The existence of free will has been both an enduring presumption of Western culture and a subject for debate across disciplines for millennia. However, little empirical evidence exists to support the almost unquestioned assumption that, in general, Westerners endorse the existence of free will. The few studies that measure belief in free will have methodological problems that likely resulted in underestimating the true extent of belief. Recently, Rakos et al. (Behavior and Social Issues 17:20–39, 2008 ) found a stronger endorsement (...) of free will when demand characteristics were eliminated. The current study builds on this work by sampling incarcerated adolescents and adults, whose freedom to act is externally constrained. Belief in free will as well as attitudes toward punishment, self-esteem, and locus of control were measured. The results indicate that free will is strongly endorsed in Western society even when freedom to act is severely restricted. However, incarcerated adolescents endorsed free will to a slightly lesser extent than their nonincarcerated counterparts from Rakos et al. (Behavior and Social Issues 17:20–39, 2008 ), while incarcerated and nonincarcerated adults offered equally strong endorsements. The comparable endorsement by adults is consistent with the hypothesis that the belief in agency is an evolutionary adaptation. The small decrease found for incarcerated adolescents may reflect the interaction between developmental factors and the expression of an evolutionary adaptation. Additionally, incarcerated adolescents and adults associated beliefs in free will with viewing punishment as a means of deterrence, rehabilitation, and retribution. Incarcerated adults, but not incarcerated adolescents, associated beliefs in free will with greater self-esteem and with an external locus of control. Finally, though both incarcerated adults and adolescents endorsed free will strongly, the former manifested the belief by emphasizing free agentic choice whereas the latter focused on the personal responsibility that is interwoven with free choice. The implications of these findings are discussed in the context of evolutionary, cultural, and developmental factors. (shrink)
This article describes the development of a computerized version of a measure of ethical sensitivity to racial and gender intolerance, the Racial Ethical Sensitivity Test (REST; Brabeck et al., 2000). The REST was based on James Rest's (1983) 4-component model of moral development and the professional codes of ethics from school-based professions. The new version, Racial and Ethical Sensitivity Test-Compact Disk (REST-CD), consists of 5 videotaped scenarios (used in the original REST) followed by an interactive "interview" presented on compact discs. (...) Data from a study with 58 students provides initial validation of the REST-CD. Ethical sensitivity to racial and gender intolerance in schools, as measured by the REST-CD, was moderately related to attitudes toward racial and gender equity issues in society as measured by the Quick Discrimination Index (Ponterotto et al., 1995). The results provide evidence for both interrater and internal reliability of the REST-CD scores. This study also tests the hypothesized relationship between REST-CD scores and previous multicultural and ethics course work. Students with multicultural and ethics course experience have scored significantly higher on the REST-CD than students without course work. The paper-and-pencil tests are not significantly related to previous ethics/multicultural course work. In this article, we discuss the implications of the results and directions for future research. (shrink)
Biologists, historians, lawyers, art historians, and literary critics all voice arguments in the critical dialogue about what constitutes evidence in research and scholarship. They examine not only the constitution and "blurring" of disciplinary boundaries, but also the configuration of the fact-evidence distinctions made in different disciplines and historical moments the relative function of such concepts as "self-evidence," "experience," "test," "testimony," and "textuality" in varied academic discourses and the way "rules of evidence" are themselves products of historical developments. The essays and (...) rejoinders are by Terry Castle, Lorraine Daston, Carlo Ginzburg, Ian Hacking, Mark Kelman, R. C. Lewontin, Pierre Vidal-Naquet, Mary Poovey, Donald Preziosi, Simon Schaffer, Joan W. Scott, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, and Barbara Herrnstein Smith. The critical responses are by Lauren Berlant, James Chandler, Jean Comaroff, Arnold I. Davidson, Harry D. harootunian, Elizabeth Helsinger, Thomas C. Holt, Francoise Meltzer, Robert J. Richards, Lawrence Rothfield, Joel Snyder, Cass R. Sunstein, and William Wimsatt. (shrink)
The purpose of this paper is to suggest that the current conversation about the relationship between capitalism and the poor assumes a story about business that is shopworn and outmoded. There are assumptions about business, human behavior, and language that are no longer useful in the twenty first century. Business needs to be understood as how we cooperate together to create value and trade. It is fundamentally about creating value for stakeholders. Human beings are not solely self-interested, but driven by (...) meaning, purpose, and the ability to cooperate. And, language is best understood as a tool, rather than a source of representation. Business and capitalism with these new assumptions can be realized by large and small businesses as not just about money and profits but as the creation of meaning within a prophetic framework. (shrink)
Machine generated contents note: Part I. Origins and Contours: 1. Historical perspectives on legal pluralism Lauren Benton; 2. The rule of law and legal pluralism in development Brian Z. Tamanaha; 3. Bendable rules: the development implications of human rights pluralism David Kinley; 4. Legal pluralism and legal culture: mapping the terrain Sally Engle Merry; 5. Towards equity in development when the law is not the law: reflections on legal pluralism in practice Daniel Adler and So Sokbunthouen; Part II. Theoretical Foundations (...) and Conceptual Debates: 6. Sustainable diversity in law H. Patrick Glenn; 7. Legal pluralism 101 William Twining; 8. The development 'problem' of legal pluralism: an analysis and steps towards solutions Gordon R. Woodman; 9. Institutional hybrids and the rule of law as a regulatory project Kanishka Jayasuriya; 10. Some implications of the application of legal pluralism to development practice Doug J. Porter; Part III. From Theory to Practice: 11. Legal pluralism and international development agencies: state building or legal reform Julio Faundez; 12. Access to property and citizenship: marginalization in a context of legal pluralism Christian Lund; 13. The publicity 'defect' of customary law Varun Gauri; 14. Unearthing pluralism: mining, multilaterals and the state Meg Taylor and Nicholas Menzies; 15. The problem with problematizing legal pluralism: lessons from the field Deborah H. Isser. (shrink)
To Vallortigara & Rogers's (V&R's) evidence of everyday directional asymmetries in the natural environment of a variety of species, we offer one more example for human beings. It is the bias for holding an infant on the left side, and it illustrates several themes in the target article.