This paper develops a notion of manipulative gaslighting, which is designed to capture something not captured by epistemic gaslighting, namely the intent to undermine women by denying their testimony about harms done to them by men. Manipulative gaslighting, I propose, consists in getting someone to doubt her testimony by challenging its credibility using two tactics: "sidestepping" (dodging evidence that supports her testimony) and "displacing" (attributing to her cognitive or characterological defects). I explain how manipulative gaslighting is distinct from (mere) reasonable disagreement, with which it is sometimes confused. I also argue for three further claims: that manipulative gaslighting is a method of enacting misogyny, that it is often a collective phenomenon, and, as collective, qualifies as a mode of psychological oppression.
A SUFFICIENTLY nuanced theory of distributive justice should be able to accomplish the following two theoretical tasks: it should provide grounds for meeting the needs of people who are not able to contribute to the production of the goods necessary to sustain them; and it should provide grounds for adequately compensating those who do contribute to the production of such goods. The first task suggests a basis for distribution that is independent of contribution; it rests perhaps on a moral ideal requiring that the basic needs of all individuals be met. The second task suggests a basis for distribution that is in some way connected to contribution. It rests, perhaps, upon an ideal of reciprocity according to which one is owed a share of the social goods she helps create, all things being equal.The theory of John Rawls-now the standard-bearer for accounts of justicecontains an idealizing assumption that was largely, though not completely, overlooked until underscored in a recent book by Eva Kittay. 1 This assumptionwhich I will call "the fully cooperating assumption"-states that all citizens will be regarded, for the purposes of Rawls's theory, as physically and mentally competent and hence able to participate fully in schemes of cooperation. 2 Rawls's
A 15-lesson social problem-solving training program was developed and implemented with 25 severely disturbed children enrolled in a special day treatment school. Trained children generated significantly more alternative solutions at posttesting than did matched control youngsters. Follow-up analyses indicated a larger number of antisocial responses from trained as opposed to untrained children. No adjustment differences were found at posttesting. Issues related to generalization of skill acquisition from the cognitive to behavioral domain are discussed.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://links.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://links.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jphil.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.