Drawing on interviews, this article examines how the third wave of the straight edge hardcore music scene can promote a gender-progressive image in light of evidence that suggests men's continued advantage over women in the scene. The author argues that this discrepancy can be explained by straight edgers' use of going rate comparisons that highlight the scene's “doings” and “not-doings” in ways that portray sXe favorably. By insisting that gender is no longer relevant, straight edgers then set (...) up a going rate of authenticity that is purportedly attainable by men and women. This going rate, however, ultimately reinstates gender boundaries sXers claim to erase. The author concludes the article by discussing the larger implications of doings and not-doings in going rate constructions and the performance of gender. (shrink)

Here lies the vocation of those who preserve our understanding of past theories, who sharpen our sense of the subtle, complex interplay between political experience and thought, and who preserve our memory of the agonizing efforts of intellect to restate the possibilities and threats posed by political dilemmas of the past. —Sheldon S. Wolin, “Political Theory as a Vocation”In the same way in which the great transformation of the first industrial revolution destroyed the social and political structures as well as (...) the legal categories of the ancien regime, terms such as sovereignty, right, nation, people, democracy, and general will by now refer to a reality that no longer has anything to do with what these concepts used to designate—and those who continue to use these concepts uncritically literally do not know what they are talking about. —Giorgio Agamben, Means without Ends: Notes on PoliticsLooking obliquely at the edges of things, where they come together with other things, can tell you as much about them, often, as can looking at them directly, intently, straight on. —Clifford Geertz, “The Near East in the Far East”. (shrink)

This massive study of the history of scientific ideas covers the period from Galileo to Einstein in a way that no other single work so far has. It is not a ‘straight’ history of science; it contains scarcely any diagrams or equations; it has no footnotes, while its order is historical, not logical or systematic. Its aim is to discover a structure in the history of science by interrelating the philosophies, the techniques, and the personalities that have moulded it, (...) and in this way to illuminate not only the past development but also the present state of science. All of the natural sciences are brought into the story, but Dr. Gillispie wisely concentrates on the central figures, the great moments of discovery and the dominant currents of thought in each. This genre of writing is becoming increasingly popular and influential, though it requires a varied competence that its exponents do not always display. When well done, as in this instance, it helps to cast an easily-traversed and much-needed bridge between the humanities and science. Like the author’s previous From Genesis to Geology, this book is full of sparkling insights, and presents a quite personal evaluation of the people and movements of ideas that cross its pages. (shrink)

Examining the costs and motivations of warfare is key to conundrums concerning the relevance of this troubling phenomenon to the evolution of social attachment and cooperation, particularly during adolescence and young adulthood—the developmental time period during which many participants are first recruited for warfare. The study focuses on Samburu, a pastoralist society of approximately 200,000 people occupying northern Kenya’s semi-arid and arid lands, asking what role the emotionally sensitized, peer-driven adolescent life stage may have played in the cultural and genetic (...) coevolution of coalitional lethal aggression. Research in small-scale societies provides unparalleled opportunities for sharply defined variables, particularly in age generation societies in which all young men are initiated into “warriorhood.” Proposing an epigenetic and component behavior approach, we examine whether raiding activities such as number of raids, killing, and sparing enemy lives associate with DNA methylation in two candidate genes: MAOA, linked to mood and arousal, and NR3C1, linked to stress and immune response. We report statistically significant associations between the epigenetic variables and the combat variables of overall raiding activity and reportedly showing mercy to enemies. In contrast, epigenetic variables did not associate with post-traumatic stress disorder symptom scores, and the only combat variable associated with PTSD was losing one’s own livestock in a raid. These findings raise important questions concerning the mechanisms driving warfare’s paradoxical mix of violent and altruistic behaviors. (shrink)

Linguists have habitually phrased their accounts of language knowledge as sound/meaning correspondences about which no mention need be made of differences that might exist between knowledge of how to analyze input versus knowledge of how to construct output . However, evidence from many sources increasingly indicates that the dissimilarities between language as comprehension versus language as production are so profound that they nullify attempts to describe language in a 'non-directional' manner, 'neutral' with respect to interpretive versus expressive functions. A two-component (...) model of idealized linguistic performance can be devised on the basis of much past and present linguistic scholarship. Elements needed for the comprehension component are derivable from 'taxonomic' distributional analyses of phonotactics, morphosyntax, and lexical semantics, as well as from recent cognitive psychological work on 'perceptual strategies', while the production component can be formulated in terms of 'generative-semantic' and 'generative-phonological' rules recast as meaning-to-sound transformational processes. Interaction between these two components may well be the crucial determinant of the 'creative aspect of language use'. (shrink)

