Exploring the Dynamics of Charismatic Attribution: How and Why Do People Think of Other Individuals as Charismatic?

Charisma is a popular and enthralling concept both in its academic and lay usage; with some alluding to the role of charisma as important to various historical events including the 2016 Philippine presidential elections (Curato, 2016; Francisco, 2017; Pedrosa, 2015). However, the dynamics of charismatic attribution – how and why people think of, label, perceive or categorize other individuals as charismatic – has had a disproportionately fewer share of discussion in the literature. This is despite the fact that charismatic attribution has played a central, if implicit, role in the development of the construct of charisma. This study sought to explore the dynamics of charismatic attribution, and pagtatanong-tanong (indigenous participatory interview; Pe-Pua, 2006) was done with N=17 participants (523 minutes of audio recorded data) of diverse occupations, ages, and SES. The participants' conceptualization of charisma varies, but the role of effects is primary. These effects include 1.) capturing attention, 2.) behavioral influence, 3.) making people believe the figure's message, 4.) effects on emotion and 5.) having devoted followers. Results indicate that charismatic attribution is mainly an effects-based appraisal - an evaluation of whether figures are able to achieve the participants’ notion of what a charismatic effect is. Various attributes and various behaviors are used to describe charismatic figures in so far as these help produce the previously stated effects but are not in themselves primary considerations for charismatic attribution. Only for a proportion of the participants do moral judgements factor in whether they would think of another individual as charismatic. It is argued that the process of charismatic attribution facilitates attending to internal characteristics of figures to describe and explain why effects occur. Charismatic attribution allows to make sense and simplify complex social phenomenon. Other theoretical considerations are then discussed, including a comparison with the signaling framework of charisma (Antonakis et al., 2016; Antonakis, 2017) and an alternative model of charisma is developed: The Constructed Charisma Framework.

Analysing African Ethics

Chapter 3 spells out the analytic method used in Part II to evaluate theories of right action suggested by the African tradition. The central criteria invoked to ascertain whether a general moral principle counts as African and philosophically justified are the extent to which it entails and explains two classes of intuitions. One sort consists of particular moral judgements that are salient amongst sub-Saharan peoples or at least their philosophical exponents, for instance that reconciliation is the proper end of criminal justice and that consensus is apt in politics. The other sort comprises particular moral judgements widely accepted across the globe, especially as they figure into English-speaking philosophical discussions of morality, e.g., racial epithets are wrong. The (secular) moral theory that best entails and explains these two groups of intuitions is advanced as both African and justified in respect of a multicultural audience of moral philosophers.

Quintilian’s Underlying Educational Programme

This chapter discusses the educational programme presented in Books 1, 2, and 10 of the Institutio, in connection with Quintilian’s view that rhetoric is a virtue and his pedagogical principles, which not only constitute the foundation of his review of the curricula of grammar and rhetoric, but also inform his discussion of rhetoric in the entire work. The Roman ideal of the perfect orator is central to Quintilian’s ideas on education, but these are nevertheless firmly rooted in reality, nourished by his own teaching experience and aimed at the practical goal of improving the education of the orator. Two important concerns of Quintilian about current practices are the pupil’s transition from the grammaticus to the rhetor, especially the relinquishing by rhetors of certain aspects of their duties, and school declamation. More generally, Quintilian voices indirect but unmistakable criticism of contemporary society and culture, for instance when he speaks about the decadent lifestyle in households or expresses moral judgements about effeminacy and licentiousness in epideictic performances. On the other hand, Quintilian is not a moralist or an unworldly idealist, but rather an inspired pedagogue and a retired orator with a passion for good oratory. His main audiences seem to be the grammatici and rhetors of Rome, to whom he presents clear educational principles and didactic advice, and trainee orators and young adult orators, to impress upon them the purposes of the orator and his art.

Moral Judgements of Junior Sports Sponsorships: An Emerging Mediator of Sponsor Goodwill

The sponsorship of junior sport is a contentious issue with community concerns raised about the appropriateness of some marketing targetted at children. Parents and coaches are guardians of junior sports players and often faced with a moral dilemma. On the one hand they know sponsors, who are trying to generate goodwill through providing financial or in-kind support, are crucial to the affordability of junior sports when competition for securing sponsorships is intense. On the other hand, they hold concerns that some sponsors may exploit their access to these young, vulnerable players. Guardians are caught at a crossroads with equally undesirable alternatives—financially unviable junior sports without sponsors or junior sports with potentially exploitative sponsors. Our study fills a gap in the literature where the tensions of commercial sponsorship agendas and moral concerns in sponsorship has not been well explored with our study being the first to apply the construct of moral judgements in a sponsorship model. Mixed methodology is used to examine the role that moral judgements play in determining sponsor goodwill. A qualitative study ( n = 18) informed an online survey ( n = 306) of Australian junior sports guardians. Structural equation modelling revealed that guardians’ moral judgements mediated the relationships between sponsor fit, perceived sponsor altruism and the outcome variable, sponsorship goodwill. The findings of this study extend scholarly understanding of consumers’ appraisal of sponsorships and provide useful insights to guide practitioners in sponsorship decision making, particularly in contexts that stimulate community interest or concerns.

