Private versus public : how one gay professor negotiates the boundaries between his personal and professional lives /

This study examined how one university professor negotiated the boundaries between his personal life as a gay man and his professional life as a teacher. Using his sexual orientation as a focal point, the study explored the circumstances and underlying assumptions that influenced this professor's decisions to disclose information of a personal nature. Data collection was solicited from a number of sources: (a) In-depth interviews with the participant, his colleagues, students, and friends; (b) Field observation of the participant teaching over a 3 -day period; and (c) A document review of lesson plans, course outlines, student feedback forms, and the participant's teaching portfolio. The researcher maintained both observation journals and reflective journals during this process. Data analysis using the constant comparative method elicited several themes. The participant engaged in a variety of strategies in disclosing his sexual orientation that included: (a) no disclosure at all, (b) assuming people knew, (c) casually mentioning it in conversation, and (d) deliberately planning to tell someone. The participant also engaged in an ongoing assessment of his environment that included evaluating the level of risk in disclosing his sexual orientation and assessing the listener's ability to receive the information. The participant cited numerous reasons for disclosing his sexual orientation. Further inquiry revealed a number of belief systems that underlined these reasons. These belief systems included beliefs around privacy, authenticity, teaching, manners, professionalism, and homosexuality. The conclusions suggested that the participant utilized a consistent process in both his personal and professional lives to determine what information was kept private and what information was made public. While the process used to determine the degree of disclosure was consistent, the actual disclosures themselves varied widely in nature.

Peut-on être blâmé pour ses croyances? : le déontologisme épistémique face au problème de l'involontarisme doxastique

Peut-on parfois être blâmé pour ses croyances ? Selon les partisans du déontologisme épistémique, la pratique ordinaire consistant à blâmer et critiquer les gens pour leurs croyances est tout à fait légitime. Toutefois, d’autres philosophes soutiennent que malgré son omniprésence dans la vie de tous les jours, le blâme doxastique n’est jamais approprié. En effet, selon l’argument à partir de l’involontarisme doxastique, nous ne pouvons jamais être blâmés pour nos croyances puisque (1) nous pouvons être blâmés pour une croyance seulement si elle est sous notre contrôle volontaire et (2) nos croyances ne sont jamais sous notre contrôle volontaire. Le but de ce mémoire est de déterminer si les déontologistes peuvent répondre de manière convaincante à cet argument. Autrement dit, pouvons-nous parfois être blâmés pour nos croyances malgré ce qu’en disent les anti-déontologistes, ou faut-il leur donner raison et rejeter la pratique du blâme doxastique ? Pour répondre à cette question, je commence par clarifier l’argument anti-déontologiste en précisant la teneur de sa thèse centrale : l’involontarisme doxastique. Par la suite, je passe en revue différentes stratégies qui ont été proposées par des représentants du déontologisme pour défendre le blâme doxastique contre cet argument. Devant l’échec de ces réponses, je suggère une défense alternative du déontologisme selon laquelle l’involontarisme doxastique n’est pas incompatible avec le blâme doxastique. Si cette réponse est concluante, alors nous n’avons pas à donner raison aux anti-déontologistes : nous pouvons parfois être blâmés pour nos croyances.

Existe-t-il une seule normativité de la croyance? : analyse de la thèse de l'incommensurabilité aux vues de l'instrumentalisme de la croyance

Ce mémoire s'inscrit dans la constellation de questions regroupées sous l'étiquette de l'éthique de la croyance. Plus spécifiquement, il cherche à analyser la viabilité des jugements tout bien considéré portant sur les croyances lorsque des raisons de types distincts (raisons épistémiques et raisons pragmatiques) entrent en conflit. Cette analyse se fera à l'aune d'une recherche portant sur l'instrumentalisme de la croyance, la position avançant que les croyances sont instrumentales à nos intérêts et que, par conséquent, la normativité de la croyance se jauge en fonction de nos objectifs. L'instrumentalisme de la croyance est tombé sous le coup de plusieurs critiques dans les dernières années et se mémoire se donne comme mission d'en évaluer la portée. Si d'aventure l'instrumentalisme de la croyance devait être une position viable, il y a lieu de penser qu'il existe une commensurabilité possible entre raisons de différents types.

Why fit contact lenses? Part 1 - clinical reasons

There are probably two main reasons why some practitioners do not bother fitting contact lenses – that it is not profitable and it is clinically too difficult. Although this article will concentrate on clinical issues rather than questions of profitability, I feel that the belief that contact lens fitting is not as profitable as prescribing spectacles is unfounded.

“How Can a Woman Who Has Been Raped Be Believed?”: Andrea Dworkin, Sexual Violence and the Ethics of Belief

In June 2000, Andrea Dworkin, an American feminist activist and author, published an account of being raped in a Paris hotel room a year earlier. The story was met with widespread disbelief, including from feminist readers. This article explores the reasons for this disbelief, asking how and why narratives of rape are granted – or denied – truth status by their readers. The article argues for understanding the conferral of belief as a narrative transaction involving the actions of both narrator and reader. It posits that Dworkin was widely seen as an unreliable narrator but argues that for ideologically charged narratives such as rape narratives judgements of reliability and belief inevitably draw upon the normative standpoint of the reader. I suggest that there are opposing criteria for establishing the truth of rape narratives; a ‘factual’ or legal model, which sees rape narratives as requiring scrutiny, and an ‘experiential’ model, located within certain strands of feminist politics, which emphasises the ethical importance of believing women’s narratives. The article finishes with a consideration of the place of belief within an ethics of reading and reception of rape narratives.

