Employing the concept of “layering,” this book seeks to rethink our relation to textual tradition against the background of the emergence of digital culture, the increasing spectacularization of psychic as well as social life, the renegotiation of historical thinking and the precarious position of the theoretical humanities within academia.

Proper conduct of an AIDS vaccine trial in Africa must be informed not only by the epidemiology and biology of HIV infection in African settings, but also by the ethical norms and cultural constraints prevailing in African settings.

British capitalism has from the very beginning entertained an ambivalent relationship with the process of European unification. But that ambivalence has gone through different stages and since the outbreak of the financial crisis in 2008 a new, conflictual, stage in that relationship began. This is the essential backdrop against which the Brexit referendum should be understood and its consequences evaluated.

Thirty-five stakeholder representatives and six observers from thirty organizations, interested in anticipating the adoption of energy efficiency for the Pacific Northwest, identified and described one hundred and seventy-eight national and regional trends extending to the year 2015 impacting energy efficiency, and proposed more than ninety actions for addressing these trends at the regional level. The representatives were engaged in a collaborative action planning workshop that was facilitated with the CogniScope methodology founded in the systems sciences. Convergence was achieved on eight (...) highly influential actions as the highest priority. (shrink)

RÉSUMÉLe mot «migrants» n'existait pas dans la langue des Hellènes; ils étaient plus familiers avec le vocable de l'exil et de l'asile. D'ailleurs, l'exil ne saurait se penser sans son corollaire, l'asile, comme le citoyen antique sans le barbare et la démocratie sans la tyrannie. À travers une métaphore située au carrefour de la fiction historique, de la philosophie politique et de la psychanalyse, cet article propose une réflexion sur l'exil comme condition fondamentale du sujet. L'exil est d'origine, car la (...) langue de l'enfance, la langue dite maternelle est d'abord une langue étrangère. L'exil intime porte la marque d'une universalité qui fonde l'expérience subjective.ABSTRACTThe word ‘migrants’ did not exist in the language of the Hellenes; they were more familiar with the terms ‘exile’ and ‘political asylum.’ Indeed, exile cannot be thought of without its corollary, political asylum, as the Ancient citizen cannot be thought of without the barbarian, and democracy without tyranny. Through a metaphor located at the crossroads of historical fiction, political philosophy and psychoanalysis, this article offers a reflection on exile as a fundamental condition of the subject. Exile is originary because the language of childhood, the so-called mother tongue, is originally a foreign language. Intimate exile bears the mark of a universality that founds subjective experience. (shrink)

Medical students newly arrived on the wards encounter frustrating ethical predicaments that are complicated by students' place in the hospital hierarchy. A careful scrutiny of medical social structure and culture may enable medical schools to offer their students a more effective ethics education.

Mass drug screening offers a deceptively simple solution to the problem of drug use among workers. Even a very effective test is subject to error. In any given group of tested individuals, some will unavoidably be falsely accused. Even though scientific tests appear to provide efficient solutions to social and legal problems, these tests should not be accepted unless they also meet our standards for fair dealing.

In the expanding repertoire of practices designed to increase the supply of organs for transplantation, non-heart-beating cadaver organ donation has generated an ongoing debate in the literature. The continuing stream of articles is disquieting in part because it documents a troubling "trial-and-error ethics" approach to the formulation of organ procurement policy, and because it raises serious questions about the reasons that the development of this policy is being mediated by published communication. In the light of concerns about the implicit support (...) and credibility that professional publications give to organ procurement policies, restraint in publishing articles about non-heart-beating organ donation as well as in devising such policies is strongly advocated. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:“Unduly Iterative Ethical Review?”Franklin G. MillerMadam:Renée C. Fox and Nicholas A. Christakis have written a provocative article, “Perish and Publish: Non-Heart-Beating Organ Donation and Unduly Iterative Ethical Review” (KIEJ, December 1995). The language of their argument and some of the implicit assumptions on which it rests deserve critical scrutiny. They describe the articles presenting and commenting on the University of Pittsburgh protocol as “disquieting” because the display “trial-and-error (...) ethics.” To dismiss “trial-and-error ethics” implies that we antecedently possess all the moral knowledge we need to evaluate and regulate developments in medicine. Should we summarily reject experimentation in ethics, particularly with respect to complex issues involving scientific and technological changes? For if we need to reconsider and possibly revise what counts as moral knowledge, the proposing an experimental approach to the ethics of a novel practice, which is presented publicly and made open to revision, as in the Pittsburgh protocol, may be precisely the best way to proceed.Fox and Christakis resort to invidious insinuation in their criticism of ethicists who have written, and journals that have published, articles about non-heart-beating organ donation. Publication on this issue has given ethicists the opportunity of “adding numerous items to their vitae.” Their appraisal of the vitae-boosting behavior represents an interesting rhetorical specimen: “Although there is nothing inherently dishonorable about this it does create tension between two motives: conviction about the importance of perfecting ethical conduct, on the one hand, and the desire to advance one’s professional career, on the other” (p. 340). I am not sure what the authors mean by “perfecting ethical conduct.” Yet they suggest that a group of reputable scholars, who have taken diverse positions on the ethics of non-heart-beating organ donation, have come perilously close to venality.Finally, in order to avoid further legitimating what they consider to be an ethically objectionable practice, the authors advocate that journals exercise “restraint” in publishing articles about this topic. Perhaps in a future pronouncement they will enlighten us about how enforcing a publication policy that avoids the vice of “unduly iterative ethical review” might work without compromising freedom of discussion. Moral dogmatism and censorship have a long history of association.Franklin G. MillerCenter for Biomedical Ethics University of Virginia Charlottesville, VACopyright © 1996 The Johns Hopkins University Press... (shrink)