The conventional wisdom that influences university policy on what is considered valid sexual consent has undergone radical change over the past twenty years. Valid consent being the criteria that makes subsequent sexual behavior morally justified because the consent is morally transformative in the way that matters. Affirmative consent policies are now being used increasingly at universities across the country, as well as forming the basis for legislation in some U.S. states. University policies that define affirmative consent are varied, but policies (...) generally require the consent to be voluntary, conscious, unambiguous, and ongoing. The consent can be communicated verbally or behaviorally as long as it is clear and continues throughout the sexual encounter. I will argue against both the unambiguous and ongoing requirements of sexual consent. I contend that we should reject the affirmative model of sexual consent because of the problems with these requirements and I then offer some reasons in favor of returning to a lack of dissent model of sexual consent. (shrink)

My dissertation develops a defense of a right to self-defense against the state. I set aside anarchist theories and grant for the sake of argument that the state has legitimate political authority. My goal is to convince non-anarchists that the right to self-defense extends to individuals against the state and the state’s agents. I argue that the right to self-defense is a fundamental, negative, claim right. The right to self-defense has these characteristics: (1) it is fundamental, meaning that it is (...) not derivative of any other right—it doesn’t appeal to any other right for its justification (2) it is negative, meaning that it simply requires others to refrain from certain action, and (3) it is a claim right, rather than a permission right, which means that it logically entails correlative duties on others. I also challenge some basic tenets of the orthodox account of justified defensive force, including the imminence, necessity, and proportionality conditions. My argument is a controversial one; many will resist the idea that an individual could be justified in self-defense against the state for a variety of reasons, ranging from thinking the idea is absurd or dangerous, to thinking that even if it is morally permissible, it is impractical. I aim to rebut these objections and to provide strong moral reasons to show why individuals do in fact have this right. -/- This research explores the relationship between one of our most basic rights—the right to self-defense—with our most basic political relationship—the relationship between the individual and the state. Part of my aim is to convince non-anarchist readers of philosophical claims that are usually only supported by anarchists. The reason this is important, beyond being academically interesting, is that if I am successful, it could allow a great majority of individuals to rethink their relationship with the state; not just at a basic level, but also in other applied areas such as gun rights, drug laws, and issues surrounding punishment and imprisonment. (shrink)

The Second Amendment is accepted as protecting a right, but it is commonly accepted that the right is not unrestricted. I will explore the most commonly suggested restrictions proposed by gun control advocates and show why these restrictions to the Second Amendment are unjustifiably high, especially when compared with restrictions we accept for other Constitutional rights. I argue that these restrictions violate a central function of the Second Amendment—to enable the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. The three (...) restrictions I will be discussing are: licensing requirements for gun ownership, gun tracing with a national database of gun owners, and concealed carry restrictions. (shrink)

In this article, I attempt to answer the famous analyses of Benjamin Constant and Isaiah Berlin that the Classical Athenian Democracy had no conception of negative, individual, freedom. I do this by excavating an Athenian democratic concept of individual liberty from Classical Athenian texts. I go on to show that, whilst this has notable links to the later neo-Classical idea of freedom (excavated by the work of Quentin Skinner and Philip Pettit), there are also a number of important differences. This (...) means that we should perhaps stop arguing over whether there are one, or two, or three, concepts of freedom, but investigate instead (and, then, apply, in contemporary political philosophy) different historical uses of the word `'liberty' (as here), though these, interestingly, might well contain a similar basic meaning (of non-interference). (shrink)

Ethics of Health Care: A Guide for Clinical Practice, 3E is designed to guide health care students and practitioners through a wide variety of areas involving ethical controversies. It provides a background in value development and ethical theories, including numerous real-life examples to stimulate discussion and thought.

