report their own happiness and to predict the happiness of others (Study 1) and themselves (Study 2) at different income levels. Data from two national surveys revealed that while laypeople's predictions were relatively accurate at higher levels of income, they greatly overestimated the impact of income on life satisfaction at lower income levels, expecting low household income to be coupled with very low life satisfaction. Thus, people may work hard to maintain or increase their income in part because they overestimate the hedonic costs of earning low levels of income.     

弘扬孟子仁政思想精华促进建设和谐小康社会

孟子继承发挥孔子仁学德治思想,提出以民为本的仁政学说,经剔除其封建糟粕,具超时代超阶级的积极意义.孟子仁政说中保民而王、亲亲仁民、与民同乐及制民之产以安民富民的思想,其积极意义、历史贡献须充分肯定,它对我们今天加强党风政风建设,促进加强社会主义政治文明精神文明建设,促进全面建设和谐小康社会,有现实意义,须大力弘扬.     

Thinking about the Needy, Justice, and International Organizations

This article has three main parts, Section 2 considers the nature and extent to which individuals who are well-off have a moral obligation to aid the worlds needy. Drawing on a pluralistic approach to morality, which includes consequentialist, virtue-based, and deontological elements, it is contended that most who are well-off should do much more than they do to aid the needy, and that they are open to serious moral criticism if they simply ignore the needy. Part one also focuses on the United States, and illustrates both how incredibly wealthy the U.S. is and some of the spending habits of its citizens; however, its considerations apply to the well-off generally. Section 3 considers whether justice provides reasons for helping the needy. Noting that justice in an extremely complex notion, it discusses numerous considerations relevant to justices scope and implications, including an extended Rawlsian conception of justice, an absolute conception, a comparative conception, the distinction between natural and social justice, and various elements of common-sense morality. Section 2 also distinguishes between agent-relative justice-based reasons, which are relevant to whether we act justly, and agent-neutral justice-based reasons, which are relevant to whether we have reasons of justicefor acting. Correspondingly, it argues that even if one can ignore the needy without acting unjustly, as philosophers like Robert Nozick and Jan Narveson contend, there may be powerful reasons of justicefor addressing their plight. Section 4 briefly address the responsibilities of international organizations like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Trade Organization (WTO). Drawing on Section 2, it is suggested that in addition to standard reasons to act justlytowards needy members of the worlds community, there will be reasons of justicefor such organizations to aid the needy in both present, and future, generations. The article concludes by contending that the well-off in countries like the U.S. have reason to view international organizations like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO as their agents, and to seek to insure that they alleviate misfortunes amongst the worlds needy.     

Evolution of the wealth gap in child development and mediating pathways: Evidence from a longitudinal study in Bogota,Colombia

Large gaps in cognition and language on the Bayley‐III between the top and bottom household wealth quartiles in 1,330 children aged 6–42 months in a representative sample of low‐ and middle‐income families in Bogota were previously shown. Maternal education and the home environment mediated these wealth effects, whereas height‐for‐age mediated a small amount of the language deficit only. At ages 6–8 years, we relocated 72% of the children and assessed their IQ on the WISC‐V, school achievement, and behavior to investigate the evolution of the wealth gaps and potential mediators. The wealth gap in IQ at 6–8 years was significantly larger than that in a factor combining Bayley‐III language and cognition at 6–42 months; whereas the gap in achievement was larger but not significantly. Moreover, in cross‐sectional analysis, the IQ gap increased from 6 to 8 years reaching over 1 SD. In contrast, the gap in behavior was not significant in either childhood stage. Parental education and early home environment remained major mediators of the wealth gap in IQ and achievement at 6–8 years; later home environment and attending private education also had an effect; and early height‐for‐age was no longer significant. The home environment partly mediated the effect of parental education on wealth. All mediators combined explained most of the variance in the wealth gap; the remaining gaps being not significant. Results highlight the importance of the early home environment and suggest that interventions focusing on that should have long‐term benefits. Also, continued intervention through to 8 years may be desirable. A video abstract of this article can be viewed at https://youtu.be/_U53iXNww3I .     

