Suchergebnisse

Interrogates human sexual nature in an effort to illuminate the cultural construction of gender. Comparative exposition on the feminist & evolutionary psychology view identifies relationships & a mutual compatibility of the perspectives. A brief review of feminist arguments reviews the social contract theories of Okin & Pateman. Consideration of evolutionary psychology reviews Ridley & Wright's use of parenting & sexual selection & the rarity social monogamy in nature. The variety of reproduction & human distinction defined by evolutionary psychology offers a feminist views empirical evidence to support socially supported alternatives from the monogamous model. These alternatives provide a wide range of possible patterns of sexual behavior that support change to societal ideals. References. J. Harwell

The author argues for a more complex understanding of the concept of "luck" as it is applied to moral or political philosophy. She distinguishes between "thin luck," which may be posited as the mere inverse of responsibility, & "thick luck," or "lottery luck," which evokes more complicated relations with agency, responsibility, control, & moral judgment. "Thick luck," she demonstrates, is an inadequate model for studying constitutional responsibility, as it does not sufficiently account for chance, predictability, indeterminism, & identity-dependence. Given the problematics of "thick constitutional luck," the thin conception becomes preferable. 12 References. K. Coddon

A state-of-the-art view of imitation from leading researchers in neuroscience and brain imaging, animal and developmental psychology, primatology, ethology, philosophy, anthropology, media studies, economics, sociology, education, and law.Leading researchers across a range of disciplines provide a state-of-the-art view of imitation, integrating the latest findings and theories with reviews of seminal work, and revealing why imitation is a topic of such intense current scientific interest

AbstractEconomic evaluation techniques were originally developed to assess the efficiency of public, rather than private, investment decisions. They are particularly relevant to the health sector where there is general agreement that free markets fail to produce efficient and equitable solutions, and government intervention can improve both equity and efficiency. In this paper, the four evaluation techniques most commonly applied to the health sector—cost‐minimization, cost‐effectiveness, cost‐utility and cost‐benefit analysis—are reviewed in turn. The purpose is not to provide a step by step guide to their use. Rather, the aim is to explain the context in which they are used, their relative strengths and weaknesses, and to highlight a number of methodological issues and controversies surrounding their application. The discussion shows that no technique is without problems, and none can be recommended as being better than the others in all situations. The review concludes that, despite the sophistication of the academic debate surrounding the techniques, the type of economic evaluation which will influence health policy must remain pragmatic. For the time being, a full description of the costs and benefits of competing alternatives is likely to be more useful to decision makers than attempts to incorporate all possible costs and benefits into a single efficiency ratio.