This book evaluates the claim that in order to explore the changing social foundations of global power relations today, we need to include in our analysis an understanding of global civil society, particularly if we also wish to raise ethical questions about the changing political and institutional practices of transnational governance. The authors engage directly with the notion of global civil society in order to examines the ethical, social, and political conditions that make certain kinds of globalizing practices a reality (...) today. They explore and utilize the normative dimensions of the civil discourse to further debate about the meaning of citizenship in a world of multi-level governance, as well as the changing characteristics of political community and democracy. Bridging the normative concerns of political theorists with the historical and institutional focus of scholars of international relations and international political economy, this book will be of broad interest to students and researchers concerned with international relations, civil society, global governance and ethics. (shrink)
Alexandre Germain | : Le problème du partage des bénéfices liés aux ressources naturelles ne peut faire l’économie de la question territoriale. Cette question est de plus en plus abordée sous l’angle des droits territoriaux sans toutefois reposer sur une théorie générale de la territorialité qui permettrait d’éviter l’écueil de l’ethnocentricité. Nous proposons donc une définition fonctionnaliste de la territorialité permettant de distinguer des territorialités matérielles et idéelles, des territoires formels et fonctionnels, et des conceptions verticale et horizontale du (...) territoire. Ces distinctions nous permettent de formuler une question fondamentale que la philosophie politique a trop peu abordée (et elle offre les outils conceptuels pour y répondre) : comment gérer la concurrence des légitimités territoriales dans un même espace ? | : The problem of how to share the benefits generated from the extraction of natural resources is directly linked to territorial issues. These issues have been increasingly addressed from a perspective of territorial rights without, however, developing a theory of territoriality that would avoid the risk of ethnocentrism. I thus propose a functionalist definition of territoriality that would allow for a distinction between two types of territoriality (material and ideational), two kinds of territories (formal and functional), and two different conceptions of territory (vertical and horizontal). These distinctions lay the groundwork for formulating a fundamental question that has been neglected by political philosophy — how should concurrent territorial legitimacies be managed ? — and provide us with the conceptual tools to tackle it. (shrink)
D. Alan Shewmon has advanced a well-documented challenge to the widely accepted total brain death criterion for death of the human being. We show that Shewmon's argument against this criterion is unsound, though he does refute the standard argument for that criterion. We advance a distinct argument for the total brain death criterion and answer likely objections. Since human beings are rational animals – sentient organisms of a specific type – the loss of the radical capacity for sentience (the capacity (...) to sense or to develop the capacity to sense) involves a substantial change, the passing away of the human organism. In human beings total brain death involves the complete loss of the radical capacity for sentience, and so in human beings total brain death is death. (shrink)
How exactly is accepting the bad side effects of good choices morally defensible? The best defense to date is by Joseph Boyle, John Finnis, and Germain Grisez and relies on the claim that bad side effects are unavoidable. But are they? Three accounts of why bad side effects are unavoidable—one by John Zeis, a second by Boyle, Finnis, and Grisez jointly, and a third by Boyle independently—are examined and rejected. Next, an alternative proposal which suggests bad side effects are (...) always avoidable is also examined and rejected. Finally, an adequate account of why bad side effects are unavoidable is presented and defended. This defense relies on certain facts about the goods which human agents ultimately find fulfilling and about human agents’ attempts to instantiate those goods through various projects. (shrink)
