The grant supports the planning phase of a large, interdisciplinary project Rea and Newlands are developing — “Narrative Conceptions of the Self in Psychology, Philosophy, and Theology.”

In January, the philosophers will bring together scholars in philosophy, psychology, neuroscience, anthropology and theology to present cutting-edge research related to the question, “How can we understand and make sense of the narrative conceptions of the self?”

The January conference serves a number of purposes, Newlands said, including examining the state of research across disciplines to discover areas of common ground and avenues for new research.

“We also want to work toward consensus and clarity among the various scholarly fields with regard to terminology and vocabulary,” he said. “We’re working hard to make sure researchers from different disciplines don’t end up just talking past each other.”

Rea and Newlands have established a science advisory board to help them prepare aspects of their larger proposal that venture into domains beyond their own areas of expertise.

Related to their overarching question on the narrative conceptions of the self are two ancillary questions — “Who am I?” and “What am I?”

“Developments in psychology during the last 30 years have favored setting aside the ‘what’ query while trying to make progress on the ‘who’ question,” Rea said, “and out of this has arisen a theory called narrative conception.”

Scholars who defend the narrative conception theory argue that — given the way the brain processes experiences and strings together episodic memories — perhaps the resultant narrative is, actually, wholly constitutive of the self.

The skeptics’ rejoinder, Rea said, is, “What kind of thing is it that creates itself?”

Such debates are among those that Rea and Newlands plan to explore with their gathering of scholars in January.

This initiative is the latest in a series of collaborative, interdisciplinary projects Rea and Newlands have spearheaded in the last eight years. Together, they have received close to $15 million in funding for projects exploring ,��, and .

Notre Dame is an “extremely friendly and fertile environment” for research on spiritually and religiously significant topics, Rea said.

Rea and Newlands, who are also directors of the , said the center has been “an absolute key” to their ability to manage projects like this one.

“We now have a center staff with years of project management experience under their belts,” Newlands said, “and we are all eager to expand the center’s reach and dialogue partners.”

The Center for Philosophy of Religion in Notre Dame’s College of Arts and Letters promotes work on topics in the philosophy of religion and philosophical theology and encourages the development and exploration of specifically Christian and theistic philosophy.

The Templeton Foundation strives to be a philanthropic catalyst for discovery in areas engaging life’s biggest questions, ranging from explorations into the laws of nature and the universe to questions on the nature of love, gratitude, forgiveness and creativity.

Originally published by Renee Peggs at on December 14, 2017.

In "" (Cambridge University Press, 2016), Harden examines the relationship between what citizens want from their elected state lawmakers and what legislators adopt as their top priorities while in office.

Harden frames his book around four dimensions of representation: policy, constituent services, allocation (economic development and fundraising), and descriptive representation (categories such as gender or race). While these dimensions are each common themes in political science, Harden is among the first in this discipline to emphasize the relationship between the four elements.

“These were essentially four different facets, usually treated in isolation by political scientists,” Harden said. “For a legislator, though, these are all part of the job every day; they meld into one. It made sense to me to bring them all together for the purposes of the book.”

Harden, who , was surprised to discover that economic inequality plays a significant role in determining which of the dimensions, according to constituents, should be the focus for an elected representative.

“People who rank policy as most important tend to be economically advantaged,” Harden said. “Not to say that economically disadvantaged people are not interested in their representatives’ policy decisions, but they tend to express a preference for constituent services and bringing money to the district.”

Harden’s book suggests that legislators actually respond to these demands relative to the economic viability of their district — the wealthier a district is, the more representatives tend to focus on policy. The converse seems also to be true, with representatives in economically disadvantaged districts spending more time on services and allocation.

This dichotomy has the potential to perpetuate political inequality, he said.

“If the rich are getting the policy changes they want and the poor are getting bought off with services, that could be a contributing factor in the poor not getting their voice heard,” Harden said.

In addition to the Virginia Gray Award, Harden also won APSA’s State Politics and Policy Quarterly Award for his co-authored paper "Follow the Leader: Prominent Female Politicians and the Emergence of Women Candidates for Public Office," presented at the Midwest Political Science Association’s annual meeting in 2016.

“It’s a tremendous honor to receive any APSA award, because there are so many great political science books written every year,” Harden said. “Virginia Gray was on my dissertation committee, so that makes this award especially meaningful.”

Harden is currently at work on another book, tentatively titled "Indecision in American Legislatures," which he is co-authoring with University of Houston political scientist Justin H. Kirkland.

“We call it ‘the waffling book,’ because it addresses situations where a legislator starts off sponsoring or supporting a bill but switches sides by the time the final vote comes around,” Harden said. “We’re looking at how elected officials balance pleasing constituents and pleasing powerful party leaders.”

Originally published by Renee Peggs at on August 29, 2017.