Nouthetic Counseling Defended: A Reply to Ganz

1976 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 206-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
John D. Carter
Keyword(s):  
Original Analysis ◽  
Nouthetic Counseling ◽  
Common Grace ◽  
Psychological Concepts ◽  
Biblical Concepts

This paper is to reply to Ganz's critique of Carter's (1975a) analysis of Adams’ theory of Nouthetic Counseling. It begins with a further analysis of Adams’ thoughts. Several weaknesses were noted in Adams thought: omission of central biblical concepts, rejection of common grace, a theologically inadequate view of the fall, uncritically using psychological concepts yet claiming to be exclusively biblical, ignoring psychology as phenomena and a rhetoric which is confusing. Ganz's comments were then responded to in detail. At many points Ganz did not appear to understand the nature of the original analysis and reacted to a label he placed on my original analysis.

Adams’ Theory of Nouthetic Counseling

1975 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 143-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
John D. Carter
Keyword(s):  
Primary Sources ◽  
Positive Bias ◽  
Counseling Process ◽  
Nouthetic Counseling ◽  
Research Problems ◽  
Counseling Model ◽  
Theory Of Motivation ◽  
Lack Of Knowledge ◽  
Biblical Concepts

Adams’ theory of nouthetic counseling was analyzed with reference to the nature of man, view of pathology, the counseling model, the counseling process, and the counselor and his techniques. Biblically, Adams’ theory is found to be inadequate. It views man almost entirely in behavioral terms and fails to incorporate such biblical concepts as heart, soul, spirit, and flesh. Adams also fails to provide a biblical basis for building his theory around the word noutheteo. Psychologically, Adams offers no emperical support for his theory and seems unaware of the methodological and research problems involved in supporting his claims of success. Adams’ criticism of Rogers and Freud shows a lack of knowledge of primary sources, and his uncritical positive bias toward Mowrer and Skinner reflects an uncritical presuppositionalism. Finally, he has no theory of motivation or theory of personality.

Psychological Concepts

1975 ◽  
Vol 20 (8) ◽  
pp. 651-652
Author(s):  
T. S. KRAWIEC
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Concepts

Recycling Psychological Concepts: A Teaching Demonstration

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth A. Weaver ◽  
Cooper B. Holmes ◽  
Dee A. Holmes ◽  
Philip J. Wurtz
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Concepts

Low system justification drives ideological differences in joke perception: A critical commentary and re-analysis of Baltiansky et al. (2020)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry Robert McSweeney Purser ◽  
Craig A. Harper
Keyword(s):  
Data File ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Poor People ◽  
Women Poor ◽  
Critical Commentary ◽  
Original Analysis ◽  
The Social ◽  
Ideological Differences ◽  
High System ◽  
Racial Ethnic

A recent study by Baltiansky, Craig, & Jost (2020) tested two hypotheses related to system justification and the perception of stereotypical humor. They reported to have found evidence for a cross-over interaction, with judgments of jokes being contingent on a combination of the social status of the targets of jokes and raters’ system justification motivations. Here, we discuss the original analysis, presentation, and interpretation of the data in Baltiansky et al. (2020), before presenting a re-analysis of the authors’ shared data file. We show that the framing of claims such as “high system-justifiers found jokes targeting low-status groups (e.g., women, poor people, racial/ethnic minorities) to be funnier than low system-justifiers did” (p. 1) are misleading in their framing. Instead, our re-analyses suggest that ideological differences in joke perception are driven primarily by those scoring low on the system justification motivation rating jokes about ostensibly low-status groups as less funny than jokes about other social groups.

German Angst

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Biess
Keyword(s):  
Federal Republic ◽  
National Socialism ◽  
West Germany ◽  
Peace Movements ◽  
Original Analysis ◽  
The Holocaust ◽  
The Future ◽  
History Of ◽  
Fear And Anxiety ◽  
Relationship Of

German Angst analyzes the relationship of fear and democracy in postwar West Germany. While fear has historically been associated with authoritarian regimes, the book highlights the role of fear and anxiety in a democratizing society: these emotions undermined democracy and stabilized it at the same time. By taking seriously postwar Germans’ uncertainties about the future, the book challenges dominant linear and teleological narratives of postwar West German “success.” It highlights the prospective function of memories of war and defeat, of National Socialism and the Holocaust. Fears and anxieties derived from memories of a catastrophic past that postwar Germans projected into the future. Based on case studies from the 1940s to the present, the book provides a new interpretive synthesis of the Federal Republic. It tells the history of the Federal Republic as a series of recurring crises, in which specific fears and anxieties emerged, served a variety of political functions, and then again abated. Drawing on recent interdisciplinary insights of emotion studies, the book transcends the dichotomy of “reason” and “emotion.” Fear and anxiety were not exclusively irrational and dysfunctional but served important roles in postwar democracy. These emotions sensitized postwar Germans to the dangers of an authoritarian transformation, and they also served as the emotional engine of the environmental and peace movements. The book also provides an original analysis of the emotional basis of right-wing populism in Germany today, and it explores the possibilities of a democratic politics of emotion.

