The seemingly "inextricable" mutual entanglement of history and the play of power dissolves itself when thinking, under the sway of technique, moves beyond the horizon of metaphysic, and turns to question the unconcealment of being, that is, when man lets time become the law of his essence. Only so would a history, i.e. freedom, happen again, and rescue modern man from his otherwise destinyless age.

The world is not on track to achieve Agenda 2030—the approach chosen in 2015 by all UN member states to engage multiple stakeholders for the common goal of sustainable development. The creation of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) arguably offered a new take on sustainable development by adopting hybrid and principle-based governance approaches, where public, private, not for profit and knowledge-institutions were invited to engage around achieving common medium-term targets. Cross-sector partnerships and multi-stakeholder engagement for sustainability have consequently taken (...) shape. But the call for collaboration has also come with fundamental challenges to meaningful engagement strategies—when private enterprises try to establish elaborate multi-stakeholder configurations. How can the purpose of businesses be mitigated through multi-stakeholder principle-based partnerships to effectively serve the purpose of a common sustainability agenda? In selecting nine scholarly contributions, this special issue aims at advancing this discourse. To stimulate further progress in business studies, this introductory essay, furthermore, identifies three pathways for research on multi-stakeholder engagement processes in support of the Decade of Action along three coupling lines: multi-sector alignment (relational coupling), operational perception alignment (cognitive coupling) and goal and strategic alignment (material coupling). (shrink)

By the application of a linear mass spectrum to a composite system of both the pseudoscalar and scalar meson nonets, we find three relations for the masses of the scalar states which suggest the $q\bar q$ assignment for the scalar meson nonet a0(1320), K 0 * (1430), f0(1500), and f0 ′(980).

This paper argues that the concerns and methodology of the recently completed Report of the International Law Commission (ILC) over the fragmentation of international law presuppose a particular way of understanding legal language which tends to separate the understanding of rules from their factual adaptability to certain recurring social problems faced within specific institutional contexts. The paper argues that separating rules from their factual adaptability focuses the analysis on surface coherence - coherence at the level of abstract terms and phrases. (...) It is the argument of this paper that this presupposition is not warranted, and that the understanding of rules cannot be thus separated. An alternative model of the understanding of legal language is developed on the basis of the work of Bernard Jackson and Geoffrey Samuel. This is further supplemented by the approach to the study of institutional contexts in the recent work of Robert Summers and John Bell. Together, these resources can lead to the analysis of the deep coherence of the international legal order, that being one that prioritizes not the unity of that order, but its responsiveness. The ideal of responsive law is elaborated upon by reference to the work of Philip Selznick and Philippe Nonet. Finally, a different agenda for the ILC is offered on the basis of the methodology of deep coherence. The upshot is that the paper calls for a reorientation of international legal theory, away from concerns about 'the law itself' and towards an engagement with the responsiveness of legal work performed in international legal institutions. (shrink)

This slim volume is another addition to the ever growing family of anthologies—in this case Oxford Readings in Philosophy—recognizable as such not only because of its eye-catching external appearance but also, and mainly, on account of its close similarity in technical features to the previously born siblings. The composite body of the various contributions bears the unmistakable mark of ‘analysis’ as an identifying label. This observation, needless to say, is not intended to be condemnatory—for there is a great deal to (...) be said in favour of dissecting propensities—it is merely an indication of what one should expect to find in this compilation. The nonet playing ‘Action’ consists of the following performers: J L Austin, A C Danto, H A Prichard, A I Melden, D Davidson, J Feinberg, P J Fitzgerald, G E M Anscombe, J O Urmson. As can be seen, the group represents a pretty homogeneous bunch—with the possible exception of the veteran ethical intuitionist Prichard, whose participation ceases to be a mystery only after Melden’s essay has been digested. I must confess that I find the arrangement of the articles rather puzzling. There seems to be no clear criterion involved. It cannot be in order of importance ; neither can it be taken to signify logical affinity ; it certainly is not chronological; and—in the presence of an eminent editor—one hesitates to see it as an ad hoc, haphazard motley. It might be maintained that A White’s excellent introduction—a rare combination of lucidity, economy and relevant information—with its appropriate headings throws some light on the collocation of players in the ensemble. If it was intended to do this then I fail to see the logic behind the plan. This, however, is a minor matter when compared with the meritorious execution of a difficult task which the introduction represents. It gives us a comprehensive bird’s-eye view of the territory disputed and pin-points neatly the various claimants to the, often more than obscure, land-titles. Considering the nature of the landscape and the diversity of figures swarming over and about it Professor White has done a splendid job and deserves unqualified praise. (shrink)