Paradox is a logical phenomenon. Usually, it is produced in type theory, on a type Ω of “truth values”. A formula Ψ (i.e., a term of type Ω) is presented, such that Ψ↔¬Ψ (with negation as a term¬∶Ω→Ω)-whereupon everything can be proved: In Sect. 1 we describe a general pattern which many constructions of the formula Ψ follow: for example, the well known arguments of Cantor, Russell, and Gödel. The structure uncovered behind these paradoxes is generalized in Sect. 2. This (...) allows us to show that Reynolds' [R] construction of a typeA ≃℘℘A in polymorphic λ-calculus cannot be extended, as conjectured, to give a fixed point ofevery variable type derived from the exponentiation: for some (contravariant) types, such a fixed point causes a paradox.Pursueing the idea that $$\frac{{{\text{type theory}}}}{{{\text{categorical interpretation}}}} = \frac{{{\text{(propositional) logic}}}}{{{\text{Lindebaum algebra}}}}$$ the language of categories appears here as a natural medium for logical structures. It allows us to abstract from the specific predicates that appear in particular paradoxes, and to display the underlying constructions in “pure state”. The essential role of cartesian closed categories in this context has been pointed out in [L]. The paradoxes studied here remain within the limits of the cartesian closed structure of types, as sketched in this Lawvere's seminal paper — and do not depend on any logical operations on the type Ω. Our results can be translated in simply typed λ-calculus in a straightforward way (although some of them do become a bit messy). (shrink)

L'Exil est la patrie de la pensée regroupe un ensemble de textes inédits ou introuvables de Kostas Axelos. Prolongeant ses derniers livres (Réponses énigmatiques, Minuit, 2005 ; En quête de l'impensé, Encre marine, 2012, posthume), il questionne la philosophie du XXe siècle et relit sous le signe de l'exil la vie et l'oeuvre du philosophe, éclairant d'un jour nouveau une pensée singulière. On trouvera également dans ce recueil des contributions philosophiques majeures sur Axelos (P. Fougeyrollas, F. Dastur, S. Jollivet, L. (...) Couloubaritsis), ainsi que de nombreux témoignages, dessins et photographies. (shrink)

Von welchen Annahmen muss eine Ästhetik ausgehen, die nicht hinter der Komplexität der Kunst zurückbleiben will? Einerseits davon, dass Künstler erst wird, wem es gelingt, die ungewöhnliche Kraft aufzubringen oder die eigentümliche Fähigkeit zu entwickeln, alles zu bejahen, was ihn trifft und berührt, was er erleidet, was ihn schmerzt, reizt und verwundet. Es gibt nichts, was der Künstler von seiner Liebe ausschliessen könnte, wenn sich in seiner uneingeschränkten Bejahung eines Aussen eine aktive Zuwendung, Teilnahme und Sorge ausdrückt, die man Liebe (...) nennen kann. Das gilt noch für das Unerträgliche und das Unannehmbare, das Unfassbare, von dem man denken könnte, dass das Subjekt es verwerfen muss oder dass es dieses sogar traumatisiert. Der Künstler ist in diesem Sinn ein radikal promiskuitives Subjekt, nicht ein gegebenes empirisches und psychologisches Individuum, das eine Voraussetzung für die Erzeugung von Kunst bildet. (shrink)

La recherche récente autour du culte d’Héraclès tend à rejeter l’idée que les ambiguïtés mythiques du personnage se reflétaient dans le rituel. Cet article reprend la question, à la lumière d’études plus larges sur la prétendue opposition « ouranien/chthonien » dans la pratique religieuse des Grecs. Des éléments inhabituels apparaissent à coup sûr dans certains rituels pour Héraklès. En particulier, certains cas de sacrifices mixtes, impliquant la destruction partielle d’une victime, ou l’holocauste de petites victimes à côté d’un sacrifice régulier (...) sont attestés à Sicyone, à Thasos, à Milet et à Cos. À Athènes, la particularité tient plutôt à la forme des sanctuaires d’Héraklès, avec l’édifice à quatre colonnes, très discuté. Un autel primitif est également attesté parfois, ce qui n’a pas reçu beaucoup d’attention. La figure d’Héraklès comme heros theos livre au moins une possibilité d’explication pour tous ces éléments, et il ne faut pas en évacuer trop vite la portée.Herakles: the problem of the heros-theos yet again. Recent scholarship on the cult of Herakles has tended to argue against the idea that the ambiguities of his mythological character were reflected in ritual. This paper re-examines the case, in the light of broader studies of the supposed Olympian-chthonian opposition in Greek religious practice. Unusual elements can certainly be seen in Herakles’ ritual in a number of locations: in particular, various kinds of mixed sacrifice, involving partial destruction of a victim, or holocaust of a small victim alongside a regular sacrifice, are attested at Sicyon, Thasos, Miletos and Kos. At Athens the unusual feature is rather the form of Herakles’ sanctuaries, with their much-discussed four-column shrines; a primitive altar is also occasionally attested, which has not previously received much scholarly notice. Herakles’ character as heros theos provides at least a possible explanation for all of these elements, and we should not be too hasty to dismiss its significance. (shrink)

1. Sŏron -- 2. Ŭisik ŭi chonggyojŏk ch'ŭngmyŏn -- 3. Yŏng : Chŏng Yag-yong ŭi simnon -- 4. Yŏngch'e : Chŏng Yag-yong ŭi insŏngnon -- 5. 'Yŏngch'e' insŏngnon esŏ pon ch'ŏnin kwan'gye -- 6. Kyŏllon.

