Style Of Reasoning Research Articles

HERMANN VON HELMHOLTZ, EWALD HERING AND COLOR VISION: A CONTROVERSY OVER STYLES OF REASONING?

During the second half of the 19th century, in the field of physiological optics, there was a strong controversy between Hermann von Helmholtz and Ewald Hering. This controversy has been usually characterized as “empiricism” vs. “nativism”. In the field of physiology of visual perception, several subjects demanded attention, among them, color vision. Helmholtz and Hering suggested different theories for the physiological correlate of color sensation and different color spaces to give an account of the relationships between colors. In this article, I will argue that the controversy between the two authors could be understood as differences between styles of reasoning, and these different styles express different presuppositions. More specifically, I want to suggest that the disagreements could be linked to the discussions on how vital phenomena should be studied.

The Facts of Science & the Values of Social Justice

The Facts of Science & the Values of Social Justice

How to (Consistently) Reject the Options Argument

AbstractIt is commonly thought that disability is a harm or “bad difference” because having a disability restricts valuable options in life. In his recent essay “Disability, Options and Well-Being,” Thomas Crawley offers a novel defense of this style of reasoning (formulated as the Options Argument) and argues that we and like-minded critics of this brand of argument are guilty of an inconsistency. Our aim in this article is to explain why our view avoids inconsistency, to challenge Crawley's positive defense of the Options Argument, and to suggest that this general line of reasoning employs a double standard.

A Reason-Based Approach to Coherence in Customary International Law

This paper focuses on customary international law (CIL) to point out some limitations of a deductive-syllogistic style of reasoning. It emphasises two CIL complexities. First, even well-established CIL rules are known to have exceptions, but that does not call for the conclusion that a CIL rule is non-existent. Second, the preceding practice for recognising a CIL rule does not need to be uniform. If one attempts to explain such complexities employing a syllogism-oriented, deductive style of reasoning, one will face severe difficulties and mismatches between the law and the model in place. While deductivism ties coherence to the absence of contradiction, legal reasoning allows coherence to find its way out of contradiction. As an alternative to the deductive model, this paper argues that reason-based logic (RBL) provides a suitable framework for understanding the law and CIL complexities. This logic is reason-based because it gives the centre stage to reasons instead of syllogisms, allowing one to balance reasons in favour and against a conclusion. This paper is structured as follows: Section 1 focuses on the two abovementioned CIL complexities. Section 2 examines deductivism and points out why it is unable to account for such complexities. Section 3 introduces the reason-based alternative. Section 4 concludes the paper.

АНГЕЛОЛОГИЯ В РУССКОЙ ИНТЕЛЛЕКТУАЛЬНОЙ ИСТОРИИ: НЕСКОЛЬКО ЭПИЗОДОВ

Reflections on the nature of angels in Russian religious philosophy are inseparable from political theology and reflection on scientific and technical achievements. Based on the works of N. Boldyrev, A. Losev and S. Averintsev, the article proves that the doctrine of angels was to spiritualize technical progress and not less to preserve humanitarian culture in the field of symbolic-mathematical speculation. Therefore, Russian angelology is dialogical and controversial: it relies on the hermeneutics of a symbol, while symbolism is considered as part of intellectual production parallel to technical invention. It is proved how exactly the reception of ideas related to the parameters of perception and a certain style of intellectual reasoning made it possible to single out questions about angels into a separate area of philosophical problematization. Accordingly, the study of how exactly the questions were thought of as autonomous, makes it possible to clarify how Russian thought could assert the autonomy of orders of philosophical reasoning

Conspiracy-Beliefs and Receptivity to Disconfirmatory Information: A Study Using the BADE Task

Conspiracy theory (CT) beliefs are thought to be related to a number of individual differences that make certain individuals more prone to this style of reasoning. In this study, we investigate (a) the relationship between CT beliefs and a standardized measure of judgment (the Bias Against Disconfirmatory Evidence task or BADE) and (b) the extent to which BADE scores are related to specific measures of psychopathology, including schizotypy and delusion-proneness, as measured by the Peters et al.’s Delusions Inventory. The BADE is an evidence integration bias and captures the extent to which individuals display a reduced willingness to integrate disconfirmatory evidence. A total of 358 individuals recruited from an online panel completed standardized measures of CT beliefs, measures of psychopathology, and a standardized BADE task. The results showed that CT-prone individuals showed a stronger BADE effect (i.e., biases against confirmatory and disconfirmatory evidence and a stronger liberal acceptance of absurd statements) and overall poorer evidence integration. Our results suggest that a reduced tendency to revise beliefs in the face of disconfirmatory evidence may contribute to the maintenance of CT beliefs, despite the availability of extensive counter-evidence.