Reasoning about Requirements Evolution Using Clustered Belief Revision

During the development of system requirements, software system specifications are often inconsistent. Inconsistencies may arise for different reasons, for example, when multiple conflicting viewpoints are embodied in the specification, or when the specification itself is at a transient stage of evolution. These inconsistencies cannot always be resolved immediately. As a result, we argue that a formal framework for the analysis of evolving specifications should be able to tolerate inconsistency by allowing reasoning in the presence of inconsistency without trivialisation, and circumvent inconsistency by enabling impact analyses of potential changes to be carried out. This paper shows how clustered belief revision can help in this process. Clustered belief revision allows for the grouping of requirements with similar functionality into clusters and the assignment of priorities between them. By analysing the result of a cluster, an engineer can either choose to rectify problems in the specification or to postpone the changes until more information becomes available.

Food Handling Practices, Knowledge and Beliefs of Families with Young Children Based on the Health Belief Model

Objective: To determine current food handling practices, knowledge and beliefs of primary food handlers with children 10 years old and the relationship between these components. Design: Surveys were developed based on FightBac!™ concepts and the Health Belief Model (HBM) construct. Participants: The majority of participants (n= 503) were females (67%), Caucasians (80%), aged between 30 to 49 years old (83%), had one or two children (83%), prepared meals all or most of the time (76%) and consumed meals away from home three times or less per week (66%). Analysis: Descriptive statistics and inferential statistics using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (rho) (p<0.05 and one-tail) and Chi-square were used to examine frequency and correlations. Results: Few participants reached the food safety objectives of Healthy People 2010 for safe food handling practices (79%). Mixed results were reported for perceived susceptibility. Only half of the participants (53-54%) reported high perceived severity for their children if they contracted food borne illness. Most participants were confident of their food handling practices for their children (91%) and would change their food handling practices if they or their family members previously experienced food poisoning (79%). Participants’ reasons for high self-efficacy were learning from their family and independently acquiring knowledge and skills from the media, internet or job. The three main barriers to safe food handling were insufficient time, lots of distractions and lack of control of the food handling practices of other people in the household. Participants preferred to use food safety information that is easy to understand, has scientific facts, causes feelings of health-threat and has lots of pictures or visuals. Participants demonstrate high levels of knowledge in certain areas of the FightBac!TM concepts but lacked knowledge in other areas. Knowledge and cues to action were most supportive of the HBM construct, while perceived susceptibility was least supportive of the HBM construct. Conclusion: Most participants demonstrate many areas to improve in their food handling practices, knowledge and beliefs. Adviser: Julie A. Albrecht

Belief in dealing with depression alone: Results from community surveys of adolescents and adults

Background: Community surveys have found that some people believe that it is better to deal with depression alone rather than seek help. However, there has been little research into the characteristics of this group. Methods: Data were drawn from three Australian surveys: (1) a national survey of 1001 adults aged 18+ years; (2) a school survey of 552 students aged 14-16 years from two regions; (3) a survey of 577 young people aged 12-17 years from the Melbourne region. In all three surveys, participants who believed it would be helpful to deal with depression alone were contrasted with those who believed it would be harmful in terms of sociodemographic characteristics, recognition of depression in a vignette, contact with people who experienced depression, beliefs about treatments, beliefs about using substances, beliefs about long-term outcomes, and beliefs about causes. Results: In both adolescents and adults, belief in dealing with depression alone was associated with male gender, less favourable views about mental health professionals, more favourable views about using substances to deal with depression, and a more positive expectation about the outcome if treatment is not sought. Adolescents believing in dealing with depression alone had more favourable views about some potential helpers, such as church workers and pharmacists. In adults, but not adolescents, there was an association with the belief that depression is caused by personal weakness. Limitations: The surveys did not directly ask about reasons for believing that dealing with depression alone would be helpful and did not assess actual help-seeking. Conclusions: Factors encouraging dealing with depression alone are a belief that it is a self-limiting disorder, that substances are an effective way to deal with it and, in adults, that depression is due to personal weakness. Consistent with previous research, males are an important target group for encouraging seeking help to deal with depression. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Children’s reasoning about other’s intentions: False-belief and counterfactual conditional inferences

Dados suplementares associados com o artigo e epígrafe estão disponíveis em: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2016.08.007

Integrating science through Bayesian Belief Networks : case study of Lyngbya in Moreton Bay

Bayesian Belief Networks (BBNs) are emerging as valuable tools for investigating complex ecological problems. In a BBN, the important variables in a problem are identified and causal relationships are represented graphically. Underpinning this is the probabilistic framework in which variables can take on a finite range of mutually exclusive states. Associated with each variable is a conditional probability table (CPT), showing the probability of a variable attaining each of its possible states conditioned on all possible combinations of it parents. Whilst the variables (nodes) are connected, the CPT attached to each node can be quantified independently. This allows each variable to be populated with the best data available, including expert opinion, simulation results or observed data. It also allows the information to be easily updated as better data become available ----- ----- This paper reports on the process of developing a BBN to better understand the initial rapid growth phase (initiation) of a marine cyanobacterium, Lyngbya majuscula, in Moreton Bay, Queensland. Anecdotal evidence suggests that Lyngbya blooms in this region have increased in severity and extent over the past decade. Lyngbya has been associated with acute dermatitis and a range of other health problems in humans. Blooms have been linked to ecosystem degradation and have also damaged commercial and recreational fisheries. However, the causes of blooms are as yet poorly understood.