The author writes:In this project I set out to provide an answer to two fundamental questions of political philosophy. How can human beings live together, in conditions of co-operation over time, enjoying what Immanuel Kant famously called ‘perpetual peace’? And how much individual freedom can we expect to enjoy, and to what degree can we expect that individual freedom to be equal, whilst engaged in the enterprise described by the first question? These may be age-old questions, but I aim, in (...) this project, to offer a new approach to answering them.In part one of this project, I aim to provide a groundwork upon which an answer to these questions can be built. I argue, contrary to much contemporary political philosophy, that the answers to these questions should not be provided by our representatives, a monarch, the elite, or by a process of philosophical abstraction but, instead, by each of us. That is to say, by you, me and everyone else together. Part one argues not only why it should be each of us who are to be engaged in this enterprise, but it also argues on behalf of a number of changes which might support us in this ongoing, and doubtless difficult, human project. I begin by arguing that, if we are to attempt to provide a genuine answer to how much individual freedom we should each be alloted in human society over time, this means that we must begin with the concept of freedom itself which, in turn, means detaching it from the philosophical and epistemological baggage it tends to carry in everyday language. (shrink)

The author writes:In this project I set out to provide an answer to two fundamental questions of political philosophy. How can human beings live together, in conditions of co-operation over time, enjoying what Immanuel Kant famously called ‘perpetual peace’? And how much individual freedom can we expect to enjoy, and to what degree can we expect that individual freedom to be equal, whilst engaged in the enterprise described by the first question? These may be age-old questions, but I aim, in (...) this project, to offer a new approach to answering them.In part two of this project, I aim to actually provide my own answer to the two fundamental questions with which I began and according to the structure I outline in Liberty. Which is to say, this is the answer I provide to you to judge regarding how successfully it answers those age old political questions. In short, I argue that these are the changes in actual, material, human conditions - the necessary set of ‘alterable human practices’ to borrow a phrase of Isaiah Berlin’s - required to create an enduring, desirable and just ‘perpetual peace’ on earth. In other words, this is not, in Kant’s phrase, a ‘philosophical sketch’ on how perpetual peace might be attained, but, by focusing on the everyday, material, relationships and conditions which create and foster conflict and injustice across the globe today, I hope to provide a ‘material sketch’ as to how human beings might live in successfully together in conditions of peaceful cooperation and freedom over time. (shrink)

The traditional dispute over whether there are one or two ‘concepts’ of freedom has recently been reignited. Despite this, Isaiah Berlin’s distinction between positive and negative freedom retains a significant amount of influence over academic and popular disputes about freedom, continuing to withstand recent attempts, in Eric Nelson’s words, to ‘lift the shadow’ of Berlin’s famous dichotomy. Berlin’s distinction has traditionally been assailed by two separate schools of thought. One line of argument, propounded by Quentin Skinner and Philip Pettit, has (...) suggested that Berlin’s account includes (at least) one concept of freedom too few. Another line of attack, however, propounded by the likes of Nelson, Efraim Podoksik and Gerald MacCallum, has suggested that, to the contrary, Berlin’s account contains one concept of liberty too many. In this article, I will attempt to clear up this confusing picture by discussing how both of these lines of attack have a role to play in helping to dismantle Berlin’s ultimately misleading account of freedom. In the second half of the article, I then go on to explore the implications of this for contemporary political theory in the construction of a theory of freedom for modern political communities, discussing how the ‘spectrum’ of liberty I explore in the first half leads, naturally, to a social model of individual liberty. (shrink)

This collection of eighteen readings provides a basic text for undergraduates taking sociology of science courses. A general survey of articles published between 1961 and 1981, the book is also a useful overview for students taking courses in social and political studies of science; science, technology, and society; and "social issues" components of courses in the environmental sciences, geography, philosophy, and history of science. The editors have organized the book around "the relationship between the subculture of science and the wider (...) culture which surrounds it. Looked at from this perpective, science is primarily a source of knowledge and competence.... Thus to stress its interaction with its context not only highlights these aspects of science which most people find of overriding pragmatic interest, but also raises important basic issues concerning credibility, the distribution of authority in society, and the nature of the interaction between different forms of culture." Essays are grouped in five sections: The Organization of Academic Science: Communication and Control; The Culture of Science; The Interaction of Science and Technology; The Interaction of Science and Society; Science as Expertise. The editors have added a general introduction, part introductions, bibliographical notes, and a lengthy bibliography. Barry Barnes is Lecturer at the Science Studies Unit, University of Edinburgh, and editor of an earlier version of this book, The Sociology of Science, published in the Penguin Sociology Readings series and now out of print. David Edge is Director of The Science Studies Unit at the University of Edinburgh and a joint editor of the journal, Social Studies of Science. (shrink)

