Suchergebnisse

At the turn of the 20th century, colleges and universities in the US (and in many other places) were convulsed with change, a change induced by the creation of the modern set of academic disciplines. Their emergence at that time fundamentally altered how universities were constructed and how they did their business. It is the model on which the academy of the 21st century operates. The contemporary college and university is a rich amalgam of disciplinary and interdisciplinary units, problems, approaches, and structures.

Vom Blickpunkt der Wissenschaftslehre des Kritischen Rationalismus aus erscheint der Gedanke, es solle über die Grenzen der Disziplinen hinweg theoretisiert und geforscht werden, als keine atemberaubende Erfindung. Das Wort Interdisziplinarität ist nicht eindeutig, was man aber sinnvollerweise darunter verstehen kann, betrachtet der kritische Rationalismus als eine Konsequenz des (metaphysischen) Realismus. Deswegen weist das Thema Realismus auf den Kontext hin, in dem das Problem der Interdisziplinarität gestellt werden kann. Das kommt in den Beiträgen des ersten Teils des Sammelbandes zum Ausdruck. Die im zweiten Teil versammelten Abhandlungen betreffen Fragen, die sich aus der "disziplinenübergreifenden" Anwendung der kritisch-rationalen Ansätze auf spezielle Probleme ergeben

Intro -- Pragmatics and its Interfaces -- Editorial page -- Title page -- LCC data -- Table of contents -- Introduction: Pragmatics and its interfaces -- References -- Sociolinguistics vs pragmatics: Where does the boundary lie? -- 1. Introduction -- 1.1 Sociolinguistics and Pragmatics as separate areas of research -- 1.2 Sociolinguistics -- 1.3 Pragmatics -- 1.4 Sociopragmatics -- 2. Critical or social realism -- 3. Egalitarianism -- 4. Self-promotion -- 5. The "gender order" -- 6. Conclusion -- Transcription key -- References -- The interface between pragmatics and Conversation Analysis: The interface between pragmatics and Conversation Analysis -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Implicature -- 3. Speech acts -- 4. Presuppositions and well-formedness -- 5. Conclusion -- References -- Pragmatics vs rhetoric: Political discourse at the pragmatics-rhetoric interface -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Target of the present study -- 3. Pragmatics and rhetoric revisited -- 3.1 The pragmatics-rhetoric interface -- 3.2 Interfacing the pragmatics and the rhetoric of political discourse -- 4. Pragma-rhetorical approach to political discourse -- 4.1 Contextualisation through meaning negotiation and re-negotiation in political interviews -- 4.1 Contextualisation through meaning negotiation and re-negotiation in political interviews -- 4.2 Metadiscourse framing strategies in question-answer sequencing in parliamentary debates -- 4.2 Metadiscourse framing strategies in question-answer sequencing in parliamentary debates -- 5. Conclusions -- References -- Narrative studies versus pragmatics (of narrative): Narrative studies versus pragmatics (of narrative) -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Getting the story told: The bottom-up perspective -- 3. What stories do: The top-down perspective -- 4. Stories in story slots -- 5. Direct and indirect force for stories -- 6. Tentative conclusions

Many people think of 'social problems' as involving poor and powerless individuals in society. This work seeks to improve the balance by adding a focus on important and powerful institutions. It discusses policy sciences, public policy analysis and public

Bioethics is a field of knowledge that requires plural approaches and solid scientific foundations to analyse with sufficient rigour the ethical, legal and social consequences of biotechnology and biomedicine. For this reason, this Handbook of Secular Bioethics, the result of many years of teaching and research, is designed to provide the necessary information to those interested in the subject. The ultimate aim is to provide arguments and proposals to encourage autonomy and responsibility, so that bioethical decisions enable the construction of a more transparent and democratic society. This perspective explains why the authors advocate the secular paradigm, based on the idea that the human rights acknowledged in international texts must form the universal minimum ethical threshold as a suitable legal and political model to ensure that these debates are productive and plural, and not merely based on beliefs, religious or of any other kind.