Quakers and Scripture

This chapter explores how the Quakers’ use of the Bible has developed, recognizing changes both in the Friends movement and in its historical and cultural settings. Friends’ approaches to Scripture have varied widely as they have responded over time to the influences of the Enlightenment, revivalism, fundamentalism, Modernism, and other factors. The chapter describes how Quakers have viewed the authority and inspiration of the Bible and how they have held the importance of the Bible in tension with the inward teaching of Christ, whom they refer to as the ‘Word of God’. The chapter also contrasts various forms of Bible study with reading the Bible with empathy as a fruit of Quaker spirituality

Local Convergence and Global Diversity: The Robustness of Cultural Homophily

Recent extensions of the Axelrod model of cultural dissemination (Klemm et al 2003) showed that global diversity is extremely fragile with small amounts of cultural mutation. This seemed to undermine the original Axelrod theory that homophily preserves diversity. We show that cultural diversity is surprisingly robust if we increase the tendency towards homophily as follows. First, we raised the threshold of similarity below which influence is precluded. Second, we allowed agents to be influenced by all neighbors simultaneously, instead of only one neighbor as assumed in the orginal model. Computational experiments show how both modifications strongly increase the robustness of diversity against mutation. We also find that our extensions may reverse at least one of the main results of Axelrod. While Axelrod predicted that a larger number of cultural dimensions (features) reduces diversity, we find that more features may entail higher levels of diversity.Comment: 21 pages, 8 figures, Submitted for presentation in Mathematical Sociology Session, Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association (ASA), 200

The Surprising Success of a Replication That Failed

In a recent paper (jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/12/4/11.html), Oliver Will contends that the effect of mobility on trust that we originally reported (2002) depends on \'an assumption that is most probably an unwilling, unintended, and unwanted implication of the code.\' When we experimented with Will\'s revised model, we came to the opposite conclusion: his version provides stronger support for our theory than does our original. The explanation is that Will left the learning rate at the upper limit of 1.0, the level we assumed in our original paper. When we lowered the learning rate to compensate for the removal of the contested assumption, the results showed how mobility can lead to an increase in trust, which is consistent with our explanation for higher trust in the US compared to Japan. Moreover, the model also shows that it is possible for there to be too much mobility.Trust, Mobility, Replication