The Benefits and Potential Harms of Genetic Testing for Huntington's Disease: A Case Study Content Type Journal Article Pages 14-19 Authors Kathryn Edge, BSC, Rheumatic Diseases Centre, CSB, Hope Hospital, The University of Manchester, Stott Lane, Salford M6 8HD, England Journal Human Reproduction & Genetic Ethics Online ISSN 2043-0469 Print ISSN 1028-7825 Journal Volume Volume 14 Journal Issue Volume 14, Number 2 / 2008.

Discussions of the liberty of the ancients, in contemporary political theory, treat democratic freedom, and the political equality on which democracy was premised, as anathema to the liberty of the moderns. This article discusses ancient democratic liberty by referencing the theory of arithmetic equality preserved by Aristotle and Plato and suggests that we need to re-investigate this relationship in the interests of modern freedom. The article argues that, in fact, Greek, particularly Athenian, democratic ideas, construe freedom in a negative way (...) and that democratic, arithmetic, accounts of equality are, at root, anti-oppressive and require further investigation in the name of justice for the moderns. (shrink)

The subject of this article is Neil Jordan's film The Crying Game. Released in 1992, it was widely received as a film that challenged stereotypes in relation to both the IRA and questions of race, sexuality and desire. This article calls into question such a radical reading by analysing the way in which Jude the IRA woman is represented. Through a feminist deconstruction, the article proposes that the character of Jude can be seen to represent both national and international anxieties (...) concerning contemporary masculine and feminine subject positions. The article plots this by investigating how the film deals with the specifics of gender and Irish nationalism. It then moves on to consider how these specifics can be seen to articulate international postmodern concerns about contemporary gender identities. (shrink)

Our paper examines the impact of the intersection of cultural and gender identity on moral reasoning. Much research has been done on gender differences in moral thinking/reasoning, and increasingly research has also examined cultural differences in moral thinking. In agreement with a number of scholars we support the following claims about culture, moral reasoning, and concepts of self: concepts of self and approaches to moral reasoning are connected, concepts of self are differing by gender and culture, moral reasoning differs by (...) gender and culture. We propose that philosophy, particularly moral philosophy, follow the lead of psychology and strive to be as inclusive as possible by including the full range of human diversity and experience. For philosophers, this would mean embracing – indeed, starting from – a multicultural, feminist approach to moral theories and questions; this approach would not only be sensitive to gender and cultural bias, but also offer an alternative model to the paradigmatic rational, autonomous, independent agent of traditional moral theory. The implications of this go far beyond moral reasoning, but also have implications for other areas of philosophy as well, such as recent work in philosophy of mind on the idea of extended cognition. (shrink)

Scientists use models to understand the natural world, and it is important not to conflate model and nature. As an illustration, we distinguish three different kinds of populations in studies of ecology and evolution: theoretical, laboratory, and natural populations, exemplified by the work of R.A. Fisher, Thomas Park, and David Lack, respectively. Biologists are rightly concerned with all three types of populations. We examine the interplay between these different kinds of populations, and their pertinent models, in three examples: the notion (...) of “effective” population size, the work of Thomas Park on /Tribolium/ populations, and model-based clustering algorithms such as /Structure/. Finally, we discuss ways to move safely between three distinct population types while avoiding confusing models and reality. (shrink)

Most contemporary justice theories focus on the basic structure of society but pay relatively little attention to the implementation of laws and policies at the street-level. As agents of the basic structure, social caseworkers and street-level bureaucrats are, however, potentially in a unique position in the fight to deliver justice at the coalface of social inequality. Introducing a paradigm of ‘Justice as Action’, we explore how street-level bureaucrats can work with both citizen-clients and, indeed, political philosophers, to promote justice. Although (...) the Justice as Action paradigm does not involve entirely abandoning ideal justice theories, we show how it provides a potential method for paying heed to the objections of political realists about the need to direct attention to the concerns of people ‘now and around here’ if we are to produce both meaningful political theory and meaningful political action. Our conclusion is that it is essential for front-line workers and street-level bureaucrats and political theorists to have more conversations with one another than they currently do in order to advance their shared cause. (shrink)