Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Alternativ können Sie versuchen, selbst über Ihren lokalen Bibliothekskatalog auf das gewünschte Dokument zuzugreifen.
Bei Zugriffsproblemen kontaktieren Sie uns gern.
21 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Critical review of international social and political philosophy: CRISPP, S. 1-7
ISSN: 1743-8772
In: Journal of intervention and statebuilding, Band 12, Heft 4, S. 584-602
ISSN: 1750-2977
World Affairs Online
In: Ethics & international affairs, Band 30, Heft 4, S. 511-526
ISSN: 1747-7093
Carol Sue Snowden worked for thirty years as a librarian at the Columbus Metropolitan Library in Columbus, Ohio. She led a quiet, frugal life, spending money mostly on books, which were her passion. When she died, she donated the money she had saved—over $1 million—to the Columbus library and seven local schools. Most of us would look upon this generosity with admiration, but according to a new movement called Effective Altruism (EA), Snowden got it wrong. While she was right to donate her money, she should have instead directed it to an organization that does the most good overall.
In: Social philosophy & policy, Band 32, Heft 1, S. 101-126
ISSN: 1471-6437
Abstract:The straightforward normative importance of emergencies suggests that empirically engaged political theorists and philosophers should study them. Indeed, many have done so. In this essay, however, I argue that scholars interested in the political and/or moral dimensions of large-scale emergencies should shift their focus from emergencies to emergency claims. Building on Michael Saward's model of a "representative claim," I develop an account of an emergency claim as a claim that a particular (kind of) situation is an emergency, made by particular actors against particular background conditions to particular audiences, which in turn accept, ignore, or reject that claim. Emergency politics, in turn, consists of many different actors making and not making, accepting, and rejecting, a wide range of overlapping and competing emergency claims. I argue that scholars should shift their focus to emergency claims because doing so helps us see the fraught implications of emergency politics for marginalized groups. I examine three such implications: emergency claims are often "Janus-faced," meaning that they function simultaneously as "weapons of the weak" and weapons of the strong; they are often regressive, including by discriminating against victims of chronic bad situations, and they often perpetuate and exacerbate existing social hierarchies. Noticing these troubling features of emergency politics raises a question that I do not address here: What might plausible alternatives to emergency politics look like?
In: Between Samaritans and States, S. 87-114
In: Between Samaritans and States, S. 171-206
In: Between Samaritans and States, S. 28-50
In: Between Samaritans and States, S. 207-226
In: Between Samaritans and States, S. 51-86
In: Between Samaritans and States, S. 115-142
In: Between Samaritans and States, S. 143-170
In: The journal of political philosophy, Band 22, Heft 2, S. 204-230
ISSN: 1467-9760
On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, better known as the Dodd-Frank bill, was signed into law by President Obama. Section 1502 of the bill, the Conflict Minerals Provision, requires companies to show that the minerals used in their products did not originate in the Democratic Republic of Congo, or if they did originate in the DRC, that they did not contribute to the conflict there. Support for Section 1502 was spearheaded by ENOUGH, a US-based international non-governmental organization (INGO), and Global Witness, a UK-based INGO. Together with the International Crisis Group's John Prendergast, these organizations wrote Section 1502. Adapted from the source document.