Öğretmen Adaylarının Akıl Yürütme Stillerinin ve Başarıya Dönük Nedensel Yüklemelerinin İncelenmesi

The aim of this research is to investigate reasoning styles and causal attributions for success of university students. The study is a quantitative study based on correlational survey model. The population of the study consists from 267 teacher candidates in Ondokuz Mayıs University. The sample was selected in terms of convenience sampling technique. The result shows that there is no significant difference among the sub-dimensions of causal attributions and reasoning styles except the metaphorical-deductive style of reasoning in terms of gender. Besides, the results show that there is no significant difference among the sub-dimensions of causal attributions and reasoning styles in terms of departments. The result shows that there is no significant difference among the sub-dimensions of causal attributions and reasoning styles in terms of students’ most liked courses. The result of the test statistics about whether causal attributions and reasoning styles differ according to the object of their causal attributions shows that there is no significant difference among the sub-dimensions of causal attributions and reasoning styles except personal control and external control dimension in the causal attribution scale. According to test results, some dimensions of reasoning styles are correlated with causal attributions at a low level. Importance level of reasoning styles for causal attributions show that metaphorical-deductive reasoning style is the most important factor for causality focus, emprical dimension is the most significant dimension for external control, analogical inductive and hypothetical dimensions are the most important factors for personal control and hypothetical dimension is the most important factor for persistance dimension.

New Styles of Reasoning in Contemporary Philosophy and Science

The paper discusses the unexpected trends in the most modern forms of philosophy and science. The traditional differences in the roles of philosophy and science can be traced back to Kant: natural sciences refer to possible experience; philosophy as metaphysics does not affect experience at all. Today, there are very different trends. Some physical theories (such as string theory) have a highly theoretical character and cannot be proved by empirical experiments. A new approach has been developed in philosophy too: experimental philosophy, which makes use of empirical data to inform research on philosophical questions. Are these approaches just contradictions in terms or rather new styles of reasoning? The goal is not a deep analysis of x-phi or string theory but a reflection on the context between tradition and new trends in philosophy and science which are still rather marginal but may play an important role in the future.

How Might the Next Generation Science Standards Support Styles of Scientific Reasoning in Biology?

In this article, we put forward a new approach to the teaching of scientific reasoning in biology with the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). We argue that a framework based on the idea of six styles of scientific reasoning provides the best guide for biology teachers to the nature of scientific reasoning in biology and how it might be taught. The current framework of the crosscutting concepts fails to provide a narrative for what makes biology distinctive and how biological scientists reason. By contrast, a framework of styles of scientific reasoning does offer a coherent argument for the biology curriculum in grades K–12, a justification for each performance expectation, and a vision of how each standard might support the development of scientific reasoning in biology. Examples and implications for curriculum designers and educators are discussed.

Problems in measuring the JTC-bias in patients with psychotic disorders with the fish task: a secondary analysis of a baseline assessment of a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundThe jumping to conclusions bias (JTC) is considered to be an important causal factor in theoretical models for the formation and maintenance of delusions. However, recent meta-analytic findings show a rather equivocal pattern of results regarding associations between JTC and delusions. Thus, the present study aims to investigate in a large sample whether the JTC-bias is more pronounced in patients with psychotic disorders in comparison to controls and whether the JTC bias is associated with a more severe delusional conviction, persecutory delusions, and positive symptoms in general.MethodsPatients with psychotic disorders (n = 300) enrolled in a therapy trial and healthy controls (n = 51) conducted a variant of the beads task (fish task) as a measure for the JTC-bias at the start of the trial. Further, clinical interviews were used to assess patients’ delusional severity and delusional conviction.ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences between patients with psychotic disorders (with 53% displaying the JTC-bias) and controls (41%). Furthermore, there were no statistically significant correlations between JTC measures and persecutory delusions, delusional conviction, and positive symptoms.ConclusionsWe found no differences in JTC between patients with psychotic disorders and healthy controls, which is in part in line with meta-analytic findings using a wide range of JTC task variants. Interestingly, patients with psychotic disorders displayed JTC rates commonly found in the literature, while healthy control subjects showed an unexpectedly high level of JTC. The task variant we used in the present study (fish task) is discussed as a potential reason for our results, as it may induce a more deliberative reasoning style in controls as compared to the traditional beads task. Furthermore, possible implications for the measurement of the JTC-bias, in general, are discussed.Trial RegistrationISRCTN29242879 (isrctn.com), date of registration: April 12th 2006, retrospectively registered.

