Analyzing Social Knowledge argues for both socialized and naturalized epistemology. J. Angelo Corlett takes social epistemology in a new direction, applying the findings of experimental cognitive psychology to theories of social knowledge. Corlett analyzes social knowlegde in terms of group belief, individual belief, truth, justification, coherence, and reliability and responsibility. He provides a critique of leading theories of social knowledge and defends his analysis against respected criticisms of naturalized epistemology. The far-reaching implications of Analyzing Social Knowledge will interest epistemoloogists, philosophers (...) of the mind, and cognitive psychologists. (shrink)

In a recent article in this journal, Lopez Frias and McNamee raise some concerns about an argument presented in Corlett, also published in this journal. This article is a deta...

U radu ce biti predstavljeni i razmotreni argumenti koje R.Pevnik, u svojoj novoj knjizi Imigracija i ogranicenja pravde, nudi protiv pristupa koji podrazumeva zatvorene granice, a u prilog pristupu otvorenijih granica u reformi imigracione politike SAD-a. Ukazacemo na brojne probleme u Pevnikovoj argumentaciji povodom obe tvrdnje.

Packing his case with moral argument and relevant facts, Angelo Corlett offers the most comprehensive defense to date in favor of reparations for African Americans and American Indians. As Corlett see it, the heirs of oppression are both the descendants of the oppressors and the descendants of their victims. Corlett delves deeply into the philosophically related issues of collective responsibility, forgiveness and apology, and reparations as a human right in ways that no other book or article to date has done.

Given the basic tenets of just war theory and those of United States law regarding compensatory justice, it is argued that the U.S. invasion of Iraq from 2003-present is morally unjust and that the U.S. owes substantial reparations to Iraq. Imajuci u vidu osnovna nacela pravednog rata, kao i nacela kompenzacijske pravde pravnog poretka Sjedinjenih Americkih Drzava, autor zastupa stanoviste da je americka invazija na Irak, od 2003. godine do danas, moralno nepravedna i da SAD duguju znatnu odstetu Iraku.

Ovaj clanak se bavi kritickom diskusijom shvatanja Kevina R. Dzonsona o americkoj imigrantskoj reformi, kao i njegovim predlogom o otvorenoj imigraciji koje je izneo u svojoj knjizi Otvaranje brana i u nekim drugim svojim clancima posvecenim istoj temi.