Wage inequality, including the college/high school education premium, has increased substantially in the United States. A key part of the most widely accepted explanation for this is that skill-biased technological change accelerated during this time. This article suggests that the impact of skill-biased technological change was closer to constant in the second half of the twentieth century. This leaves a large unexplained decrease in the college/high school education premium in the 1940s and a large unexplained increase in the 1980s. The (...) current article provides evidence that the upsurge and decline in union power during those respective periods provide a good explanation for these unexplained wage inequality changes. (shrink)

Within the Christian theological tradition there has always been a variety of perspectives on hell, usually distinguished according to their views about the duration of hell’s torments for the damned. Traditionalists maintain that the suffering of the damned is everlasting. Universalists claim that eventually every person is redeemed and arrives in heaven. And conditional immortalists, also known as “conditionalists” or “annihilationists,” reject both the concept of eternal torment as well as universal salvation, instead claiming that after a finite period of (...) suffering the damned are annihilated. Conditionalism has enjoyed somewhat of a revival in scholarly circles in recent years, buoyed by the influential biblical defense of the view by Edward Fudge. However, there has yet to appear a book-length philosophical defense of conditionalism... until now. In Hell and Divine Goodness, James Spiegel assesses the three major alternative theories of hell, arriving at the conclusion that the conditionalist view is, all things considered, the most defensible position on the issue. (shrink)

That art historians have felt it necessary to emulate this effort to express personal input can be explained by our need to gain credibility in that aspect of our work that is indistinguishable in method from other historical research: the reconstruction, through documents and artifacts, of past events, conditions, and attitudes. Most of us simply ignore the ambivalence of our position; I cannot recall having heard or read discussions of it, but it is bound to creep out from under the (...) rug. If a student asks me why I think Rembrandt and Picasso are good artists—which most students are too well trained to do—and if I answer that judgments of value are not discussed by historians, I am within my rights, like a witness at a congressional hearing claiming the protection of the Fifth Amendment. But I ought to be found in contempt of the classroom. And if I try to answer seriously, I ought not begin by saying that I chose Rembrandt because he has been acknowledged by generations to have been a great artist but rather because I find more to think, feel, and speak about in his works than in those of, for example, Nicolaes Maes, and because I believe that the student stands to gain more by looking at them. I want the student to have the most rewarding experiences, and, as a result, perhaps to learn to make value discriminations of his own—even ones different from mine and from the so-called consensus of history—and ultimately to explain the grounds on which he makes them. This means having to know and to explain what I think is "rewarding." James S. Ackerman, professor of fine arts at Harvard University, is the author of, among other works, The Architecture of Michelangelo, Art and Archaeology, The Cortile del Belvedere, and Palladio. He is currently writing on Renaissance art, science, and naturalism and making a film on Andrea Palladio and his influence in America. "Transactions in Architectural Design," his previous contribution to Critical Inquiry, appeared in the Winter 1974 issue. (shrink)

Scholar and author James Spiegel affirms the classic view of God's omniscience and omnipotence and shows how it answers difficult questions that Christians wrestle with, including the problem of evil.

We establish the decidability of the${{\rm{\Sigma }}_2}$theory of both the arithmetic and hyperarithmetic degrees in the language of uppersemilattices, i.e., the language with ≤, 0, and$\sqcup$. This is achieved by using Kumabe-Slaman forcing, along with other known results, to show given finite uppersemilattices${\cal M}$and${\cal N}$, where${\cal M}$is a subuppersemilattice of${\cal N}$, that every embedding of${\cal M}$into either degree structure extends to one of${\cal N}$iff${\cal N}$is an end-extension of${\cal M}$.

Nelson Goodman argues against those who, like Carnap, claim extensional identity is the criterion for correct constructional definition. Goodman argues that internal logical difficulties sink such a criterion, thus he proposes his own criterion of extensional isomorphism. We argue that Goodman's criterion itself falls prey to his own arguments or else extensional identity is not shown faulty.

Part I of this essay will be devoted to Gauthier's principle of minimax relative concession. Part II will focus, more generally, on the variety of possible strategies available to liberal theory. In Part I, I will argue that the principle of minimax relative concession does not define “essential justice” as Gauthier claims. In Part II, I will argue that the difficulties facing Gauthier's strategy are common to other strategies of die same general kind. I will close by suggesting what I (...) think may prove to be a more promising approach. (shrink)

ABSTRACT Contrary to Laurel Gleason's assertions, Deliberative Polling among random samples is not a process that is dominated by “experts” or by certain categories of deliberator; it produces genuine gains among the participants in knowledge of information that has been verified as true and relevant; it does not cause ideological polarization; and it is not intended as a substitute for, rather than a supplement to, deliberation on the part of the general public.

"[T]his is much more than a conventional reference guide. . . . An essential item in any collection that deals with the subject of ethics and public policy." Choice.

Introduction: Socratic divagation/divination -- The holy -- On the sign of Socrates -- Divine madness -- Banishing the poets -- Conclusion: the multiplicity of voices.