Human rights impact assessments and the politics of evidence in economic policymaking

ABSTRACT The Guiding Principles on Human Rights Impact Assessments of Economic Reforms envision a policymaking process based on sound empirical evidence, so that the proportionality and legitimacy of reforms can be ‘properly’ assessed. Implicit in this vision is that methodological tools from economics should be drawn on, and adapted, to project or assess human rights impact. This article argues that biases inherent to these tools must be fully understood and addressed in order to meaningfully assess the human rights impacts of economic policy choices. First, it reviews relevant literature on human rights impact assessment, to give context to some of the methodological issues raised in the Guiding Principles. It then interrogates the claim that impact assessments can advance evidence-based policymaking, unpacking this idea with reference to a frame for advancing a more ‘politically informed’ approach to understanding evidentiary bias. Second, it explores bias in neoclassical economics. It does this by unpacking dominant styles of reasoning and policy devices, concluding that meaningful assessment of rights realisation does not easily fit within this cognitive infrastructure. Finally, it outlines a number of strategies that would help advocates of human rights impact assessments to better navigate the politics of evidence and contest economic orthodoxies.

Decision making processes underlying avoidance of mandatory child vaccination in Croatia - a qualitative study.

Despite extensive research evidencing child vaccination is safe and effective, we are witnessing a trend of increasing vaccine hesitancy which is listed among the top ten global health threats. Although some countries incorporate mandatory vaccination programs, no particularly efficient strategies for addressing vaccine avoidance have so far been identified. Within this study we investigated perceptions and reasoning of vaccine hesitant parents from Croatia where child vaccination is mandatory. The aims were to reveal different strategies by which they avoid mandatory vaccination schedules and hypothetical situations in which they would reconsider vaccinating, as well as to identify features of related decision-making. We conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with vaccine hesitant parents and analyzed the data using the framework of thematic analyses. The identified themes were related to the parents’ decision-making process, reflection as well as justification of their decision, avoidance behavior of mandatory vaccination schedules and related consequences, dealing with outcomes of the decision and reconsidering vaccinating. The results support and extend previous findings regarding vaccine reasoning, linking hesitancy with the experientially intuitive thinking style and social intuitionist model of moral reasoning. The findings provide important insights into vaccination avoidance and potential for reconsideration, as well as dealing with related risks. Furthermore, we offer a general framework as well as practical guidelines that may help the development of strategies aimed at increasing vaccination rates.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s12144-020-01110-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Points of contention: Qualitative research identifying where researchers and research ethics committees disagree about consent waivers for secondary research with tissue and data.

BackgroundThis is a multi-method, in-depth, three part qualitative study exploring the regulation and practice of secondary research with tissue and data in a high-income country. We explore and compare the perspectives of researchers, research ethics committees (RECs) and other relevant professionals (e.g. pathologists and clinicians). We focus on points of contention because they demonstrate misalignment between the expectations, values and assumptions of these stakeholders.MethodsThis is a multi-method study using observational research, focus groups and interviews with 42 participants (conducted 2016–2017) and analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsResults are arranged under the following themes: consent; balancing the social value of the research with consent requirements; and harm. Our findings demonstrate different perspectives on the review process, styles of ethical reasoning and issues of concern. First, researchers and RECs disagreed about whether the cost of re-consenting patients satisfied the criterion of impracticability for consent waivers. Second, most researchers were skeptical that secondary research with already collected tissue and data could harm patients. Researchers often pointed to the harm arising from a failure to use existing material for research. RECs were concerned about the potential for secondary research to stigmatize communities. Third, researchers adopted a more consequentialist approach to decision-making, including some willingness to trade off the benefit of the research against the cost of getting consent; whereas RECs were more deontological and typically considered research benefit only after it had been established that re-consent was impractical.ConclusionThis research highlights ways in which RECs and researchers may be talking past each other, resulting in confusion and frustration. These finding provide a platform for realignment of the expectations of RECs and researchers, which could contribute to making research ethics review more effective.

