Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. A “We” Problem for Bioethics and the Social Sciences: A Response to Barbara Prainsack.Bob Simpson - 2018 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 43 (1):45-55.
    In her article “The ‘We’ in the Me: Solidarity in the Era of Personalized Medicine,” Barbara Prainsack develops an earlier interest in the relationship between solidarity and autonomy and the way that these notions operate once passed through the lens of bioethical thought and practice. In his response to this article, Simpson introduces the perspective of two South Asian physicians on these issues. The piece highlights issues of personhood upon which the informed consent transaction is based and draws attention to (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Human Rights and New Horizons? Thoughts toward a New Juridical Ontology.Anna Grear - 2018 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 43 (1):129-145.
    The much-lamented anthropocentrism of human rights is misleading. Human rights anthropocentrism is radically attenuated and reflects persistent patterns of intra- and interspecies injustice and binary subject–object relations inapt for twenty-first-century crises and posthuman complexities. This article explores the possibility of reimagining the “human” of human rights in the light of anti- and post-Cartesian analyses drawing—in particular—upon Merleau-Ponty and on new materialism. This article also seeks to reimagine human rights themselves as responsibilized, injustice-sensitive claim concepts emerging in the “midst of” lively (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Corporate Law Versus Social Autonomy: Law as Social Hazard.Michael Galanis - 2020 - Law and Critique 32 (1):1-32.
    This article argues that corporate law has become the legal platform upon which is erected a social process impeding society’s capacity to lucidly reflect on its primary ends; in this sense, corporate law is in conflict with social autonomy. This process is described here as a social feedback loop, in the structural centre of which lies the corporation which imposes its own purpose as an irrational social end, i.e. irrespective of its potentially catastrophic social consequences. The article argues that resolving (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark