Toleration in Applied Ethics

Our moral judgments are fallible, and we’re often uncertain what morality requires. I argue that, in the face of these challenges, it’s not only rational to use effective procedures for trying to be moral – we have a moral responsibility to do so, and being reckless when navigating moral uncertainty, is, itself, a form of moral wrongdoing. These strategic requirements present a large class of under-explored norms of morality. I use these norms to address moral and social questions concerning, for (...) example, interpersonal toleration, exceptions to moral rules in high-stakes cases, and principal-agent relationships (such as those between lawyers and clients). -/- (email for full text). (shrink)

Alfred Stepan’s “twin-tolerations” thesis (2000) is a model for explaining different ways that religious and political authority come to be reconciled. In this paper, we investigate some obstacles and challenges to realizing a reconciliation between religious and political authority in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) that might result in a transition away from a theocratic monarchy to a more consultative form of political authority. Whereas most analyses of religion and politics in KSA focus on geopolitics, the rentier state model, (...) or economic and military aid from the United States, we also consider local factors that emphasize the agency of political and non-political actors within KSA, focusing in particular on education policy and how this policy is a barrier to political reform. Our position is not meant to replace the standard models, but rather to supplement them by offering a multi-variable perspective on the challenges and prospects for meaningful political reform in KSA. (shrink)

Generally speaking, just war theory holds that there are two just causes for war: self-defence and ‘other-defence’, the most common type of which is popularly known as ‘humanitarian intervention’. There is however some debate as to whether these serve equally as just causes for preventive war. Whilst this debate is ongoing, those theorists who claim to subscribe to JWT tend to be unified in treating preventive war with a healthy dose of suspicion. Those who oppose preventive war tend to do (...) so on the basis that it fails to fit popular criteria for jus ad bello; particularly, the just cause and last resort criteria. Francisco di Vitoria held that the only just cause for war was “a wrong received”, undermining any justification for preventive war. However, more recent developments in military practice suggest a questioning of an outright ban; most notably, the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. Interestingly, both supporters and critics of preventive war tend to justify their view through the broader logic of JWT; viz., a conception of what is good for both political communities and individuals, and defending those goods. Supporters point to situations where there is ‘grave and imminent risk’ that a nation will suffer aggression as good reasons to resist the oncoming aggression, whilst critics may argue that to attack another political community on the basis of crimes not yet performed is a breach of the same rights that JWT strives to defend. The advocate of preventive war does capture a point which should be of very real concern to us today. Situations such as the ongoing tensions between Iran and The United States and her allies are situations where – if the rhetoric is to be believed – an ongoing threat to security and liberty is tolerated, and our being subject to aggression is risked in the interest of the rights of the antagonistic, but not yet aggressive, state. Is such tolerance and risk consistent with the logic of just war? When is the risk of being attacked too great to abstain from declaring war in anticipation? In this paper I will highlight some of the theoretical and practical difficulties in determining what counts as a grave and imminent threat; focussing especially on the complicating case of ‘imminence’ in the face of so-called ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’. Secondly, I will argue that not only is the notion of preventive war both inconsistent with the defence of the rights of political communities that JWT defends, but is also forbidden by the proportionality requirement of jus ad bellum. The risk of being subject to aggression is the cost of global peace; and whilst political communities can do a great deal to prevent aggression and be prepared in case it occurs, the demands of just war require that this prevention and preparation stop short of declaring war. We must accept a degree of risk in this area. (shrink)

People's opinions toward polygamy were examined in a study of 1369 adults who were current or former members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Questions addressed several areas: polygamy and the law, respondents' perceptions of polygamous women, the potential link between legalizing gay marriage and legalizing polygamy, polygamists' reliance on social welfare programs, and the ability of teens raised in polygamy to leave that lifestyle. Consistent with the contact hypothesis, multiple regression analyses showed that people who knew (...) a polygamist held more favorable opinions of polygamy. Polygamists, men, infrequent church attenders, and older people also tended to hold more favorable opinions of polygamy. Educational attainment showed weak associations with opinions, while marital status failed to predict opinions toward polygamy. (shrink)

Polygamy is a hotly contested practice and open to widespread misunderstandings. This practice is defined as a relationship between either one husband and multiple wives or one wife and multiple husbands. Today, “polygamy” almost exclusively takes the form of one husband with multiple wives. In this article, my focus will center on limited defenses of polygamy offered recently by Chesire Calhoun and Martha Nussbaum. I will argue that these defenses are unconvincing. The problem with polygamy is primarily that it is (...) a structurally inegalitarian practice in both theory and fact. Polygamy should be opposed for this reason. (shrink)

The review focuses basically on Leader’s paper "Toleration without Liberal Foundations". First, the author makes some semantic remarks about the uses of the word “toleration”; second, he offers some criticisms of Leader’s paper; and, finally, he puts forward the outline of a modest proposal.

In this engaging and comprehensive introduction to the topic of toleration, Andrew Jason Cohen seeks to answer fundamental questions, such as: What is toleration? What should be tolerated? Why is toleration important? Beginning with some key insights into what we mean by toleration, Cohen goes on to investigate what should be tolerated and why. We should not be free to do everythingÑmurder, rape, and theft, for clear examples, should not be tolerated. But should we be free to take drugs, hire (...) a prostitute, or kill ourselves? Should our governments outlaw such activities or tolerate them? Should they tolerate “outsourcing” of jobs or importing of goods or put embargos on other countries? Cohen examines these difficult questions, among others, and argues that we should look to principles of toleration to guide our answers. These principles tell us when limiting freedom is acceptableÑthat is, they indicate the proper limits of toleration. Cohen deftly explains the main principles on offer and indicates why one of these stands out from the rest. This wide-ranging new book on an important topic will be essential reading for students taking courses in philosophy, political science and religious studies. (shrink)

Specific character of globalization can be understood only in connection with deep crisis of the nation-state and thus with sovereignty. The sovereignty organically includes territory. During globalization territory factor is not anymore the key principle of social and cultural life. Such phenomenon as Islamic fundamentalism (Islamism) fits quite well the structure of the theory of globalization in postmodernist interpretation. For Islamism as a subject of the world order the determining identity (as sets of the ontological aims determining its outlook and (...) purposes of political activity), i.e. determining, basic, fundamental to self-determination and activities is a creation of the Islamic world order, the world of Caliphate. Thus the Islamic fundamentalism focuses on universal nature of its identity. This activity ignores norms of international law and denies its key positions, such as state sovereignty, territorial integrity, firmness of borders, etc. Tolerance is an integral feature of the sovereignty. Weakening of sovereignty in conditions of globalization causes danger of strengthening of intolerance. Recognition of uniqueness, peculiarity and other civilization identity is a key to peaceful settlement of problems in conditions of the new global order as well as to establishment of philosophy of tolerance. (shrink)

High ethical standards have always been at the core of the Afghan culture throughout the country. Unfortunately, over the past few years in Afghanistan, bribery and corruption have become more widespread throughout the government offices as employees attempt to serve their customers. This quantitative study of 98 male and 116 female Afghan-American respondents analyzes their perceptions regarding the recognition of dilemmas related to ethics and bribery. The 214Afghan-American responses are compared with the average scores of 602 American respondents from the (...) retail industry. The groups’ scores are significantly different with the later reporting less tolerance for unethical behavior. It appears that there are no differences in the responses of Afghan males and females. The younger generation seems to be as ethically mature as the older Afghans. Finally, higher education levels among the Afghan respondents demonstrated a statistically significant and positive correlation toward ethical maturity. Results and implications are presented. (shrink)

The university is promoted as 'a place from where to speak'. Academic freedom is examined as a crucial value in an increasingly uncertain age which resonates with Barnett's concern to encourage students to overcome their 'fear of freedom'. My concern is that the putative university space of freedom and autonomy may well become constricted by those who would limit not just our freedom to speak but also our freedoms to be and to do. Without academic freedom students and teachers, who (...) might be able to fly, will not be permitted to fly. I review issues of academic freedom and free speech raised especially by Berlin, Voltaire, von Humboldt, Mill, Milton and Rorty. I discuss problems raised when free speech is heard by others as harmful and offensive to their beliefs and values. I offer a set of suggestions to ensure that the university may envision itself as a space of freedom, pluralism and tolerance. Finally, I reflect that the university, of all democratic institutions, should be the one which best serves its society as 'a place from where to speak'. (shrink)

This article analyzes the contribution Christian ethics might be able to make to the ethical debate on policy and caregiving in health and social care in the United Kingdom. The article deals particularly with the concepts of solidarity and subsidiarity which are essential in Christian social ethics and health care ethics, and which may be relevant for the ethical debate on health and social caregiving in the United Kingdom. An important argument in the article is that utilitarian and market-driven policies (...) in the National Health Service (NHS) and the social care system have marginalized the position of the elderly and have seriously impoverished the quality of care for the elderly. The neglect of the elderly and other vulnerable groups is also the result of widespread consumerist attitudes among patients and of libertarian models of noninterference which are affirmed by a public ethos of self-sufficiency and counter-dependency. Those who need care dare not make their need known to others and ask for help, while simultaneously those who could help are so intimidated by the public affirmation of privacy and negative rights that they do not dare to offer help except if this is explicitly demanded. This distant and standoffish attitude is in an important way responsible for the fact that the voice of those in need is altogether lost to the public forum. Christian ethics puts much emphasis on responsibility and solidarity with the needy other but is not able to have much impact on the delivery of care in a secularized society and health care system like the NHS. Nonetheless, Christianity still has a powerful and respected voice, by speaking up for those who cannot speak for themselves, such as the elderly and the handicapped. Christians can find allies in the ethics of care and other relational approaches in health care ethics in order to combat libertarianism, consumerism, and utilitarianism. (shrink)

The cross-cultural literature is reviewed and integrated together with attitude theories, thereby outlining a model through which certain values influence the intervening variables that ultimately lead managers to tolerate employee bribery. The case of Latin America is employed to illustrate how regionally dominant cultural values may shape managers' attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, which in turn affect tolerance of employee bribery. A series of research propositions and practical recommendations are derived from the model.

The purpose of this research was to investigate, for the first time, tertiary education students’ ethical judgements in the Republic of Cyprus academic environment. The authors developed and administered a quantitative questionnaire to a sample of 1,000 individuals currently pursuing accredited degrees at two tertiary institutions. Statistical analysis revealed four factors, named violation of school regulations, selfishness, cheating, and computer ethics that describe students’ ethical judgements in the academic environment. The results indicate that students exhibit the lowest tolerance with ethical (...) issues relevant with selfishness and highest with issues relevant with computer ethics. In addition, a number of differences were revealed when the authors investigated the relationship between the four retained factors and variables such as gender, year of study, type of academic discipline, and religion. Finally, reflecting on the research findings, a number of practical recommendations are made mainly to educational institutions that wish to redefine their policies and procedures regarding ethics within their academic environment. (shrink)

This paper reports on the results from two studies that were conducted eight years apart with different respondents. The studies examined the role of the Mere Exposure Effect on ethical tolerance or acceptability of particular business decisions. The results from Study 1 show there is a significant difference in ethical judgment for 12 out of 16 vignettes between those who have been exposed to such situations compared to those who have not been exposed to them. In those 12 situations, those (...) who have been exposed to such situations adopted a more tolerant stance toward the ethically questionable behavior. The results from Study 2 show there is a significant difference in ethical judgment for 9 out of 16 vignettes between those who have been exposed to such situations compared to those who have not been exposed to them. Again, in those nine situations, those who have been exposed to such situations adopted a more tolerant stance toward the ethically questionable behavior. Interestingly, the 9 situations in Study 2 were 9 of the 12 situations found to be significant in Study 1, and in the same direction, suggesting that we have found consistency in our findings and support for the Mere Exposure Effect. Implications are provided for both higher education and practitioners. (shrink)

Recent events at Enron, K-Mart, Adelphia, and Tyson would seem to suggest that managers are still experiencing ethical lapses. These lapses are somewhat surprising and disappointing given the heightened focus on ethical considerations within business contexts during the past decade. This study is designed, therefore, to increase our understanding of the forces that shape ethical perceptions by considering the effects of business school education as well as a number of other individual-level factors (such as intra-national culture, area of specialization within (...) business, and gender) that may exert an influence on ethical perceptions. We found significant effects for business education, self-reported intra-national culture, area of specialization within business, and gender for some and/or all areas of ethics examined (i.e., deceit, fraud, self-interest, influence dealing, and coercion). One of our most encouraging findings is that tolerance for unethical behavior appears to decrease with formal business education. Despite the prevalent stereotype that business students are only interested in the bottom line or that business schools transform idealistic freshman into self-serving business graduates, our results suggest otherwise. Given the heightened criticism of the ethicality of contemporary managerial behavior, it is heartening to note that, even as adults, individuals can be positively affected by integration of ethics training. (shrink)

This article groups the rhetoric of hate on the Internet into five generic categories. Although continuous with its ancestral form, we argue that in its discontinuity this cyberspace variant is uniquely harmful to children because of its diffuse textuality, anonymity, and potential for immersive, user-interactivity. This unique postmodern grammar compels us to confront the sacrosanct premises of our paradoxical ethic of tolerance. We conclude that a postmodern ethic that features accountability can be derived by augmenting our conception of critical praxis.

Everyone knows that something has gone wrong, in the United States, with the conventions of privacy. Along with a vastly increased tolerance for variation in sexual life we have seen a sharp increase in prurient and censorious attention to the sexual lives of public figures and famous persons, past and present. The culture seems to be growing more tolerant and more intolerant at the same time, though perhaps different parts of it are involved in the two movements.

I outline what I call a relational account of toleration. This relational account helps explain the apparent paradox of toleration in that it involves two competing moral stances, of acceptance and disapproval, towards the tolerated. It also helps clarify the way toleration is a normative ideal, and not a position one is forced into out of the practical need to accommodate or accept. Specifically, toleration is recommended out of respect for that which the tolerant agent also disapproves of. This combination (...) of respect entangled with disapproval results from two different evaluative perspectives of the tolerant agent. The relational account explains how an agent can hold these competing evaluative perspectives. I also discuss the proper scope of state toleration under this relational account. (shrink)

The current UN policy regarding free speech presents a philosophical dilemma between accepting the free speech provisions in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and exceptions carved out for hatred, hostility, and religious defamation. The Declaration should be understood to imply viewpoint neutrality and the exceptions for defamation are not viewpoint neutral. If the UN were to adopt J. S. Mill’s crucial distinctions between expression and performative speech, content and context, and mental states and the acts motivated by them, it (...) would be clear that hatred, hostility, and defamation cannot be exceptions to viewpoint neutral free speech. If the heart of free speech is freedom especially for the thought we hate, then the UN should abandon its exceptions or abandon appeals to free speech. However, I will offer a strong reason that it should not do the latter. (shrink)

The article focuses on examining the distinct nature of persecution. In the article I argue that on the grounds of common historical cases of persecution an account of the core components of the concept may be established. The core comprises three central elements: asymmetrical and systemic threat, severe and sustained harm, and unjust discriminatory targeting. I will conclude the paper by suggesting that none of the components alone make persecution anything distinct. However, the simultaneous occurrence of the components may be (...) argued to amount to a separable class of harms that are among the worst-case scenarios for those having to endure them. (shrink)

The zero tolerance fallacy occurs when someone advocates or adopts a zero tolerance policy towards some activity or behaviour without seeing if there is evidence to support the view that such a policy is the best or most cost-effective way of preventing or reducing the unwanted behaviour. This paper explores the idea that, instead of thinking about what the zero tolerance fallacy is, argumentation theorists should try to characterize what features good arguments for zero tolerance policies must have.

