Notice: تابع WP_Block_Type_Registry::register به طورنادرست فراخوانی شد. نامهای نوع بلوک نباید حروف بزرگ داشته باشند. لطفاً برای اطلاعات بیشتر، اشکال زدایی در وردپرس را مشاهده کنید. (این پیام در نگارش 5.0.0 افزوده شده است.) in /home/ethicsho/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5313
Warning: Use of undefined constant TDC_PATH_LEGACY - assumed 'TDC_PATH_LEGACY' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/ethicsho/public_html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/td-composer.php on line 109
Warning: Use of undefined constant TDSP_THEME_PATH - assumed 'TDSP_THEME_PATH' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/ethicsho/public_html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/td-composer.php on line 113 بایگانیهای 2449 - خانه اخلاق پژوهان جوان Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/ethicsho/public_html/wp-content/plugins/wp-ulike/inc/general-functions.php on line 807
This book is recommended for anyone interested in understanding, questioning, articulating, and acting on the basis of their own and others’ perspectives on sexism, racism, and affirmative action in American higher education. –ChoiceWhile equal opportunity for all candidates is widely recognized as a goal within academia, the implementation of specific procedures to achieve equality has resulted in vehement disputes regarding both the means and ends. To encourage a reexamination of this issue, Cahn asked three prominent American social philosophers–Leslie Pickering Francis, Robert L. Simon, and Lawrence C. Becker–who hold divergent views about affirmative action, to write extended essays presenting their views. Twenty-two other philosophers then respond to these three principal essays. While no consensus is reached, the resulting clash of reasoned judgments will serve to revitalize the issues raised by affirmative action.ContentsIntroduction – Steven M. CahnPart I1. In Defense of Affirmative Action – Leslie Pickering Francis2. Affirmative Action and the University: Faculty Appointment and Preferential Treatment – Robert L. Simon3. Affirmative Action and Faculty Appointments – Lawrence C. BeckerPart II4. What Good Am I? – Laurence Thomas5. Who Counts on Campus? – Ann Hartle6. Reflections on Affirmative Action in Academia – Robert G. Turnbull7. The Injustice of Strong Affirmative Action – John Kekes8. Preferential Treatment Versus Purported Meritocratic Rights – Richard J. Arneson9. Faculties as Civil Societies: A Misleading Model for Affirmative Action – Jeffrie G. Murphy10. Facing Facts and Responsibilities – The White Man’s Burden and the Burden of Proof – Karen Hanson11. Affirmative Action: Relevant Knowledge and Relevant Ignorance – Joel J. Kupperman12. Remarks on Affirmative Action – Andrew Oldenquist13. Affirmative Action and the Multicultural Ideal – Philip L. Quinn14. Affirmative Action in the Cultural Wars – Frederick A. Olafson15. Quotas by Any Name: Some Problems of Affirmative Action in Faculty Appointments – Tom L. Beauchamp16. Are Quotas Sometimes Justified? – James Rachels17. Proportional Representation of Women and Minorities – Celia Wolf-Devine18. An Ecological Concept of Diversity – La Verne Shelton19. Careers Open to Talent – Ellen Frankel Paul20. Some Sceptical Doubts – Alasdair MacIntyre21. Affirmative Action and Tenure Decisions – Richard T. De George22. Affirmative Action and the Awarding of Tenure – Peter J. Markie23. The Case for Preferential Treatment – James P. Sterba24. Saying What We Think – Fred Sommers25. Comments on Compromise and Affirmative Action – Alan H. GoldmanAbout the AuthorsIndex About the Author(s)Steven M. Cahn is Professor of Philosophy and former Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. He has published numerous other books, including Morality, Responsibility, and the University (Temple).Contributors: Laurence Thomas, Ann Hartle, Robert G. Turnbull, John Kekes, Richard J. Arneson, Jeffrie G. Murphy, Karen Hanson, Joel J. Kupperman, Andrew Oldenquist, Philip L. Quinn, Frederick A. Olafson, Tom L. Beauchamp, James Rachels, Celia Wolf-Devine, La Verne Shelton, Ellen Frankel Paul, Alasdair MacIntyre, Richard T. De George, Peter J. Markie, James P. Sterba, Fred Sommers, Alan H. Goldman, and the editor.
One of the most influential debates in John Locke`s work is the problem of personal identity over time. This problem is that of how a person at one time is the same person later in time, and so can be held responsible for past actions. The time of most concern for Locke is that of the general resurrection promised in the New Testament. Given the turbulence of the Reformation and the formation of new approaches to the Bible, many philosophers and scientists paid careful attention to emerging orthodoxies or heterodoxies about death. Here K. Joanna S. Forstrom examines the interrelated positions of Rene Descartes, Thomas Hobbes, Henry More and Robert Boyle in their individual contexts and in Locke`s treatment of them. She argues that, in this way, we can better understand Locke and his position on personal identity and immortality. Once his unique take is understood and grounded in his own theological convictions (or lack thereof), we can better evaluate Locke and defend him against classic objections to his thought.
Monte Johnson examines the most controversial aspects of Aristiotle’snatural philosophy: his teleology. Is teleology about causation or explanation?Does it exclude or obviate mechanism, determinism, or materialism? Is it focusedon the good of individual organisms, or is god or man the ultimate end of allprocesses and entities? Is teleology restricted to living things, or does itapply to the cosmos as a whole? Does it identify objectively existent causes inthe world, or is it merely a heuristic for our understanding of other causalprocesses? Johnson argues that Aristotle’s aporetic approach drives a middlecourse between these traditional oppositions, and avoids the dilemma, frequentlyurged against teleology, between backwards causation and anthropomorphism.Although these issues have been debated with extraordinary depth by Aristotlescholars, and touched upon by many in the wider philosophical and scientificcommunity as well, there is no comprehensive historical treatment of the issue. Aristotle is commonly considered the inventor of teleology, although the preciseterm originated in the eighteenth century. If teleology means the use of endsand goals in natural science, then Aristotle was rather a critical innovator ofteleological explanation. Teleological notions were widespread among hispredecessors, but Aristotle rejected their conception of extrinsic causes suchas mind or god as the primary causes for natural things. Aristotle’s radicalalternative was to assert nature itself as an internal principle of change andan end, and his teleological explanations focus on the intrinsic ends of naturalsubstances – those ends that benefit the natural thing itself. Aristotle’s use of ends was subsequently conflated with incompatible’teleological’ notions, including proofs for the existence of a providential ordesigner god, vitalism and animism, opposition to mechanism and non-teleologicalcausation, and anthropocentrism. Johnson addresses these misconceptions throughan elaboration of Aristotle’s methodological statements, as well as anexamination of the explanations actually offered in the scientific works.
Kant and Applied Ethics makes an important contribution to Kant scholarship, illuminating the vital moral parameters of key ethical debates.Offers a critical analysis of Kant’s ethics, interrogating the theoretical bases of his theory and evaluating their strengths and weaknessesExamines the controversies surrounding the most important ethical discussions taking place today, including abortion, the death penalty, and same-sex marriageJoins innovative thinkers in contemporary Kantian scholarship, including Christine Korsgaard, Allen Wood, and Barbara Herman, in taking Kant’s philosophy in new and interesting directionsClarifies Kant’s legacy for applied ethics, helping us to understand how these debates have been structured historically and providing us with the philosophical tools to address them
This book offers a systematic overview of Aristotle’s conception of well-being, virtue and justice in the Nicomachean Ethics, and then explores the major themes of Politics: civic-mindedness, slavery, family, property, the common good, class conflict, the limited wisdom of the multitude, and the radically egalitarian institutions of the ideal society.
ما از اخلاق چه انتظاری داریم؟ این سوال شاید تاحدودی برای عموم مردم و یا متخصصان این رشته قابل پاسخ باشد؛ اینکه خوب بودن را به ما بیاموزد و در تنظیم روابط فردی م...
جشن کتاب تهران به ایستگاه سی و یکم رسیده است. حال و احوال نشر کتاب خوب نیست و باید فرهنگدوستان را به خرید و هدیه دادن کتاب ترغیب نمود. خانه اخلاقپژوهان جوان ب...
بنیاد کتابهای اخلاق اسلامی عمدتا پالایش جان از آلودگیها و آراستن آن به زیباییها است. اندیشه محوری این قبیل کتابها آن است که انسان فعلی آنی نیست که باید باشد...
-
0 Comments