scholarly journals Accepting the truth: A step toward reconciliation

Temida ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 15-18
Author(s):  
Zoran Ilic
Keyword(s):  
National Identity ◽  
Defense Mechanism ◽  
Psychological Explanation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Moral Norms ◽  
Extreme Form ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Psychological Mechanisms

The truth is not only about accepting the facts. The truth includes emotional components - longing for acknowledgment of mistakes and validation of painful losses and experiences. While one side in the conflict considers itself as the only victim and experiences determination and acknowledgment of the truth as a possibility for healing its own trauma through satisfaction of justice and compensation, the other side is not accepting the truth. For this other side, confrontation with the facts is a painful trauma, which endangers individual moral norms, threatens the national identity and requires, on individual level, plugging in the defense mechanism, in order to prevent penetration of painful emotions into the consciousness. Primitive psychological mechanisms of defense, focused around splitting (projection, denial), are the main obstacles in accepting the truth both on individual and group level. There is also another extreme form of reaction manifested through "hypertrophy" of the truth and one-sided self-accusation. In this paper the author presents psychological explanation of the process of accepting the truth as the prerequisite for reconciliation and transformation of the conflict.

scholarly journals We predict a riot: inequality, relative deprivation and collective destruction in the lab (Dezecache, Allen, von Zimmermann & Richardson, in press)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillaume Dezecache ◽  
James M. Allen ◽  
Jorina von Zimmermann ◽  
Daniel C. Richardson
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Psychological Factors ◽  
Relative Deprivation ◽  
Population Data ◽  
The Other ◽  
Agent Based Models ◽  
Agent Based ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Psychological Mechanisms ◽  
Post Hoc

Riots are unpredictable and dangerous. Our understanding of the factors that cause riots are based on correlational observations of population data, or post hoc introspection of individuals. To complement these accounts, we developed innovative experimental techniques, investigated the psychological factors of rioting, and explored their consequences with agent-based simulations. We created a game, ‘Parklife’, that physically co-present participants played using smartphones. In two teams, participants tapped on their screen to grow trees and flowerbeds on separate but adjacent virtual parks. Participants could also tap to vandalise the other team’s park. In some conditions, we surreptitiously introduced inequity between the teams so that one (the disadvantaged team) had to tap more for each reward. The experience of inequity caused the disadvantaged team to engage in more destruction, and to report higher relative deprivation and frustration. Agent-based models suggested that acts of destruction were driven by the interaction between individual level of frustration and the team’s behaviour. Our results provide insights into the psychological mechanisms underlying collective action.

Group Belief

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-93
Author(s):  
Domingos Faria ◽  
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Group Belief ◽  
Level I ◽  
The One ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Group Acceptance

Beliefs are commonly attributed to groups or collective entities. But what is the nature of group belief? Summativism and nonsummativism are two main rival views regarding the nature of group belief. On the one hand, summativism holds that, necessarily, a group g has a belief B only if at least one individual i is both a member of g and has B. On the other hand, non-summativism holds that it is possible for a group g to have a belief B even if no member of g has B. My aim in this paper is to consider whether divergence arguments for non-summativism and against summativism about group belief are sound. Such divergence arguments aim to show that there can be a divergence between belief at the group level and the corresponding belief at the individual level. I will argue that these divergence arguments do not decisively defeat a minimal version of summativism. In order to accomplish this goal, I have the following plan: In section 2, I will analyze the structure of two important counterexamples against the summativist view, which are based on divergence arguments. Such counterexamples are based on the idea that a group decides to adopt a particular group belief, even if none of its members holds the belief in question. However, in section 3, I will show that these counterexamples fail, because they can be explained without the need to posit group beliefs. More specifically, I argue that in these apparent counterexamples, we have only a ‘group acceptance’ phenomenon and not a ‘group belief’ phenomenon. For this conclusion, I advance two arguments: in subsection 3.1, I formulate an argument from doxastic involuntarism, and in subsection 3.2, I develop an argument from truth connection. Thus, summativism is not defeated by divergence arguments. Lastly, in section 4, I will conclude with some advantages of summativism.

scholarly journals We predict a riot: inequity, relative deprivation and collective destruction in the laboratory

2021 ◽  
Vol 288 (1959) ◽  
pp. 20203091
Author(s):  
Guillaume Dezecache ◽  
James M. Allen ◽  
Jorina von Zimmermann ◽  
Daniel C. Richardson
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Psychological Factors ◽  
Relative Deprivation ◽  
Population Data ◽  
The Other ◽  
Agent Based Models ◽  
Agent Based ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Psychological Mechanisms ◽  
Post Hoc

