Suchergebnisse

THE CORE OF POPPER'S EPISTEMOLOGY IS THAT FALISIFIABILITY BE TREATED AS A CRITERION OF DEMARCATION BETWEEN EMPIRICAL AND NON EMPIRICAL STATEMENTS. THIS FALSIFICATION APPROACH IS DERIVED FROM MILL, WHO ANTICIPATED MUCH OF POPPER. THE LATTER'S WORK SUGGESTS A METAPHYSICAL PERSPECTIVE FOR MILL'S DEFENSE OF LIBERALISM.

This chapter proposes the notion of the 'data epic', which is examined through two works of 'cinematic data visualization': The Fallen of World War II and The Shadow Peace: The Nuclear Threat. These pieces mobilize an aesthetics of distance to narrate life and death at scale, in past and possible global conf licts. While previous studies of quantif ication emphasize the function of distance in relation to aspirations of objectivity, this chapter explores other narrative and affective capacities of distance in the context of 'public data culture'. The data epic can thus enrich understanding of how data are rendered meaningful for various publics, as well as the entanglement of data aesthetics and data politics involved in visualization practices for picturing collective life.

THIS ARTICLE ARGUES THAT THE TORY PARTY IN ENGLAND HAS BECOME A VICTIM OF ITS OWN SUCCESS. THE THATCHER-LED DISMANTLING OF THE POSTWAR SETTLEMENT LED TO A PROCESS OF PERMANENT INSTITUTIONAL REVOLUTION WHICH GRADUALLY ERODED THE VERY MECHANISMS OF TORY SUPPORT INCLUDING BOTH NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND AND THE MONARCHY AND LOCAL PARTY ORGANIZATIONS. AS FOR TORY ENGLAND--THAT RICH NETWORK OF INTERLOCKING INTERESTS, SOCIAL DEFERENCES, AND INHERITED INSTITUTIONS THAT TORY STATECRAFT HAS SUCCESSFULLY PROTECTED FOR OVER A CENTURY AND A HALF BY ITS SKILLFUL ADAPTATION TO DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS IN BRITAIN--IT IS NOW AS GOOD AS DEAD.

Section 47 of the 1948 National Assistance Act allows incompetent people, usually old people, to be removed from their homes. It can be considered as a repressive tool, designed to infringe personal liberty, but in this article it is argued that it can also be considered as being legislation which governs and controls professional practice and protects the old person from public prejudice.

Dr Gray leaves us with a question at the conclusion of his article--how should we choose priorities? He says that the debate so far has been mainly on what we should choose, but perhaps we should consider how to choose even more. Under the various subheadings of Criteria, Principles and Persons Dr Gray sets out the pros and cons of the arguments in the priority debates and tries to offer some more specific guidelines to offset the criticism that the government's priority discussions have been too generalised. Yet this is a difficult task when everyone's priorities are so different.