The central question of this work is how should physicians respond to patients' religious beliefs when those beliefs cause patients to act in a manner that is at odds with what most of the community regard as reasonable? I use the example of a Jehovah's Witness who refuses a life-sustaining blood transfusion as a paradigm case of a religiously grounded disagreement about medical care. In chapter 1, I explain the reasons for Jehovah's Witnesses' refusal of blood and lay out three (...) responses to the question of how physicians should respond. The options of coercing a transfusion, respecting patients' right to self-determination, and respectfully but critically tolerating patients' medical decisions are considered throughout this work. In chapter 2, I contrast four readings of the Kantian demand for respect and argue that respect for persons as engagement can best guide physicians' interactions with patients where there is intractable disagreement. In chapter 3, I develop the idea of respectful toleration as the preferred response to patients whose religious beliefs are the foundation of a medical decision that is at odds with our initial standards of reasonableness. This response to patients is characterized by tempered beneficence that leads to engagement and persuasion, but stops short of coercion. In chapter 4, I suggest that the reluctance to engage patients in a critical discussion of their religious reasons is based on a misguided understanding of a physician's role and the process of change within religion. In chapter 5, I consider the question how a physician should respond to patients who, despite attempts at engagement, affirm their religious commitment to refuse life-sustaining treatment. I argue that physicians should respond to dying patients with whom they disagree with empathy and sympathy. ;My thesis is that religious reasons in medical decision-making should not be accorded a privileged status. They should be subject to critical scrutiny while we try to understand religious tradition's attempt to establish deeper meaning in human life. There should not be a wall between physicians and patients that prevents physicians from talking, reasoning about, and engaging patients in a discussion of their religious beliefs and reasons. (shrink)

This dissertation examines the concept of autonomy reflected in nondirective genetic counseling. I argue that counselors interpret autonomy primarily as clients' right to non-interference in decision-making, a construal that may permit both poorly reasoned and unethical decisions. I propose that counselors reconfigure their view of autonomy to emphasize instead deliberative competence in the decision-making process. This is expressed in what I develop as a "dialogical" counseling approach, framed within the interpretive ethics of H. Richard Niebuhr. Dialogical counseling requires careful and (...) thorough deliberation of the medical, psychosocial, and ethical issues germane to a decision, attained through dialogue between counselor and client. In this dialogue, the counselor is free to introduce unsolicited information and alternative perspectives. While the client makes the final decision, the counselor ensures that it is well considered and includes acknowledgement of the ethical issues and social consequences of individual choices. The goal of successful counseling is a decision in "reflective equilibrium" with respect to clients' circumstances, ethically responsible decisions being those that are accountable to their social consequences. (shrink)

Available evidence suggests that pedagogical practices in some religious schools in America are harmful to children. They excessively restrict students' liberties, thwart intellectual autonomy; foster intolerance and an inability to interact constructively with persons holding different conceptions of the good; and cause diminished self-respect and severe anxiety. This Dissertation considers from a liberal perspective what state policy should be toward such schools if they do in fact harm children in these ways. ;After summarizing research on Fundamentalist Christian and Catholic schooling, (...) the Dissertation describes the prevailing approach of courts, legislators, and academics to addressing parent-state conflicts over regulation of religious schools. They attribute to parents a fundamental right to control their children's education, and balance this right against state interests. The Dissertation demonstrates that the very concept of parental rights is illegitimate. Rights to control another person's life are anomalous within our legal and moral culture, and standard justifications for giving parents such rights, including justifications based on children's interests, cannot withstand scrutiny. It also explains why liberal values of state neutrality and toleration with respect to religious belief do not support state deference to parents' child-rearing preferences. ;The Dissertation next critiques an alternative approach that treats children's education as a protected means for religious communities to preserve their culture. Arguments for giving special rights to cultural minorities, based on values of equality or freedom of association, cannot support a community right to control children's up-bringing. Applying to the situation of children themselves the values underlying these arguments actually yields support for increased state intervention into culture-transmitting practices of some minority communities. ;Finally, the Dissertation endorses a justice-based approach that gives equal consideration to the distinct interests of children. It modifies and applies John Rawls' political conception of justice, demonstrating that application of its basic principles to children's education yields requirements for substantial state regulation and oversight of religious schools. Insofar as these conclusions are inconsistent with Rawls's recent statements concerning education and respect for persons holding non-liberal conceptions of the good, this analysis generates criticism of his latest work. (shrink)