Preservice Science Teachers\u2019 Strategies in Scientific Reasoning: the Case of Modeling

The development of scientific reasoning competencies is a key goal of science education. To better understand the complex construct of scientific reasoning, which includes modeling as one style of reasoning, thorough investigations of the underlying processes are needed. Therefore, in this study, a typology of preservice science teachers’ modeling strategies was developed. Thirty-two preservice science teachers were videotaped while engaging in the modeling task of investigating a black box. Following a qualitative content analysis, sequences of modeling activities were identified. By transforming these sequences of modeling activities into state transition graphs, six types of modeling strategies were derived, differing in the homogeneity and complexity of their modeling processes. The preservice science teachers engaged in activities of (1) exploration only; (2a) exploration and development with a focus on development; (2b) exploration and development with a focus on exploration; (2c) exploration and development, balanced; (3a) exploration, development, and drawing predictions from a model once; or (3b) exploration, development, and repeatedly drawing predictions from a model. Finally, this typology is discussed regarding the process of its development and its potential to inform and guide further research as well as the development of interventions aiming to foster competencies in scientific modeling.

COVID-19-related conspiracy beliefs and their relationship with perceived stress and pre-existing conspiracy beliefs

Previous studies have down that erroneous Conspiracy Theory (CT) beliefs develop more strongly in people who have underlying conspiratorial reasoning styles and psychopathological traits and particularly when they are faced with stressful external events (Swami et al., 2013; van Prooijen, 2018). In this study, we test this proposition by examining the individual differences associated with the development of COVID-19-related CT beliefs during the pandemic. A total of 660 adults completed a survey that captured COVID–related CT beliefs and broader conspiracy beliefs, education, perceived stress and attitudes towards government responses. The results showed that COVID-19 related CT beliefs were: strongly related to broader CT beliefs, higher in those with lower levels of education; and, positively (although weakly) correlated with more negative attitudes towards government responses. However, no relationship was found between COVID-19 beliefs and self-reported stress. These findings hold implications for why some people are more likely to be resistant to public health interventions relating to COVID-19. The findings encourage more detailed exploration of the causes and sources of CTs and, in particular, the role of social media use and other information sources in the development and perpetuation of health-related CT beliefs.

PROYEK “KRITIK” ABED AL-JABIRI DAN IMPLIKASINYA PADA NALAR KEISLAMAN

Critical studies in an academic study are the most important aspects that are ‘necessary’ and ‘required’ to be carried out. The existence of this critical study aims to provide a broad view on a scientific study. The aim is that the study will continue and be developed again. The hope is that there will be a contribution to a civilization of human history. Patterns of excellence and distinctiveness, as a form that knowledge is not entirely final. Abed Al-Jabiri - hereinafter written by Al-Jabiri “through his critical study, tries to offer a concept to the Arabic- Islamic reasoning style. The epistemology of Arabic-Islamic reasoning that has not yet been ‘moved on’ from longstanding history. Al-Jabiri’s criticism of the stagnation of Arab-Islamic reasoning occurs because they have not been able to get out of the ‘lullabies’ of past progress. In addition, he provided a solution so that the Arab community could get out of the chaos that befell it. Through the epistemological framework of “Burhani, Bayani, and Irfani”, he invited the Arab community - we Muslims - to not merely worship the past which was considered complete.

PROYEK “KRITIK” ABED AL-JABIRI DAN IMPLIKASINYA PADA NALAR KEISLAMAN

Critical studies in an academic study are the most important aspects that are ‘necessary’ and ‘required’ to be carried out. The existence of this critical study aims to provide a broad view on a scientific study. The aim is that the study will continue and be developed again. The hope is that there will be a contribution to a civilization of human history. Patterns of excellence and distinctiveness, as a form that knowledge is not entirely final. Abed Al-Jabiri - hereinafter written by Al-Jabiri “through his critical study, tries to offer a concept to the Arabic- Islamic reasoning style. The epistemology of Arabic-Islamic reasoning that has not yet been ‘moved on’ from longstanding history. Al-Jabiri’s criticism of the stagnation of Arab-Islamic reasoning occurs because they have not been able to get out of the ‘lullabies’ of past progress. In addition, he provided a solution so that the Arab community could get out of the chaos that befell it. Through the epistemological framework of “Burhani, Bayani, and Irfani”, he invited the Arab community - we Muslims - to not merely worship the past which was considered complete.