8~15岁儿童贫富观的发展特点及其与成人的比较

儿童贫富观是其价值观的重要体现,贫富观形成是儿童社会化进程中的重要方面,然而目前国内尚缺乏中国儿童贫富观的系统研究。本研究以8~9岁、11~12岁、14~15岁以及成人(主要为大学生,年龄为20.7±1.32岁)为研究对象(N=186),结合开放性问题和结构化问卷,考察他们对于贫富的感知、公平判断、归因以及对于缓解贫困对策的认识。结果发现:控制社会经济地位之后,(1)8~9岁儿童对贫富的认识局限于表面特征,11~12岁更关注心理特征,而成人提及系统特征的比例更高;(2)8~9岁儿童较其他年龄组更倾向于对贫富做不公平的判断;(3)在贫富的归因和缓解贫困的对策上,儿童和成人都认可个人因素的重要性,但成人更多关注国家政策和社会的影响,并且认为消除贫困是不可能的。中国儿童贫富观的发展与西方已有研究相比,既有共性也有文化特异性。     

Too Few Tensions, But Not Enough Utopia? Comments on Equality: From Theory to Action

This welcomes Equality: From Theory to Action as an important contribution both to linking egalitarian political philosophy to public policy and as a book which helps communicate a wealth of philosophical ideas in an accessible way to a wide public. On the critical side, it argues that the authors understate some tensions between egalitarianism and pluralism, and that the book’s discussion of egalitarian economic institutions is quite narrow in scope. As a complement and development of this latter discussion, the paper discusses some policy proposals to address inequality of wealth.     

Level and Inequality of Happiness in Nations: Does Greater Happiness of a Greater Number Imply Greater Inequality in Happiness?

Utilitarians and egalitarians have different priorities. Utilitarians prioritize the greatest level of happiness in society and are prepared to accept inequality, while egalitarians prioritize the smallest differences and are willing to accept a loss of happiness for this purpose. In theory these moral tenets conflict, but do they really clash in practice? This question is answered in two steps. First I consider the relation between level and inequality of happiness in nations; level of happiness is measured using average responses to a survey question on life satisfaction and inequality is measured with the standard deviation. There appears to be a strong negative correlation; in nations where average happiness is high, the standard deviation tends to be low. This indicates harmony instead of tension. Secondly I consider the institutional factors that are likely to affect happiness. It appears that level and equality of happiness depend largely on the same institutional context, which is another indication for harmony. We may conclude that the discussion between utilitarians and egalitarians is of little practical importance. This conclusion implies that increasing income inequality can go together with decreasing inequality in happiness and this conclusion provides moral support for Governments developing modern market economics     

‘How the other half lives’?: Taking a critical approach to the social psychology of economic inequality and extreme wealth

The negative impact of economic inequality on social issues and wellbeing is of importance to social psychology that historically has an interest in social justice. Social Identity Theory is explored as an approach that acknowledges the wider context of social issues. The use of experiments encounters challenges in categorizing wealth and how individuals account for extreme wealth. Mainstream research agendas in psychology are not neutral and draw upon current ideology (such as neoliberalism) that can often maintain inequality. These difficulties are addressed by Critical Social Psychology driven by a social justice agenda that challenges the acceptance of neoliberal values. The application of Critical Social Psychology to wealth inequality is demonstrated with research using UK media data. Critical feminist psychology is discussed to explore the role of class and how to challenge the stigmatization of working-class people. Finally, this paper outlines how Discursive Psychology addresses how extreme wealth and the practices of the super-rich are warranted. A discursive approach questions the acceptance of wealth inequality as an everyday assumption and demonstrates how dominant discourse draws upon individualism. Furthermore, Discursive Psychology has examined how accountability for problematic practices, such as tax avoidance that maintain inequality, are managed in media broadcasts.