University of Windsor, Ontario: Open Journal Systems
Not a member yet
3084 research outputs found
Sort by
Controlling Death: Exploring the Discourse of Suicide in Antebellum America
No full textAntebellum America represents a time and place of horrific injustices imposed on Black individuals. While many of the injustices that occurred and were directed towards free and enslaved Black Americans are well documented, the topic of suicide and discourses surrounding suicide within this context remains largely unacknowledged. This article considers how Black suicide was understood by contemporaries in Antebellum America and how perceptions of Black suicide were constructed by both sides of the abolitionist debate. It examines how conceptions of suicide evolved throughout the Antebellum Era, how these conceptions reflected and contributed to racism as a social construct, and how Black suicide was used to influence public opinion about both race and the institution of slavery. In doing so, it emphasizes the relationship between discourse, racism, and perceptions of reality
Recipes for Life: Black Women, Cooking, and Memory
No full textIn African American history, food has functioned as expression of colonial power and control, and as a source of Black celebration and liberation. Cookbooks written by Black women from the mid-eighteenth century to late twentieth century reflect the long history of the development of African American cuisine. These texts are practical and instructional, while also offering insights into the transnational development of food as an expression of cultural history through African, Indigenous, and European influences. African Americans, and more specifically Black women, have contributed to the food history of the Southern United States by developing a distinct African American cuisine and creating the texts by which to publicly declare their knowledge and ensure its survival. By analyzing the cookbooks of Malinda Russell, Edna Lewis, Vertamae Smith-Grosvenor, and Carole and Norma Jean Darden, a timeline of cookbooks from the Civil War to the Black Power Movement can be established. Their commonalities, including the use of cookbooks as autobiographies, community memoirs, and genealogical records, are features that resonated with the Civil Rights Movement in the latter half of the twentieth century. Food is more than a means of survival. It is a constantly evolving expression of culture, people, and celebration
Medieval Crime: English Peasants and Trends in Crime
No full textThe author attempts to discover if modern day statistics of crime are similar to the crimes committed by medieval peasants by reviewing medieval crime records. The paper seeks to answer the question: Was there a correlation between poverty and crime for medieval peasants? The author discovers this correlation upon many other topics, such as who was more likely to commit a crime, and the role women played in the medieval crime system
The Colonial Spirit: Rum, its Rise and Decline
No full textThis paper aims to explore the rise of rum in colonial North America: its commodification and use in trade as currency, its prevalence in everyday life, and its eventual decline and supplementation by whiskey. Although rum, for a time, was the spirit of colonial North America, cultural shifts in North America, and the improved feasibility of whiskey production through technological advancements led to a decline in the consumption of rum
Particularism About Arguments
No full textThe aim of this paper is to develop the notions of particularism and generalism in argumentation theory. Generalism is the claim that to argue we need general rules that specify which data support which conclusions, while particularism denies it. The problem is that it is not always clear what these rules consist of, and in what sense argumentation depend on them. To clarify this, I will first introduce the discussion in moral philosophy and show how it has been adapted to argumentation theory. Then I will distinguish some ways of understanding rules and contend that their alleged necessity might be supported in at least three ways. This will allow me to identify some variants of generalism and, on this basis, to outline what I consider to be the most promising reading of particularism.