Franco’s Victory

Social Catholic groups took firm control of the juvenile courts after General Franco occupied Madrid. They swiftly exercised their moral judgements on families which suffered executions, imprisonment, employment purges, dire living conditions, and the high cost of living. Court staff particularly loathed secular ‘Red’ worker groups and endeavoured to capture the children of these foes of the faith. Mothers forced into prostitution or petty crime, living in overcrowded and poor housing whose lives were marked by hunger and disease, proved especially vulnerable to child removal. They could also fall victim to their husbands serving jail terms for political offences who, from prison, could battle to deprive them of custody. In other cases, families managed to keep bonds alive by visiting children and youngsters petitioned the authorities to be allowed home to help look after their parents.

Are some cultures more mind-minded in their moral judgements than others?

Cross-cultural research on moral reasoning has brought to the fore the question of whether moral judgements always turn on inferences about the mental states of others. Formal legal systems for assigning blame and punishment typically make fine-grained distinctions about mental states, as illustrated by the concept of mens rea, and experimental studies in the USA and elsewhere suggest everyday moral judgements also make use of such distinctions. On the other hand, anthropologists have suggested that some societies have a morality that is disregarding of mental states, and have marshalled ethnographic and experimental evidence in support of this claim. Here, we argue against the claim that some societies are simply less ‘mind-minded’ than others about morality. In place of this cultural main effects hypothesis about the role of mindreading in morality, we propose a contextual variability view in which the role of mental states in moral judgement depends on the context and the reasons for judgement. On this view, which mental states are or are not relevant for a judgement is context-specific, and what appear to be cultural main effects are better explained by culture-by-context interactions.

Are some cultures more mind-minded in their moral judgements than others?

Cross-cultural research on moral reasoning has brought to the fore the question of whether moral judgements always turn on inferences about the mental states of others. Formal legal systems for assigning blame and punishment typically make fine-grained distinctions about mental states, as illustrated by the concept of mens rea , and experimental studies in the USA and elsewhere suggest everyday moral judgements also make use of such distinctions. On the other hand, anthropologists have suggested that some societies have a morality that is disregarding of mental states, and have marshalled ethnographic and experimental evidence in support of this claim. Here, we argue against the claim that some societies are simply less ‘mind-minded’ than others about morality. In place of this cultural main effects hypothesis about the role of mindreading in morality, we propose a contextual variability view in which the role of mental states in moral judgement depends on the context and the reasons for judgement. On this view, which mental states are or are not relevant for a judgement is context-specific, and what appear to be cultural main effects are better explained by culture-by-context interactions. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The language of cooperation: reputation and honest signalling’.

Critical reasoning

This chapter explores the process of moral reasoning. It explains that often moral judgements are complex. There is no single rule that can be used to identify the correct answer. The chapter explains what makes a good or bad moral argument. It explores how different approaches can be combined to resolve an ethical dilemma.

Moral origins and Christian ethics: An interdisciplinary approach in conversation with J. Wentzel van Huyssteen

Only a small number of theologians attempt to explore the critical and constructive contributions theology can make to evolutionary accounts of morality. J. Wentzel van Huyssteen can be considered a pioneer in the science and theology discourse, with a special interest in the origin of morality as part of his pursuit of a more profound notion of human uniqueness in science and theology. In this article, the origin of moral awareness and morality will be explored by combining a variety of perspectives, including evolutionary anthropology, in an attempt to gain a more responsible notion of ethics and clarify its relationship to Christian theology. The interdisciplinary approach adopted in this study, in conversation with Van Huyssteen, reveals the necessity of distinguishing between moral awareness and morality, that is, moral norms, judgements and conventions. Evolutionary explanations of our innate sense of morality cannot explain any of our moral judgements or justify the truth claims regarding our moral judgements. Gaining insights from philosophy and developmental psychology, the origin of moral norms, judgements and conventions are explored on a more interactive level of cultural evolution and niche construction. Finally, this article briefly explores whether Van Huyssteen’s post-foundational rethinking of the imago Dei can offer insights into how this bottom-up approach to moral awareness and morality relates to Christian theology and ethics.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: This article, in conversation with Wentzel van Huyssteen, explores the origin of moral awareness and morality and its relation to ethics. The interdisciplinary conversation covers the fields of evolutionary anthropology, developmental psychology, philosophy and theology within the contemporary science and theology discourses.