Elementary Forms of the Metaphorical Life : Tropes at Work in Durkheim’s Theory of the Religious

Peer reviewedPostprin

Sociological and Communication-Theoretical Perspectives on the Commercialization of the Sciences

Both self-organization and organization are important for the further development of the sciences: the two dynamics condition and enable each other. Commercial and public considerations can interact and "interpenetrate" in historical organization; different codes of communication are then "recombined." However, self-organization in the symbolically generalized codes of communication can be expected to operate at the global level. The Triple Helix model allows for both a neo-institutional appreciation in terms of historical networks of university-industry-government relations and a neo-evolutionary interpretation in terms of three functions: (i) novelty production, (i) wealth generation, and (iii) political control. Using this model, one can appreciate both subdynamics. The mutual information in three dimensions enables us to measure the trade-off between organization and self-organization as a possible synergy. The question of optimization between commercial and public interests in the different sciences can thus be made empirical.Comment: Science & Education (forthcoming

Sex Differences in the Brain: A Whole Body Perspective

Most writing on sexual differentiation of the mammalian brain (including our own) considers just two organs: the gonads and the brain. This perspective, which leaves out all other body parts, misleads us in several ways. First, there is accumulating evidence that all organs are sexually differentiated, and that sex differences in peripheral organs affect the brain. We demonstrate this by reviewing examples involving sex differences in muscles, adipose tissue, the liver, immune system, gut, kidneys, bladder, and placenta that affect the nervous system and behavior. The second consequence of ignoring other organs when considering neural sex differences is that we are likely to miss the fact that some brain sex differences develop to compensate for differences in the internal environment (i.e., because male and female brains operate in different bodies, sex differences are required to make output/function more similar in the two sexes). We also consider evidence that sex differences in sensory systems cause male and female brains to perceive different information about the world; the two sexes are also perceived by the world differently and therefore exposed to differences in experience via treatment by others. Although the topic of sex differences in the brain is often seen as much more emotionally charged than studies of sex differences in other organs, the dichotomy is largely false. By putting the brain firmly back in the body, sex differences in the brain are predictable and can be more completely understood

The Shackles of Practice: History of psychology, research assessment and the curriculum

The history of psychology is being increasingly marginalized in British universities. In this article we argue that this marginalization has been brought about by a combination of material circumstances resulting from the marketization of the UK Higher Education sector. One consequence of this, the statutory audit known as the Research Excellence Framework, has made it increasingly difficult to undertake historical work as it has traditionally been done in UK Psychology Departments. At best such a situation challenges the ambition for historical work to have an impact on psychology. At worst it potentially renders the history of psychology irrelevant. Yet the theoretical justification for history of psychology has never been stronger. Psychology’s subject matter is neither exclusively natural nor entirely socially constructed, but lies on that “somewhat suspect borderland between physiology and philosophy” as Wilhelm Wundt put it. The discipline’s ontological claims are therefore always made from within epistemological frameworks which are themselves products of particular historical contexts. Such arguments have persuaded us that history of psychology has a fundamental role to play within the wider discipline. Yet as historians we cannot ignore the constraining social and material circumstances in which our field operates. We conclude that although the constraints of practice suggest that its prospects for influencing its parent discipline are seriously challenged, there are nevertheless opportunities for the history of psychology areas such as the undergraduate curriculum