Suchergebnisse

A strictly biological definition of death as a specific event is both possible & socially desirable. Contrary to L. C. Becker (see SA 24:5/76I1544), brain-stem death, as defined by the Harvard Committee of 1968, provides a satisfactory definition of death, since it provides as equally valid a yardstick as the conventional criteria of cessation of respiration & of the heartbeats. The convergence of transplant surgery with extraordinary methods of resuscitation has led to considerable confusion concerning the boundaries of life & has placed the issue of an alternative biological criterion of death in the foreground of public interest. The concept of a biological definition of death is defended against proposals to redefine death in terms of social, economic, or morally relevant criteria. The criteria for diagnosing death, being strictly biological, must be distinguished from discussions concerning the quality of residual life & decisions as to when, if ever, the existence of a living being should be terminated. Following a survey of changing attitudes toward the traditional diagnosis of death within the medical profession, the actual criteria for the diagnosis of brain-stem death is examined & then defended against the accusation that any departure from criteria based on the cessation of the heart & respiratory organs must constitute an "artificial advancement of death." AA.

Activity 7.3 Avoiding AIDSActivity 7.4 Who Gets AIDS?; Activity 7.5 Common Questions About AIDS; Activity 7.6 What is AIDS?; Activity 7.7 Women and AIDS; 8 ENCOUNTERING DEATH IN OUR VALUES; 8. Values; Activity 8.1 Values Coat of Arms; Activity 8.2 Values Encouter; Activity 8.3 Values Statement; Activity 8.4 Values Questionnaire; Activity 8.5 Ethical Dilemmas; Activity 8.6 Moral Dilemma; Activity 8.7 Near Death Experience (NDE); Activity 8.8 Afterlife; 9 ENCOUNTERING DEATH AS OUR HELPER; 9 Helping; Activity 9.1 Stages of Dying; Activity 9.2 The Tasks of Mourning.

Explores the relationship between television and deathA transnational, historically wide-ranging study of death on televisionThe first study to think about the posthumousness of television and how TV provides access to the deadCombines analyses of contemporary popular dramas and more obscure archival treasuresAnalyses the burgeoning trend for the representation of death, dying, grief, and death-related trauma on televisionOf interest to scholars of television and those situated in the growing field of death studiesIntertwines analysis of television programmes with interviews from key producers of/participants in death-related programmingTelevision/Death intertwines the study of death, dying and bereavement on television with discussion of the ways that television (and the TV archive) provides access to the dead.Section One looks at the representation of death, dying and the afterlife on television, in historical and contemporary factual television (from around the world) and in US television drama.Section Two focuses on dramas of grief and bereavement and discusses how the long form seriality and narrative complexity of television, from family melodramas to the ghost serial, allows for an emotionally realist representation of experiences of grief, bereavement and death-related trauma.Finally, Section Three proposes that television has been overlooked in critical analyses of recorded sounds' and images' propensity to 'bring back the dead'. It argues that television is the posthumous medium par excellence and looks at how the dead return via incorporation into new television programmes or through projects to bring television out of the archive

When the Supreme Court is deciding death, how much does law matter? Scholars long have lamented the majoritarian nature of the Court's Eighth Amendment "evolving standards of decency" doctrine, but their criticism misses the mark. Majoritarian doctrine does not drive the Court's decisions in this area; majoritarian forces elsewhere do. To make my point, I first examine three sets of "evolving standards" death penalty decisions in which the Court implicitly or explicitly reversed itself, attacking the legal justification for the Court's change of position and offering an extralegal explanation for why those cases came out the way they did. I then use political science models of Supreme Court decisionmaking to explain how broader social and political forces push the Court toward majoritarian death penalty rulings for reasons wholly independent of majoritarian death penalty doctrine. Finally, I bring the analysis full circle, showing how broader sociopolitical forces even led to the development of the "evolving standards" doctrine. In the realm of death penalty decisionmaking, problematic doctrine is not to blame for majoritarian influences; rather, majoritarian influences are to blame for problematic doctrine. The real obstacle to countermajoritarian decisionmaking is not doctrine, but the inherently majoritarian tendencies of the Supreme Court itself

First session: Programs -- Second session: Logic of the living (She the Living) -- Third session: Transition (Oedipus's Faux Pas) -- Fourth session: The logic of the supplement: the supplement of the other, of death, of meaning, of life -- Fifth session: The indefatigable -- Sixth session: The "limping" model: the story of the Colossus -- Seventh session: [no title] -- Eighth Session: Cause ("Nietzsche") -- Ninth session: Of interpretation -- Tenth session: Thinking the division of labor-and the contagion of the proper name -- Eleventh session: The escalade-of the devil in person -- Twelfth session: Freud's leg(acies) -- Thirteenth session: Sidestep detour: thesis, hypothesis, prosthesis -- Fourteenth session: Tightenings.