Religion as Social Reality. A Take on the Emic–Etic Debate in Light of John Searle’s Philosophy of Society

In this article I argue that the shift from a private to a public–social understanding of religion raises new ontological and epistemological questions for the scientific study of religion\s. These questions are deeply related to three central features of the emic– etic debate, namely the problems of intentionality, objectivity, and comparison. Focusing on these interrelated issues, I discuss the potential of John Searle’s philoso- phy of society for the scientific study of religion\s. Considering the role of intentional- ity at the social level, I present Searle’s concept of “social ontology” and discuss its epistemological implications. To clarify Searle’s position regarding the objectivity of the social sciences, I propose a heuristic model contrasting different stances within the scientific study of religion\s. Finally, I explore some problematic aspects of Searle’s views for a comparative study of religion\s, and sketch a solution within his frame- work. I shall argue that a distinction between the epistemological and ontological dimensions of religious affairs would help clarify the issues at stake in the past and future of the emic–etic debate.

Actions of the International Union of Soil Science towards a global agenda for the sustainable use of soils

In a multi-level stakeholder approach the international level is of primordial importance not only in terms of legal frameworks, but also in terms of scientific analysis of the needs, options and constraints, as well as related to monitoring and evaluation systems. The Working Group on 'International Actions for the Sustainable Use of Soils' (IASUS) of the International Union of Soil Science (IUSS) identified a number of issues and measures in preparation of the 17thWorld Congress of Soil Science held in Bangkok, Thailand, in August 2002, and prepared a resolution in support of a 'global agenda for the sustainable use of soils', which was adopted on 21st August 2002 on the closing day of the congress.

Decomposing speed of information processing in elementary cognitive tasks

Many studies obtained reliable individual differences in speed of information processing (SIP) as measured by elementary cognitive tasks (ECTs). ECTs usually employ response times (RT) as measure of SIP, but different ECTs target different cognitive processes (e.g., simple or choice reaction, inhibition). Here we used modified versions of the Hick and the Eriksen Flanker task to examine whether these tasks assess dissociable or common aspects of SIP. In both tasks, task complexity was systematically varied across three levels. RT data were collected from 135 participants. Applying fixed-links modeling, RT variance increasing with task complexity was separated from RT variance unchanging across conditions. For each task, these aspects of variance were represented by two independent latent variables. The two latent variables representing RT variance not varying with complexity of the two tasks were virtually identical (r = .83). The latent variables representing increasing complexity in the two tasks were also highly correlated (r = .72) but clearly dissociable. Thus, RT measures contain both task-unspecific, person-related aspects of SIP as well as task-specific aspects indicating the cognitive processes manipulated with the respective task. Separating these aspects of SIP facilitates the interpretation of individual differences in RT.