Suchergebnisse

THE AUTHOR ATTEMPTS TO RECONSTRUCT JUDITH THOMSON'S ARTICLE "REMARKS ON CAUSATION AND LIABILITY" WITH HER INSISTANCE ON THE NEED FOR AN EXPLANATION OF WHY CAUSALITY MATTERS FOR LIABILITY, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER SHE HAS PROVIDED THE NECESSARY ACCOUNT. THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS THAT THOMSON GETS INTO TROUBLE BECAUSE SHE WAS OFFERING A DEMONSTRATION THAT CAUSALITY IS NECESSARY, AND CONCLUDES THAT THE EXPLANATION SHE OFFERS RELIES MOST CENTRALLY ON THE ASSUMPTION OF INTERNALISM.

Supt. of Doc. no.: AE2.108:F31. ; Bibliography: p. 108-109. ; Mode of access: Internet.

IN THE DIALOGUE ON THE COMMON LAWS, THERE ARE CLEARLY SOME SIGNIFICANT INNOVATIONS IN HOBBES'S POLITICAL THEORY. HE NOW RECOGNIZES, IF SOMEWHAAT HESITANTLY. A REAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE NATURAL AND POLITIC CAPACITIES OF A MONARCH AND DOES NOT SHRINK FROM ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS ALSO CONSTITUES A DISTINCTION BETWEEN HIS PRIVATE AND HIS PUBLIC RIGHTS.

A critique is presented of Gary J. Santoni's & T. Norman Van Cott's claim that mandatory deposits on beverage containers will not change the number of containers (see SA 26:3/78J3744). Their estimate of consumer's surplus is more than three times the correct figure; & their attempt to assess litter reduction benefits in terms of pickup costs is completely inadequate. In Bottle Deposit Legislation: A Reply, Gary J. Santoni & T. Norman Van Cott (California State U, Northridge) find basic confusions in Porter's conceptual approach to issues of cost & benefit; in addition, Porter does not empirically establish the benefits whose existence he claims modify the original conclusions. Further, while asserting that there is no controversy over the decrease in litter in Ore following mandatory deposit legislation, Porter disregards the increase in other kinds of litter, which can be interpreted plausibly as derived from substitutes for foregone bottled beverage consumption. Porter does not provide adequate evidence for claimed net benefits. Modified HA.

Proposed legislation outlining Sen. Laxtalt's plan to return New York to traditional values

Gegenstand des Aufsatzes ist das 'Problem der Normbildung als eine der Voraussetzungen sozialen Wandels'. Der Verfasser skizziert zunächst an eine Theorie der Normbildung zu stellenden Anforderungen (Klärung des Normbegriffs, Erfassung der Subjekte und des Prozesses der Normbildung), dann gibt er einen Überblick über bestehende Theorien (P.L. Berger, T. Luckmann, J. Habermas, N. Luhmann, D. Claessens). Für den Spezialfall der Gesetzgebung wird vor allem die 'Pluralismustheorie' herangezogen, die ein Schwergewicht auf den Einfluß organisierter Gruppen und Verbände legt. Auf der Basis der referierten Ansätze versucht der Verfasser die Konstruktion einer herrschaftssoziologisch-gruppenorientierten Normbildungstheorie. Abschließend wird die empirische Überprüfung der einzelnen Theorien vermittels Inhaltsanalyse und multivariater Analyse diskutiert. (WZ)