Riots are unpredictable and dangerous. Our understanding of the factors that cause riots is based on correlational observations of population data, or post hoc introspection of individuals. To complement these accounts, we developed innovative experimental techniques, investigated the psychological factors of rioting and explored their consequences with agent-based simulations. We created a game, ‘Parklife’, that physically co-present participants played using smartphones. In two teams, participants tapped on their screen to grow trees and flowerbeds on separate but adjacent virtual parks. Participants could also tap to vandalize the other team's park. In some conditions, we surreptitiously introduced inequity between the teams so that one (the disadvantaged team) had to tap more for each reward. The experience of inequity caused the disadvantaged team to engage in more destruction, and to report higher relative deprivation and frustration. Agent-based models suggested that acts of destruction were driven by the interaction between individual level of frustration and the team's behaviour. Our results provide insights into the psychological mechanisms underlying collective action.

The Values and Norms of Islam

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Ahmed Akgunduz
Keyword(s):  
Islamic Law ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
The Other ◽  
Moral Norms ◽  
Simple Fact ◽  
Value System ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Islamic Legal Theory ◽  
The World ◽  
Over Time

AbstractIslamic Law is one of the broadest and most comprehensive systems of legislation in the world. It was applied, through various schools of thought, from one end of the Muslim world to the other. It also had a great impact on other nations and cultures. We will focus in this article on values and norms in Islamic law. The value system of Islam is immutable and does not tolerate change over time for the simple fact that human nature does not change. The basic values and needs (which can be called maṣlaḥa) are classified hierarchically into three levels: (1) necessities (Ḍarūriyyāt), (2) convenience (Ḥājiyyāt), and (3) refinements (Kamāliyyāt=Taḥsīniyyāt). In Islamic legal theory (Uṣūl al‐fiqh) the general aim of legislation is to realize values through protecting and guaranteeing their necessities (al-Ḍarūriyyāt) as well as stressing their importance (al‐ Ḥājiyyāt) and their refinements (taḥsīniyyāt).In the second part of this article we will draw attention to Islamic norms. Islam has paid great attention to norms that protect basic values. We cannot explain all the Islamic norms that relate to basic values, but we will classify them categorically. We will focus on four kinds of norms: 1) norms (rules) concerned with belief (I’tiqādiyyāt), 2) norms (rules) concerned with law (ʿAmaliyyāt); 3) general legal norms (Qawā‘id al‐ Kulliyya al‐Fiqhiyya); 4) norms (rules) concerned with ethics (Wijdāniyyāt = Aḵlāqiyyāt = Ādāb = social and moral norms).

Reply to Connor and Evers (2020): Critique of the Bias of Crowds Model Simply Restates the Model

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Payne ◽  
Heidi A. Vuletich ◽  
Kristjen B. Lundberg
Keyword(s):  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Systemic Racism ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Core ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Implicit Biases ◽  
The Individual

The Bias of Crowds model (Payne, Vuletich, & Lundberg, 2017) argues that implicit bias varies across individuals and across contexts. It is unreliable and weakly associated with behavior at the individual level. But when aggregated to measure context-level effects, the scores become stable and predictive of group-level outcomes. We concluded that the statistical benefits of aggregation are so powerful that researchers should reconceptualize implicit bias as a feature of contexts, and ask new questions about how implicit biases relate to systemic racism. Connor and Evers (2020) critiqued the model, but their critique simply restates the core claims of the model. They agreed that implicit bias varies across individuals and across contexts; that it is unreliable and weakly associated with behavior at the individual level; and that aggregating scores to measure context-level effects makes them more stable and predictive of group-level outcomes. Connor and Evers concluded that implicit bias should be considered to really be noisily measured individual construct because the effects of aggregation are merely statistical. We respond to their specific arguments and then discuss what it means to really be a feature of persons versus situations, and multilevel measurement and theory in psychological science more broadly.

Multicultural and Transnational Novels

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Meffan
Keyword(s):  
National Identity ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
The Other ◽  
Colonial History ◽  
History Of ◽  
Return Home ◽  
Access Rights ◽  
The One

This chapter discusses the history of multicultural and transnational novels in New Zealand. A novel set in New Zealand will have to deal with questions about cultural access rights on the one hand and cultural coverage on the other. The term ‘transnational novel’ gains its relevance from questions about cultural and national identity, questions that have particularly exercised nations formed from colonial history. The chapter considers novels that demonstrate and respond to perceived deficiencies in wider discourses of cultural and national identity by way of comparison between New Zealand and somewhere else. These include Amelia Batistich's Another Mountain, Another Song (1981), Albert Wendt's Sons for the Return Home (1973) and Black Rainbow (1992), James McNeish's Penelope's Island (1990), Stephanie Johnson's The Heart's Wild Surf (2003), and Lloyd Jones's Mister Pip (2006).