La crisis del estilo histórico de razonamiento económico:Joseph A. Schumpeter, Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, y Paul A. Samuelson

En este artículo abordaré el declive del estilo histórico de razonamiento económico en relación con las obras de Joseph A. Schumpeter, Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen y Paul A. Samuelson. Argumentaré dos tesis básicas. La primera afirma que la teoría schumpeteriana de los ciclos de negocios es una respuesta en pespectiva histórica a la comprensión de las crisis económicas y, en consecuencia, cabe ser concebida como una instancia del estilo histórico de razonamiento económico. La segunda sostiene que el declive de este estilo histórico-económico estuvo asociado a la derrota intelectual de Schumpeter frente al keynesianismo. En la medida en que la teoría schumpeteriana de los ciclos de negocios y del empresario innovador requerían de la historia económica como el lugar último de fundamentación, su descrédito llevó aparejada la crisis del estilo histórico de razonamiento económico. Esta quiebra puso de relieve el conflicto de racionalidades económicas durante la segunda mitad del siglo XX y restó legitimidad epistemológica a la historia de la economía en beneficio de los análisis formales de tipo sincrónico.

The role of moral reasoning & personality in explaining lyrical preferences.

Previous research has supported that personality traits can act to a precursor to media preferences. Due to the ongoing association between morality and media preferences in public and political discourse (e.g., blaming immoral behaviours on media preferences), this research sought to expand the knowledge about factors that contribute to media preferences by investigating if moral reasoning styles explain some of the variance that was not already explained by personality traits. A specific form of media preferences were chosen – lyrical preferences in metal music – as claims between metal lyrical themes and behaviour have been ongoing since the 1980s, despite a lack of empirical evidence to support these claims. A lyrical preferences scale was developed, and utilizing this scale, it was found that different types of metal fans exhibit different moral reasoning styles dependent on their metal sub-genre identification. Further, it was found that moral reasoning styles explain a portion of the variance in lyrical preferences that weren’t already explained by personality traits. In particular, lyrical preferences were often thematically consistent with moral reasoning content and personality traits, such as that individuals that preferred lyrics about celebrating metal culture and unity had higher levels of the group loyalty moral reasoning domain alongside being higher in extraversion. The implications of moral reasoning styles and personality traits as being precursors to media preferences are discussed.

Moderators of treatment efficacy in individualized metacognitive training for psychosis (MCT+)

Background and objectivesIndividualized Metacognitive Training (MCT+) is a manualized intervention designed to improve delusional severity by reducing delusion-associated cognitive biases such as jumping-to-conclusions. Increased interest in personalized medicine stipulates the identification of patients who are more likely to benefit from specialized interventions. The present study aimed to explore baseline moderators of MCT+ efficacy on delusions and overall positive symptoms in psychosis. MethodsWe analyzed data from a randomized rater-blind controlled trial, in which 92 patients with psychotic disorders and current or past delusions were randomly assigned to either MCT+ or CogPack®, a cognitive remediation software. Baseline moderator variables consisted of jumping-to-conclusions, cognitive insight, quality of life, self-esteem, selective attention, and patients’ attitudes towards their symptoms. Linear mixed-effects models were applied to investigate specific moderators of MCT+ efficacy. ResultsIn MCT+ relative to CogPack, presence of a jumping-to-conclusions bias, a lowered decision threshold, and low self-esteem were associated with larger improvements in delusional severity and/or overall positive symptoms over time. Subjective reasoning style and insight, as well as subjective attitudes towards psychosis, did not moderate the treatment efficacy of MCT+ relative to CogPack. LimitationsParticipation of both treatment groups in group MCT as a part of standard care, possibly leading to additional effects on delusional severity. ConclusionsPatients with low self-esteem and those who are prone to jumping-to-conclusions seem to particularly benefit from MCT+. Our results can help inform clinical practice as they provide specific criteria for selecting patients for whom MCT+ is most appropriate.