#disciplinary-variation

#disciplinary-variation

Witnessing the presence of God at a bus stop in 2011, I felt overwhelmed by something indescribably majestic, which bared my soul to a profound realization.

Behind the closed doors of a therapy practice, science and spiritual traditions are not adversaries. In fact, knowing how to ensure that your belief system is compatible with counseling can transform your experience and strengthen your bond.

In the practice of psychiatry, we like to think we have better radar than most doctors for identifying incoherent thinking in our fellow humans. Incoherence is one of the crucial signs for potential disasters in the central nervous system-delirium, psychosis, mania, intoxication, stroke, encephalitis. And yet, now in the waning years of my career, I confess that I've practiced this skill of identifying incoherent thinking with only the vaguest definition of coherence, and no measure.

Skilled fiction-writers can guide the imagination, cuing readers to use their senses so that they fantasize more richly than they could alone (Scarry 1999, 3-9). If it serves a storyteller's artistic aims, a writer can prompt readers to imagine a scene from several perspectives at once. Creative writers can accomplish this goal by blending appeals to readers' visual and somatosensory (bodily) senses.

Some clinicians have an uncanny quality. A colleague describes herself and others with this instinct as "witchy"-a capacity to know things about patients they haven't said yet, to follow a stray association to a song lyric or a half-remembered cultural reference and arrive, reliably, at something the patient urgently needed to say but couldn't reach on their own. We see with artificial intelligence these intriguing possibilities for discovery, especially as connections that human beings never would see pop out of apparently unrelated data.

Many colleges and universities have made cuts in these programs, often bolstering STEM programs at their expense. It's a situation that has sparked no small amount of impassioned editorials. The headline of a recent article at The Guardian by Alice Speri referenced an 'existential crisis at U.S. universities,' and Speri's reporting features numerous examples of undergraduate and graduate programs facing cuts or outright elimination.

As it turns out, neuroscience might be able to explain why. In a new study whose findings will surprise absolutely no one who's endured a fiery holiday dinner debate, researchers discovered that conservative and liberal brains don't just arrive at fundamentally different conclusions, but take strikingly different paths to get there. It's a fascinating piece of research which just might explain something about the yawning political divides currently tearing society apart.

Recent integrative approaches suggest that physics cannot be adequately characterized by magnitude-based distinctions alone, such as those implied by Big-P, little-p, and mini-p physics. While these categories capture differences in scope and historical impact, they fail to address the heterogeneity of physical activity itself. To remedy this, I propose the Five Fs of physics: force, friction, flux, formulation, and foundational structure.

A large global study across 69 countries found something unexpected: the more individualistic a society is, the more similar people are in how they feel-and in how they want to feel. Across 59 out of 60 emotions, emotional experiences showed greater uniformity in individualistic cultures. This challenges the common assumption that collectivistic cultures are emotionally restrictive because they suppress individuality. In fact, emotional life in individualistic societies appears to be shaped by strong shared norms that dictate which emotions are acceptable, desirable, or problematic-especially regarding negative emotions.

Just before winter break, news broke that the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill plans to close its centers for African, Asian, European, Middle Eastern, Latin American and Slavic, Eurasian and East European studies. Though UNC administrators said in a statement that decisions on closures are not finalized, they confirmed they are evaluating centers and institutes as part of a budget-cutting effort in response to state and federal funding changes.

They're displaying a fascinating set of personality traits that go much deeper than having their finances sorted. 1) They have exceptional impulse control Think about what it takes to always have exact change ready. You need to resist the urge to spend those coins on vending machines or leave them as tips. You have to plan ahead, knowing what you'll buy and preparing accordingly.

"You need to regulate your emotions." It's one of the most common pieces of advice in therapy, self-help, and everyday life. We're told to manage feelings, reframe thoughts, stay calm, and cope better. But modern affective science suggests that our everyday understanding of emotion regulation is incomplete-and sometimes misleading. Research across psychology, neuroscience, and cross-cultural studies shows that regulation is not a single skill you either have or lack.

For Plato, psyche meant something like what we'd now call mind -understood as a complex system requiring governance. The psyche had distinct parts: a reasoning part that deliberates, a spirited part that feels emotion and courage, and an appetitive part that desires. Each part has its own function and its own form of excellence. And crucially, these parts need to be governed-integrated under what Plato called constitutional self-rule.

Many philosophers strike me as like Polish apparatchiks in 1983-they turn up to work and do what they did yesterday just because they don't know what else to do, not because they seriously believe in the system they are maintaining. I think it's not been fully appreciated how much of a blow it is to the confidence of the field's youth that scientific ambitions are increasingly abandoned as untenable.

What does it mean to say that you are restrained solely by your own morality, by your own mind? The conscience is often described as an inner voice telling us what to do when others may be opposed. A moral compass is that which distinguishes between right and wrong, good and bad. Our conscience, our moral compass, sets the groundwork for doing the right thing.

We argue that "faculty members could hold strong viewpoints and yet act in accordance with the highest professional standards." We state emphatically that "it is not possible to make faculty experts refrain from articulating any political viewpoint" while adding that "it is possible to require that they limit the viewpoints expressed in classes to those that are academically justifiable and germane, and to create a space in class where other defensible positions can be expressed."

Chad M. Topaz's critique of the Faculty Merit Act, drafted by the National Association of Scholars, itself embodies another ill of the academy-the conflation of activism with scholarship. Dispassionate readers will quickly grasp that a "co-founder of the Institute for the Quantitative Study of Inclusion, Diversity and Equity" has programmatic goals of his own-the promotion of the illiberal and discriminatory ideology frequently referred to as "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion" (DEI).

While everyone is subject to their individual situations, for many, the process begins with an F-1 student visa, which they hold as they complete a Ph.D. over five to six years. After graduation, they may choose to transition to Optional Practical Training (OPT), which provides a year of work authorization, with a two-year extension for STEM graduates. Some may then transition to a H-1B temporary work visa, which provides for three years of work authorization and is renewable for another three years.