scholarly journals Examining the Effects of Three Group-Level Metacognitive Scaffoldings on In-Service Teachers’ Knowledge Building

2021 ◽  
pp. 073563312110308
Author(s):  
Fan Ouyang ◽  
Si Chen ◽  
Yuqin Yang ◽  
Yunqing Chen
Keyword(s):  
Small Groups ◽  
Mixed Method ◽  
Peer Interactions ◽  
Knowledge Building ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Question Asking ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Task Oriented ◽  
Metacognitive Scaffolding

Group-level metacognitive scaffolding is critical for productive knowledge building. However, previous research mainly focuses on the individual-level metacognitive scaffoldings in helping learners improve knowledge building, and little effort has been made to develop group-level metacognitive scaffolding (GMS) for knowledge building. This research designed three group-level metacognitive scaffoldings of general, task-oriented, and idea-oriented scaffoldings to facilitate in-service teachers’ knowledge building in small groups. A mixed method is used to examine the effects of the GMSs on groups’ knowledge building processes, performances, and perceptions. Results indicate a complication of the effects of GMSs on knowledge building. The idea-oriented scaffolding has potential to facilitate question-asking and perspective-proposing inquiry through peer interactions; the general scaffolding does not necessarily lessen teachers’ idea-centered explanation and elaboration on the individual level; the task-oriented scaffolding has the worst effect. Pedagogical and research implications are discussed to foster knowledge building with the support of GMSs.

Pluralistic Ignorance Research in Psychology: A Scoping Review of Topic and Method Variation and Directions for Future Research

2021 ◽  
pp. 108926802199516
Author(s):  
Rikki H. Sargent ◽  
Leonard S. Newman
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Pluralistic Ignorance ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Group Members

Pluralistic ignorance occurs when group members mistakenly believe others’ cognitions and/or behaviors are systematically different from their own. More than 20 years have passed since the last review of pluralistic ignorance from a psychological framework, with more than 60 empirical articles assessing pluralistic ignorance published since then. Previous reviews took an almost entirely conceptual approach with minimal review of methodology, making existing reviews outdated and limited in the extent to which they can provide guidelines for researchers. The goal of this review is to evaluate and integrate the literature on pluralistic ignorance, clarify important conceptual issues, identify inconsistencies in the literature, and provide guidance for future research. We provide a comprehensive definition for the phenomenon, with a focus on its status as a group-level phenomenon. We highlight three areas of variation in particular in the current scoping review: variation in topics assessed, variation in measurement, and (especially) variation in methods for assessing the implications of individual-level misperceptions that, in aggregate, lead to pluralistic ignorance. By filling these gaps in the literature, we ultimately hope to motivate further analysis of the phenomenon.

Rag Doll Nations and the Politics of Differentiation on Arbitrary Borders: Karelia and Moldova*

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 457-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lawrence Schrad
Keyword(s):  
National Identity ◽  
The State ◽  
Ethnic Community ◽  
National Identities ◽  
The Other ◽  
Interesting Aspect ◽  
Territorial Boundaries ◽  
Shed Light

“Tell a man today to go and build a state,” Samuel Finer once stated, “and he will try to establish a definite and defensible boundary and compel those who live inside it to obey him.” While at best an oversimplification, Finer's insight illuminates an interesting aspect of state-society relations. Who is it that builds the state? How and where do they establish territorial boundaries, and how are those who live within that territory compelled to obey? Generally speaking, these are the questions that will be addressed here. Of more immediate concern is the fate of peoples located in regions where arbitrary land boundaries fall. Are they made loyal to the state through coercion or by their own compulsions? More importantly, how are their identities shaped by the efforts of the state to differentiate them from their compatriots on the other side of the borders? How is the shift from ethnic to national identities undertaken? A parallel elaboration of the national histories of the populations of Karelia and Moldova will shed light on these questions. The histories of each group are marked by a myriad of attempts to differentiate the identity of each ethnic community from their compatriots beyond the state's borders. The results of such overt, state-initiated efforts to differentiate borderland populations by encouraging a national identity at the expense of the ethnic, has ranged from the mundane to the tragic—from uneventful assimilation to persecution and even genocide. As an illustration of the range of possibilities and processes, I maintain that the tragedies of Karelia and Moldova are not exceptional, but rather are a consequence of their geographical straddling of arbitrary borders, and the need for the state to promote a distinctive national identity for these populations to differentiate them socially from their compatriots beyond the frontier.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document