Suchergebnisse

Der vorliegende Band enthält die Vorträge eines Symposiums, das vom Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht in Zusammenarbeit mit der Internationalen Vereinigung der juristischen Wissenschaft und der Gesellschaft für Rechtsvergleichung veranstaltet wurde. Damit werden die rechtsvergleichenden Studien zur Erforschung der juristischen Methodik fortgeführt.Inhaltsübersicht: Law-Making Today Yuko Nishitani: Law-Making in Japan – Başak Baysal: Law-Making in Turkish Private Law – Andrey M. Shirvindt: Reforming the Russian Civil Code. A Search for Better Law-Making Judicial Decision-Making Today Thomas Coendet: Judicial Decision-Making Today. The Swiss Perspective – Matthew Dyson: Judicial Decision-Making in England and Wales – Agustín Parise: Judicial Decision-Making in Latin America. Unveiling the Dynamic Role of the Argentine Supreme Court Legal Methodology Today Aditi Bagchi: On the Very Idea of Legal Methodology – Jean-Sébastien Borghetti: Legal Methodology and the Role of Professors in France. Professorenrecht is not a French Word! – Helen Scott: The Death of Doctrine? Private-Law Scholarship in South Africa Today

From the Rice Thresher Archive, a collection of newspaper articles published in the student newspaper for Rice University. Genre: News

A sample survey of 152 professors from 17 Coll's in the Boston area was made to determine their att's to involvement in, & information about the Vietnam War. Res methods & characteristics of the sample pop are described. Data, in 7 tables, show that only 15% of the professors favored complete withdrawal from Vietnam; 15% desired increased military commitments; the bulk of the sample (almost 66%) was split between the status quo choice of maintaining the present support level & the anti-war choice of decreasing but not withdrawing US military support. It is concluded that professors may not be radical in some absolute sense, but may be radical when compared to more general publics, esp those with more educ than the public as a whole. It is suggested that the main cause of the professors' anti-war attitude is a general liberal (anti-establishment) outlook. Various views about the source of liberalism in academia are quoted, particularly as summarized by S. M. Lipset in 'Doves, Hawks and Polls,' Encounter, 1966, Oct, 1-8. It is pointed out that the fact that 80% of the present sample favored the Cuban blockade does not seem in accord with the notion of a leftist ideology dominant among professors. Further, the presence of wide variations in the sample data from professors in diff types of U's & with diff religious orientations contradicts the notion of the leftist professor. Lipset's suggestion that another source of liberalism lies in the intellectuals' view of themselves as occupying a low position in the soc & power structure in US society, while seemingly supported by data from studies by Melvin Seeman & P. Lazarsfeld & W. Thielens Jr, also fails to be supported by the present findings. In general, it is found that many conceptions about the role of the professors in the anti-war movement were exaggerated or just plain wrong. M. Maxfield.