This article offers a critical discussion in the form of debate among experts in the fields of networks, human behaviour, and social analysis about key issues that arguably affect the human nature and society in the digital age. Based on the responses of Nicholas Christakis to an interview given to the authors, some key questions, applications, and limitations regarding the research on digital networks are discussed, together with hot issues related to the nature of digital data and experimentation in (...) contemporary social science. Finally, current and future prospects are presented in relation to data science and society in the light of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. (shrink)

These three books consider the nature and evolutionary context of the individual and collective behavior of modern humans. Moffett’s The Human Swarm and Christakis’ Blue­print focus on the “big picture.” What, if anything, is distinctive about the ways groups of modern humans behave? What do modern human societies have in common that distin­guishes them from aggregations of non-human organisms? Wrangham’s The Goodness Par­adox focuses more narrowly on aggression, and the enigma that modern humans seem to be individually relatively docile, (...) but collectively capable of planning and executing highly aggressive activities. I was intrigued and educated by all three books. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:“Unduly Iterative Ethical Review?”Franklin G. MillerMadam:Renée C. Fox and Nicholas A. Christakis have written a provocative article, “Perish and Publish: Non-Heart-Beating Organ Donation and Unduly Iterative Ethical Review” (KIEJ, December 1995). The language of their argument and some of the implicit assumptions on which it rests deserve critical scrutiny. They describe the articles presenting and commenting on the University of Pittsburgh protocol as “disquieting” because the display “trial-and-error (...) ethics.” To dismiss “trial-and-error ethics” implies that we antecedently possess all the moral knowledge we need to evaluate and regulate developments in medicine. Should we summarily reject experimentation in ethics, particularly with respect to complex issues involving scientific and technological changes? For if we need to reconsider and possibly revise what counts as moral knowledge, the proposing an experimental approach to the ethics of a novel practice, which is presented publicly and made open to revision, as in the Pittsburgh protocol, may be precisely the best way to proceed.Fox and Christakis resort to invidious insinuation in their criticism of ethicists who have written, and journals that have published, articles about non-heart-beating organ donation. Publication on this issue has given ethicists the opportunity of “adding numerous items to their vitae.” Their appraisal of the vitae-boosting behavior represents an interesting rhetorical specimen: “Although there is nothing inherently dishonorable about this it does create tension between two motives: conviction about the importance of perfecting ethical conduct, on the one hand, and the desire to advance one’s professional career, on the other” (p. 340). I am not sure what the authors mean by “perfecting ethical conduct.” Yet they suggest that a group of reputable scholars, who have taken diverse positions on the ethics of non-heart-beating organ donation, have come perilously close to venality.Finally, in order to avoid further legitimating what they consider to be an ethically objectionable practice, the authors advocate that journals exercise “restraint” in publishing articles about this topic. Perhaps in a future pronouncement they will enlighten us about how enforcing a publication policy that avoids the vice of “unduly iterative ethical review” might work without compromising freedom of discussion. Moral dogmatism and censorship have a long history of association.Franklin G. MillerCenter for Biomedical Ethics University of Virginia Charlottesville, VACopyright © 1996 The Johns Hopkins University Press... (shrink)