The Regional Law of Refugee Protection in Africa

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Sharpe
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
African Unity ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Original Analysis ◽  
The Status ◽  
Organization Of African Unity ◽  
African Charter ◽  
African Refugee ◽  
Institutional Architecture

This book analyses the legal framework for refugee protection in Africa, including both refugee and human rights law as well as treaty and institutional elements. The regime is addressed in two parts. Part I analyses the relevant treaties: the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the 1969 Organization of African Unity Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa, and the 1981 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The latter two regional instruments are examined in depth. This includes the first fulsome account of the African Refugee Convention’s drafting, an interpretation of its unique refugee definition, and original analysis of the relationships between the three treaties. Significant attention is devoted to the systemic relationship between the international and the regional refugee treaties and to the discrete relationships of conflict and relationships of interpretation between the two refugee instruments, as well as to the relationships of conflict and of interpretation between the African Refugee Convention and African Charter. Part II focuses on the institutional architecture supporting the treaty framework. The Organization of African Unity is addressed in a historical sense, and the contemporary roles of the African Union, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the current and contemplated African human rights courts are examined. This book is the first devoted to the legal framework for refugee protection in Africa.

State Sponsored Literature

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asha Rogers
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Policy ◽  
The State ◽  
British Council ◽  
Material Condition ◽  
State Involvement ◽  
Satanic Verses ◽  
Original Analysis ◽  
Institutional Forces ◽  
Post War ◽  
Archival Work

Debates about the value of the ‘literary’ rarely register the expressive acts of state subsidy, sponsorship, and cultural policy that have shaped post-war Britain. In State Sponsored Literature, Asha Rogers argues that the modern state was a major material condition of literature, even as its efforts were relative, partial, and prone to disruption. Drawing from neglected and occasionally unexpected archives, she shows how the state became an integral and conflicted custodian of literary freedom in the postcolonial world as beliefs about literature’s ‘public’ were radically challenged by the unrivalled migration to Britain at the end of Empire. State Sponsored Literature retells the story of literature’s place in modern Britain through original analysis of the institutional forces behind canon-formation and contestation, from the literature programmes of the British Council and Arts Council to the UK’s fraught relations with UNESCO, from GCSE literature anthologies to the origins of The Satanic Verses in migrant Camden. The state did not shape literary production in a vacuum, Rogers argues, rather its policies, practices, and priorities were inexorably shaped in turn. Demonstrating how archival work can potentially transform our understanding of literature and its reading publics, this book challenges how we think about literature’s value by asking what state involvement has meant for writers, readers, institutions, and the ideal of autonomy itself.

scholarly journals Assessing the Risk of Democratic Reversal in the United States: A Reply to Kurt Weyland

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Matias López ◽  
Juan Pablo Luna
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Boolean Algebra ◽  
Qualitative Comparative Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
Institutional Dynamics ◽  
The Public ◽  
Original Analysis ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT By replying to Kurt Weyland’s (2020) comparative study of populism, we revisit optimistic perspectives on the health of American democracy in light of existing evidence. Relying on a set-theoretical approach, Weyland concludes that populists succeed in subverting democracy only when institutional weakness and conjunctural misfortune are observed jointly in a polity, thereby conferring on the United States immunity to democratic reversal. We challenge this conclusion on two grounds. First, we argue that the focus on institutional dynamics neglects the impact of the structural conditions in which institutions are embedded, such as inequality, racial cleavages, and changing political attitudes among the public. Second, we claim that endogeneity, coding errors, and the (mis)use of Boolean algebra raise questions about the accuracy of the analysis and its conclusions. Although we are skeptical of crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis as an adequate modeling choice, we replicate the original analysis and find that the paths toward democratic backsliding and continuity are both potentially compatible with the United States.

Is Theory Useful for Conflict Prediction? A Response to Beger, Morgan, and Ward

2021 ◽  
pp. 002200272110267
Author(s):  
Robert A. Blair ◽  
Nicholas Sambanis
Keyword(s):  
Civil Wars ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Roc Curves ◽  
Conflict Escalation ◽  
Original Analysis ◽  
Is Theory ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Conflict Prediction ◽  
Technical Question

Beger, Morgan, and Ward (BM&W) call into question the results of our article on forecasting civil wars. They claim that our theoretically-informed model of conflict escalation under-performs more mechanical, inductive alternatives. This claim is false. BM&W’s critiques are misguided or inconsequential, and their conclusions hinge on a minor technical question regarding receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves: should the curves be smoothed, or should empirical curves be used? BM&W assert that empirical curves should be used and all of their conclusions depend on this subjective modeling choice. We extend our original analysis to show that our theoretically-informed model performs as well as or better than more atheoretical alternatives across a range of performance metrics and robustness specifications. As in our original article, we conclude by encouraging conflict forecasters to treat the value added of theory not as an assumption, but rather as a hypothesis to test.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document