Suchergebnisse

During the decade of the Tentative 'Fifties the course of events has thrust a number of basic issues into the forum of public argument. One of them goes under the rabric, "morality and public policy." Chiefly in question is foreign policy.My introduction to the state of the problem took place at the outset of the decade in a conversation with a distinguished journalist who is now dead. In public affairs he was immensely knowledgeable; he was also greatly puzzled over die new issue that was being raised. His first question revealed the source of his puzzlement. What, he asked, has the Sermon on the Mount got to do with foreign policy? I was not a little taken aback by this statement on the issue.

Many lawyers, both inside and outside the law schools, suffer from insecurity about our discipline. Instead of thinking of ourselves as the curators of a grand tradition in Western thought, many of us think of the law as a collection of doctrinal formulas and rules imposed on us by legislatures and the highest courts. We are always looking elsewhere to find a source of wisdom that will give the law coherence and meaning. At various times in this century we have looked to sociology, anthropology, psychoanalysis and, of course, economics in an effort to ground our ideas in firmer soil. All of this transplanting from other disciplines has been carried out in the name of "inter-disciplinary studies." But the studies in fact have never been inter-disciplinary. We have sought to learn from others, but we have never assumed that the law had much to offer our colleagues in neighboring disciplines. However much we had to teach psychoanalysts about crime and punishment, we have not insisted on it. We apply economic analysis in the law, but the economists have not been influenced the slightest by legal thought. Legal thought is at the service of the smartest outside bidder, or at least we have come to think. This general, self-abnegating assumption about the intrinsic value of legal studies is shared by everyone from the economists to the various wings of Critical Legal Studies. The most common assumption of all, which is the most nourishing influence for law, is found in morality. If law is rooted in morality, it will flourish; if it comes disengaged from the nurturing source, it will wither into a hulk of arbitrary rules. This is the bias, more widely held than I would like to think, that moves me to write.

"Over the last few decades, there has been a marked increase in media and debate surrounding a specific group of offences in modern Democratic nations which bear the brunt of the label 'crimes against morality'. Included within this group are offences related to prostitution and pornography, homosexuality and incest and child sexual abuse. This book examines the nexus between sex, crime and morality from a theoretical perspective. This is the first academic text to offer an examination and analysis of the philosophical underpinnings of sex-related crimes and social attitudes towards them and the historical, anthropological and moral reasons for differentiating these crimes in contemporary western culture."--Publisher's website

A remarkable feature of contemporary political discourse is the
dominance of morality. One legacy of logical positivism (which was
dominant from the mid-1930s until the end of the 1960s) and analytical
(or linguistic) philosophy was the reluctance of political theorists
during the twentieth century to engage in substantive argument about
appropriate social ends or individual rights and values. Philosophers
were content to describe the linguistic framework within which related
political proposals were discussed without offering any proposals
themselves. It was felt that the philosopher was not especially
qualified to give political advice or make any recommendations. The
technical political theorist was properly confined to the
second level of inquiry, that is, explanation of the meaning
of concepts, not the first level, which was concerned with
questions of how we ought to live, or issues of public policy.
Economists and sociologists might have the technical skills appropriate
for inquiries into public policy, but as to the big
questions—such as the ends and purposes of man and
society—almost anybody could make pronouncements. The important
point was that reason was incapable of adjudicating between
rival versions of the good life.