L’objectif de cet article est de développer les notions de particularisme et de généralisme en théorie de l’argu-mentation. Le généralisme est l’affirma-tion selon laquelle pour argumenter, nous avons besoin de règles générales qui pré-cisent quelles données soutiennent que-lles conclusions, alors que le particula-risme le nie. Le problème est qu’il n’est pas toujours clair en quoi consistent ces règles et dans quel sens l’argumentation en dépend. Pour clarifier cela, je com-mencerai par introduire la discussion en philosophie morale et montrerai com-ment elle a été adaptée à la théorie de l’argumentation. Ensuite, je distinguerai quelques façons de comprendre les règles et soutiendrai que leur prétendue nécessité pourrait être soutenue d’au moins trois façons. Cela me permettra d’identifier certaines variantes du géné-ralisme et, sur cette base, d’esquisser ce que je considère comme la lecture la plus prometteuse du particularisme
Appeals to “Normality” and “Common Sense” in the Face of Global Uncertainty: An Interdisciplinary Discourse-Historical Approach
No full textAt the time of writing, in the summer of 2024, we are confronted with a ‘polycrisis’ (e.g., Tooze 2022). This term is used to describe a situation in which multiple crises do not simply add up to a somewhat bigger crisis, but rather create a significantly different, amplified crisis in which the sub-crises influence each other in interdependent ways. As numerous studies have demonstrated (e.g., Heitmeyer 2024; Roberts 2022; Nowotny 2016), crises engender feelings of uncertainty, insecurity, and subsequently fear (Bauman 2006). The aim of this paper is to pose the overarching question: How do governments and citizens cope with such uncertainties?
Les crises provoquent la peur, la panique, l’incertitude et l’impuissance. L’incertitude et l’insécurité mettent à l’épreuve tous les acteurs concernés ; chacun attend des instructions, une planification, des explications et la sécurité. Cependant, nous affrontons des alarmismes, des simplifications, une série de stratégies de légitimation et d’erreurs. Plus précisément, les erreurs sont souvent placées avant les intérêts communautaires, nationaux ou même locaux. Ces évolutions sont illustrées par une analyse qualitative et quantitative détaillée du discours des débats en Autriche, à l’été 2023. Je soutiens que les appels fallacieux au bon sens et à la normalité dépendent de leur contexte, avec des contenus, des fonctions et des effets différents observables. De tels appels instrumentalisent une « politique des émotions » de différentes manières. Ainsi, une nouvelle logique politique est normalisée, remplaçant le discours rationnel, la délibération et la formulation de politiques dirigées par des experts
Does argumentation change minds? A cognitive and evolutionary approach
No full textOur intuition is straightforward: yes, argumentation changes minds. It can’t be otherwise! But many cognitive and discursive habits seem to suggest otherwise. As the literature in the psychology of reasoning incessantly emphasizes, we hardly change our minds (and the minds of others) because a predisposed robust confirmation bias (or myside bias) is at work every time we argue, among other persistent cognitive illusions (Pohl, 2012), heuristics and biases (Santibáñez, 2023). To adequately answer the questions of why and how argumentation changes minds, if at all, this paper frames the problem in an evolutionary perspective. My main thesis is that argumentative competence changes minds because its ultimate goal (Laland et al., 2011; Scott-Phillips, Dickins & West, 2011) is to construct the future to predict more accurately (Suddendorf, Redshaw & Bulley, 2022). This idea converges with some evolutionary analysis of other cognitive skills and cultural inventions. To explain my perspective, I use the distinction between ultimate and proximal goals of a trait, and the cultural background of argumentative competence plays a fundamental role within this distinction.
Notre intuition est simple: oui, l’argumentation change les men-talités. Mais de nombreuses habitudes cognitives et discursives suggèrent le contraire. Comme le soulignent sans cesse les écrits sur la psychologie du raisonnement, nous ne changeons guère d’avis parce qu’un biais de con-firmation robuste (ou biais de-mon-côté) prédisposé est à l’oeuvre lorsque nous argumentons. Pour répondre adéquatement aux questions de pour-quoi, comment et si l’argumentation change les mentalités, je pose le prob-lème dans une perspective évolution-niste. Je soutiens que la compétence ar-gumentative change les mentalités parce que son but ultime est de con-struire l’avenir, de prédire avec plus de précision. Cela converge avec les anal-yses évolutionnistes d’autres compé-tences cognitives et inventions cul-turelles. Pour expliquer ma perspec-tive, j’utilise la distinction entre les buts ultimes et proximaux d’un trait.
