What Hope Is There: The Enthrallment of Empire Stories

In this article, I argue that many U.S. citizens are held captive by expansionist narratives and ideologies. Our enthrallment is explained, in part, by shared weak dissociation, rationalization, moralization, and denial. Theologically, I understand the ongoing presence of these narratives and ideologies in U.S. society as a manifestation of idolatry and a refusal to mourn. Furthermore, I argue that expansionist narratives signify the presence of fate and the distortion of hope, in particular, Christian hope.     

Why did this happen to me? Religious believers’ and non-believers’ teleological reasoning about life events

People often believe that significant life events happen for a reason. In three studies, we examined evidence for the view that teleological beliefs reflect a general cognitive bias to view the world in terms of agency, purpose, and design. Consistent with this hypothesis, we found that individual differences in mentalizing ability predicted both the tendency to believe in fate (Study 1) and to infer purposeful causes of one’s own life events (Study 2). In addition, people’s perception of purpose in life events was correlated with their teleological beliefs about nature, but this relationship was driven primarily by individuals’ explicit religious and paranormal beliefs (Study 3). Across all three studies, we found that while people who believe in God hold stronger teleological beliefs than those who do not, there is nonetheless evidence of teleological beliefs among non-believers, confirming that the perception of purpose in life events does not rely on theistic belief. These findings suggest that the tendency to perceive design and purpose in life events—while moderated by theistic belief—is not solely a consequence of culturally transmitted religious ideas. Rather, this teleological bias has its roots in certain more general social propensities.     

《性自命出》性情论辨析——兼论其学派归属问题

《性自命出》作为儒学文献虽为诸多学者认同,然而亦有将之归结为与道家或法家思想更有相通之处者。依笔者之浅见,否认《性自命出》的儒家学派性质多出于对其中性、情两个重要范畴的误解。本文拟从深入辨析《性自命出》的性情论为基点,一方面纵向探索《性自命出》与孔子的学术关联,另一方面横向剖析它与道家、法家的思想分歧,旨在说明,就《性自命出》不离孔门之宗而又异于道、法之旨而言,它当属于儒家文献而无疑。     

Experimental philosophy of actual and counterfactual free will intuitions

Five experiments suggested that everyday free will and moral responsibility judgments about some hypothetical thought examples differed from free will and moral responsibility judgments about the actual world. Experiment 1 (N = 106) showed that free will intuitions about the actual world measured by the FAD-Plus poorly predicted free will intuitions about a hypothetical person performing a determined action (r = .13). Experiments 2–5 replicated this result and found the relations between actual free will judgments and free will judgments about hypothetical determined or fated actions (rs = .22–.35) were much smaller than the differences between them (η_p² = .2–.55). These results put some pressure on theoretical accounts of everyday intuitions about freedom and moral responsibility.