Peacekeeping, peace enforcement and 'stability operations' ask soldiers to use violence to create peace, defeat armed threats while having no enemies and uphold human rights without taking sides. The challenges that face peacekeepers cannot be easily reduced to traditional just war principles. Daniel H. Levine uses insights from care ethics as well as extensive interviews with peacekeepers to develop the idea that peacekeepers have no enemies and should be seeking to bring even abusive actors into a Kantian 'kingdom of ends'. He argues that, while it contains elements of all three, peacekeeping is morally distinct from war, policing and governance. And he asserts that the traditional 'holy trinity' of peacekeeping principles - consent, impartiality, and minimum use of force - still provide the best guide to its morality. Key Features. Cases discussed include Darfur, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti and Liberia Focuses on protection and reconciliation rather than victory Excerpts from interviews with peacekeepers in the field, predominantly from Africa and India

Embodiment, Morality and Medicine deals with the relevance of `embodiment' to bioethics, considering both the historical development and contemporary perspectives on the mind--body relation. The emphasis of all authors is on the importance of the body in defining personal identity as well as on the role of social context in shaping experience of the body. Among the perspectives considered are Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist, and African-American. Feminist concerns are important throughout

This article details the development of "Vegandale", a corporate-vegan retail project within the borders of the traditionally marginalized Toronto neighbourhood of Parkdale. This retail development has set out on a spatial discursive branding takeover of the neighbourhood, with the goal of changing the space—and the wider features of capitalism—through decontextualized consumption practices. This paper seeks to understand the social space and discursive consequences of this incursion of "ethical entrepreneurialism" into a marginalized but gentrifying neighbourhood. Ultimately, this paper will show the imaginary of post-speciesism and moralistic consumption masks the structural realities of capitalism and invisibilizes humans in its exploitative social relations, rendering its project as just another aspect of actually-existing neoliberalism in the gentrifying creative city of Toronto. ; Cet article analyse le phénomène du"Vegandale", un projet de développement de commerces végétaliens au sein d'un quartier défavorisé de Toronto nommé Parkdale. Ce développement promeut une redéfinition de l'image de marque du quartier dans le but d'en redéfinir l'espace et les pratiques légitimes, notamment par de nouveaux rapportsau capitalisme et des pratiques de consommation décontextualisées. Cet article cherche à comprendre l'espace social et les conséquences discursives de cette incursion de «l'entrepreneuriat éthique» dans un quartier marginalisé mais embourgeoisé. Finalement, cet article montrera comment l'imaginaire du post-spécisme et de la consommationmoraliste tend à masquer les relations sociales d'exploitation inhérentes aux contraintes structurelles du capitalisme, faisant de Vegandale un avatar parmi d'autres de la gentrification néolibérale de la ville de Toronto.

"This title was first published in 2002: Political ethics is a rapidly growing field in disciplines such as political science, philosophy, applied ethics and public policy and it has become a major topic in current affairs' reporting of politics. This book discusses the most prominent subjects - and occasional victims - of the ethics debate: government ministers. It is the first major work to discuss institutional reforms around the world that target ministerial morality and asks: how are these reforms influencing the motivation and conduct of the most powerful of our politicians? The book provides unique insights into ministerial behaviour and the changing role of institutions in influencing the ethics of the executive, with analyses from around the world. Contributors to the volume include international high-profile players in political ethics. They include Lord Nolan, the first Chairman of Britain's Joint Parliamentary Committee on Standards in Public Life; Professor Robert J. Jackson, a leading Canadian political scientist instrumental in establishing the Canadian Office of the Ethics Counsellor; and Associate Professor Noel Preston, the leading commentator on ethics in Australian politics, who has been involved in developing a number of its ethical regimes."--Provided by publisher.

In view of increased public tolerance of deviant behavior in recent years & the movement of government away from morality regulation, the salience of the Moral Majority during the 1980 presidential election was unexpected, & raised anew issues related to the separation of church & state. Conflicts about morality legislation are perceived to be related to the central issue of the legitimate use of state power. Different approaches maintain, eg, that the state can or cannot act to protect people from harming themselves, that the societal consequences of deviant behavior should decide legislation, or that society is obliged to uphold divinely ordained moral codes. Other arguments about morality legislation are related to its use of public resources at the expense of other social legislation, & to secondary consequences, eg, increased stigmatization of deviants, intercultural tensions, & corruption of officials. Morality policy is seen to be historically related to values in US religious traditions. D. Dunseath.