In an era when much of what passes for debate is merely moral posturing--traditional family values versus the cultural elite, free speech versus censorship--or reflexive name-calling--the terms "liberal" and "politically correct," are used with as much dismissive scorn by the right as "reactionary" and "fascist" are by the left--Stanley Fish would seem an unlikely lightning rod for controversy. A renowned scholar of Milton, head of the English Department of Duke University, Fish has emerged as a brilliantly original critic of the (...) culture at large, praised and pilloried as a vigorous debunker of the pieties of both the left and right. His mission is not to win the cultural wars that preoccupy the nation's attention, but rather to redefine the terms of battle. In There's No Such Thing as Free Speech, Fish takes aim at the ideological gridlock paralyzing academic and political exchange in the nineties. In his witty, accessible dissections of the swirling controversies over multiculturalism, affirmative action, canon revision, hate speech, and legal reform, he neatly eviscerates both the conservatives' claim to possession of timeless, transcendent values, and the intellectual left's icons of equality, tolerance, and non-discrimination. He argues that while conservative ideologues and liberal stalwarts might disagree vehemently on what is essential to a culture, or to a curriculum, both mistakenly believe that what is essential can be identified apart from the accidental circumstances to which the essential is ritually opposed. In the book's first section, which includes the five essays written for Fish's celebrated debates with Dinesh D'Souza, Fish turns his attention to the neoconservative backlash. In his introduction, Fish writes, "Terms that come to us wearing the label 'apolitical'--'common values', 'fairness', 'merit', 'color blind', 'free speech', 'reason'--are in fact the ideologically charged constructions of a decidedly political agenda. I make the point not in order to level an accusation, but to remove the sting of accusation from the world 'politics' and redefine it as a synonym for what everyone inevitably does." Fish maintains that the debate over political correctness is an artificial one, because it is simply not possible for any party or individual to occupy a position above or beyond politics. Regarding the controversy over the revision of the college curriculum, Fish argues that the point is not to try to insist that inclusion of ethnic and gender studies is not a political decision, but "to point out that any alternative curriculum--say a diet of exclusively Western or European texts--would be no less politically invested." In Part Two, Fish follows the implications of his arguments to a surprising rejection of the optimistic claims of the intellectual left that awareness of the historical roots of our beliefs and biases can allow us, as individuals or as a society, to escape or transcend them. Specifically, he turns to the movement for reform of legal studies, and insists that a dream of a legal culture in which no one's values are slighted or declared peripheral can no more be realized than the dream of a concept of fairness that answers to everyone's notions of equality and jsutice, or a yardstick of merit that is true to everyone's notions of worth and substance. Similarly, he argues that attempts to politicize the study of literature are ultimately misguided, because recharacterizations of literary works have absolutely no impact on the mainstream of political life. He concludes his critique of the academy with "The Unbearable Ugliness of Volvos," an extraordinary look at some of the more puzzing, if not out-and-out masochistic, characteristics of a life in academia. Penetrating, fearless, and brilliantly argued, There's No Such Thing as Free Speech captures the essential Fish. It is must reading for anyone who cares about the outcome of America's cultural wars. (shrink)

American liberals believe that both civil liberties and civil rights are harmonious aspects of a basic commitment to human rights. But recently these two clusters of values have seemed increasingly to conflict – as, for example, with the feminist claim that the legal toleration of pornography, long a goal sought by civil libertarians, actually violates civil rights as a form of sex discrimination. Here I propose an interpretation of the conflict of civil rights and civil liberties in its latest manifestation: (...) the controversy over how to treat discriminatory verbal harassment on American campuses. I was involved with the controversy in a practical way at Stanford, where I helped draft a harassment regulation that was recently adopted by the university. Like the pornography issue, the harassment problem illustrates the element of paradox in the conflict of civil-liberties and civil-rights perspectives or mentalities. This problem does not simply trigger familiar disagreements between liberals of a classical or libertarian orientation as against those of a welfare state or social democratic one – though it does sometimes do that. In my experience, the issue also has the power to appear to a single person in different shapes and suggest different solutions as it oscillates between being framed in civil-liberties and in civil-rights terms. At the same time, however, it remains recognizably the same problem. It is thus a very practical and political example of the kind of tension noted by Wittgenstein in the aphorism that heads this essay – a puzzle of interpretive framing, of “seeing-as.”. (shrink)

I argue that there are strong consequentialist grounds for thinking that hate speech should be legally protected. The protection of hate speech allows those who are hateful to make their beliefs public, thereby exposing prejudices that might otherwise be suppressed to evaluation by other members of society. This greater transparency about prejudices has two social benefits. First, it facilitates social trust by making it easier to discover who holds beliefs that should exclude them from positions of authority, responsibility, and influence. (...) Second, it facilitates efforts to combat hatred by revealing which prejudiced members of society must be persuaded or discredited by those seeking to promote tolerance. (shrink)

May lethal autonomous weapons systems—‘killer robots ’—be used in war? The majority of writers argue against their use, and those who have argued in favour have done so on a consequentialist basis. We defend the moral permissibility of killer robots, but on the basis of the non-aggregative structure of right assumed by Just War theory. This is necessary because the most important argument against killer robots, the responsibility trilemma proposed by Rob Sparrow, makes the same assumptions. We show that the (...) crucial moral question is not one of responsibility. Rather, it is whether the technology can satisfy the requirements of fairness in the re-distribution of risk. Not only is this possible in principle, but some killer robots will actually satisfy these requirements. An implication of our argument is that there is a public responsibility to regulate killer robots ’ design and manufacture. (shrink)

In this paper, we propose that multiculturalism can serve as an effective public policy tool to enhance a nation’s competitiveness, in an era characterized by financial crises, globalization, immigration, and changing demographics. Specifically, we articulate how multiculturalism and strategic tolerance of differences can promote socioeconomic mobility for individuals, and act as the “glue” that binds immigrants and host country nationals together. We also demonstrate how multiculturalism can attract skilled talents necessary for nation building. Immigrants who retain their ties with their (...) countries of origin can serve as natural trade links for their countries of residence and contribute to a reverse “brain flow” rather than a brain gain/drain for the countries of residence/origin. We conclude by explicating that immigrants can be a source of competitive advantage for countries when a multiculturalism policy is in place. (shrink)

This article deals with the most significant versions of the confessional factor, acting in modern Russian society as a cultural resource of international consent. Analyzing the problem of confessional tolerance, the author traces the reflection of supporting religious values in communicative-speech space of the renewed society.

Examining the eviction of Occupy Philadelphia from city hall on November 30, 2011, this paper analyzes police tactics to address public protests in the United States. The results highlight three aspects of the police strategy deployed during the eviction: a preconceived plan to manage protests, the use of militarized tactics to implement this management plan, and the imposition of a state of dissociative meditation triggered by the incarceration that followed the eviction. The strategy of management, militarization, and meditation demonstrates the (...) Marcusean notion of repressive tolerance and characterizes the police response to public dissent. (shrink)

Within the discussion of ethics and economics some have considered designing a code of ethics for economists. But the idea of such a code is potentially problematic from a pluralist standpoint. Some possibilities are discussed here to show that any code concerning the behaviour of economists presumes a particular view of human nature and thus of professionalism. Further, issues of socio-economic power in the profession pose problems for the interpretation and implementation of some possible principles, notably those referring to standards (...) of competence and truth-seeking. It is therefore concluded that any code of ethics should take the form of general guidelines, with primacy given to the ethics of pluralism: tolerance, even-handedness and open-mindedness, on which the interpretation of all other ethical considerations rests. Read the Open Peer Discussion on this paper » Read the discussion of this paper on the WEA's Ethics conference ». (shrink)

This is part of a symposium on conscientious objection and religious freedom inspired by the US Catholic Church's claim that being forced to pay for health insurance that covers abortions (the effect of 'Obamacare')is the equivalent of forcing pacifists to fight. This article takes issue with this claim, and shows that while it would be unjust on democratic principles to force pacifists to fight, given their willingness to serve their country in other ways, there is no democratic objection to forcing (...) those who believe abortion to be murder to pay for health insurance coverage that includes abortion. (shrink)

_Free Speech_ is a philosophical treatment of a topic which is of immense importance to all of us. Writing with great clarity, wit, and genuine concern, Alan Haworth situates the main arguments for free speech by tracing their relationship to contemporary debates in politics and political philosophy, and their historical roots to earlier controversies over religious toleration. _Free Speech_ will appeal to anyone with an interest in philosophy, politics and current affairs.

Some of Badiou and Žižek’s most disquieting claims include their opposition to liberal multiculturalism, tolerance discourses and particularist “ethics” concerned with respecting the “Other.” This has particular relevance to recent liberal media coverage of the hotly-debated “Islamic Cultural Center” slated to be built near the ground zero of 911 in Manhattan . In this article, I argue that the positions of Badiou and Žižek are valuable for examining the seemingly benign, “tolerant” position held by the American liberal Left that purports (...) to be the sole logical, “moderate” stance to assume in this debate. However, this dangerous construction, offers a fallacious notion of choice: one has the “freedom” to choose either a Right or Left-side stance with respect to Park51; however, one risks condemnation if one chooses to stand with the Right. In this article, I will adapt and expand upon Badiou and Žižek’s converging viewpoints in order to fashion an examination of American liberalism’s media presence and its self-conception as the force of “good” within the post-911, “Ground Zero Mosque,” tolerance debates. Ultimately, I aim to show how the Left’s structure of thought within and around the Park51 contention betrays a fundamental infidelity to the 911-event. The proposed building of an Islamic cultural center near ground zero represents a new kind of problem that American, liberal media cannot meet head-on, I propose that we begin to question the central role of tolerating the Other within discourses concerning American “rights.”. (shrink)

This article considers the question how knowledge of an impending ecological catastrophe is likely to impact on regulatory legitimacy and regulatory effectiveness. If the ultimate aim to safeguard meaningful human life on earth is in acute danger, this is likely to translate into zero tolerance towards non-compliance with environmental rules designed to avert catastrophe. This, in turn, will persuade regulators to employ normative technologies that do not engage with the moral reason of regulatees at all, but leave no option but (...) to comply. In addition, regulators may turn to panoptic surveillance techniques that allow no breaches of rules to remain undetected. Finally, it is argued that if and to the extent that impending ecological catastrophe marks the end of maintaining the status quo as a plausible policy goal, regulators will be more sympathetic towards potentially apocalyptic technologies that carry greater promise for future gain than otherwise would be the case. (shrink)

The daily and necessary recollection of the terrorist threat on a global scale entails on the power’s side the strengthening of the surveillance of citizens, precisely in the name of a need for better security measures in favour of the citizens , which results on the citizen’s part in an always stronger repression of the admission of suffering . In the globalised society, the other’s suffering has become incomprehensible. The current anti-terrorist rhetoric consists in turning the loss of the feeling (...) of the alterity into an illusion of tolerance. Maybe this is the reason why neither the State nor the “honest” citizen would benefit from praying: “but deliver us from our daily terrorism.”. (shrink)

"Dissecting Bioethics," edited by Tuija Takala and Matti Häyry, welcomes contributions on the conceptual and theoretical dimensions of bioethics. The section is dedicated to the idea that words defined by bioethicists and others should not be allowed to imprison people's actual concerns, emotions, and thoughts. Papers that expose the many meanings of a concept, describe the different readings of a moral doctrine, or provide an alternative angle to seemingly self-evident issues are therefore particularly appreciated. The themes covered in the section (...) so far include dignity, naturalness, public interest, community, disability, autonomy, parity of reasoning, symbolic appeals, and toleration. (shrink)

La ciudad de amigos que Platón pretende fundar en Las Leyes tiene como pilares la eliminación de los extremos de la riqueza y de la pobreza, por una parte, y la educación de todos los sectores sociales, por otra. Si bien este basamento suele ser reconocido por los especialistas, la legislación sobre..

Self-determination is a central concept in the field of bioethics and the most critical decision among the myriad of decisions concerning medical care is the decision to choose to die; “self-determination of death.” The purpose of this paper is to clarify the basic positions on self-determination of death held by present Japanese people and we tentatively sorted these positions into 10 arguments. We discuss the problems and implications of these positions revealed within our present review and conclude that a society (...) needs to deny unnecessary intrusion and tolerance for different views might be a keyword in our oncoming society. (shrink)

Communitarian values are stronger in health insurance than in life or disability insurance. This correlates with increased tolerance for insurers' use of genetic information in disability insurance underwriting, which, in turn, is relevant to the scope and content of proposals to regulate such use.