Le mot grec oı̈kos suppose d’abord qu’il y ait du commun concrètement institué entre les hommes, un espace collectif à gérer, quelque chose qui puisse faire l’objet d’une entreprise commune. Et ce que les hommes ont en commun relève moins d’une supposée bienfaisance de la nature, que d’un effet de culture, s’il est vrai comme l’affirme Aristote que ce qui définit la nature en l’homme est précisément ce qui le constitue comme être social. Qu’il s’agisse d’éco-nomie ou d’éco-logie, la loi (...) d’un côté et la rationalité de l’autre ne se rapportent qu’à une possibilité d’agir, et d’être au monde comme sujet d’une décision, non comme objet d’un devenir. L’oı̈kos ne renvoie donc nullement à la présence édénique d’un corps dans la nature, ou à l’immédiateté d’une relation originelle. Bien au contraire, il se réfère à l’intervention permanente d’un sujet dans un monde non seulement construit, mais dont la construction même produit ses propres processus de subjectivation, et détermine son devenir plus radicalement que ne pourra jamais le faire son conditionnement biologique. Habiter le monde n’est donc pas habiter la nature, mais habiter les relations complexes que l’homme établit avec elle et contre elle, en la maîtrisant pour y aménager son espace. Et cette maîtrise ne conditionne pas seulement son devenir physique, mais les modalités mêmes de son devenir subjectif. (shrink)

1Neurology Department and Cyclotron Research Center, University of Lie`ge, Sart Tilman B30, 4000 Liege, Belgium 2Neurorehabilitation Medicine, Hoˆpital Caremeau, CHU Nıˆmes, 30029 Nıˆmes Cedex, France 3Department of Speech Therapy, Hospital Pitie´ Salpe´trie`re, Paris and French Association Locked in Syndrome (ALIS), 225 Bd Jean-Jaures, MBE 182, 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France 4Neurosciences et Syste`mes Sensoriels Unite´ Mixte de Recherche 5020, Universite´ Claude Bernard Lyon 1 – CNRS, 69007 Lyon, France 5Intensive Care Medicine, Hoˆpital Erasme, Universite´ Libre de Bruxelles, Route de Lennik 808, 1070 (...) Brussels, Belgium 6Anesthesiology, Reanimation and Pain Clinic, CHU University Hospital, Sart Tilman B33, 4000 Liege, Belgium 7German Association Locked in Syndrome LIS e.V., Evangelischen Krankenhaus Ko¨ningin Elisabeth Herzberge gGmbh (Lehrkrankenhaus der Charite´), Haus 30, Herzbergstrasse 79, 10365 Berlin, Germany 8Intensive Care Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Re´gional de la Citadelle, Boulevard du 12e de Ligne 1, 4000 Liege, Belgium 9Biomedical PET Unit, Hoˆpital Erasme, Universite´ Libre de Bruxelles, Route de Lennik 808, 1070 Brussels, Belgium.. (shrink)

Table of contentsI1 Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Research IntegrityConcurrent Sessions:1. Countries' systems and policies to foster research integrityCS01.1 Second time around: Implementing and embedding a review of responsible conduct of research policy and practice in an Australian research-intensive universitySusan Patricia O'BrienCS01.2 Measures to promote research integrity in a university: the case of an Asian universityDanny Chan, Frederick Leung2. Examples of research integrity education programmes in different countriesCS02.1 Development of a state-run “cyber education program of research ethics” in (...) KoreaEun Jung Ko, Jin Sun Kwak, TaeHwan Gwon, Ji Min Lee, Min-Ho LeeCS02.3 Responsible conduct of research teachers’ training courses in Germany: keeping on drilling through hard boards for more RCR teachersHelga Nolte, Michael Gommel, Gerlinde Sponholz3. The research environment and policies to encourage research integrityCS03.1 Challenges and best practices in research integrity: bridging the gap between policy and practiceYordanka Krastev, Yamini Sandiran, Julia Connell, Nicky SolomonCS03.2 The Slovenian initiative for better research: from national activities to global reflectionsUrsa Opara Krasovec, Renata SribarCS03.3 Organizational climate assessments to support research integrity: background of the Survey of Organizational Research Climate and the experience with its use at Michigan State UniversityBrian C. Martinson, Carol R. Thrush, C.K. Gunsalus4. Expressions of concern and retractionsCS04.1 Proposed guidelines for retraction notices and their disseminationIvan Oransky, Adam MarcusCS04.2 Watching retractions: analysis of process and practice, with data from the Wiley retraction archivesChris Graf, Verity Warne, Edward Wates, Sue JoshuaCS04.3 An exploratory content analysis of Expressions of ConcernMiguel RoigCS04.4 An ethics researcher in the retraction processMichael Mumford5. Funders' role in fostering research integrityCS05.1 The Fonds de Recherche du Québec’s institutional rules on the responsible conduct of research: introspection in the funding agency activitiesMylène Deschênes, Catherine Olivier, Raphaëlle Dupras-LeducCS05.2 U.S. Public Health Service funds in an international setting: research integrity and complianceZoë Hammatt, Raju Tamot, Robin Parker, Cynthia Ricard, Loc Nguyen-Khoa, Sandra TitusCS05.3 Analyzing decision making of funders of public research as a case of information asymmetryKarsten Klint JensenCS05.4 Research integrity management: Empirical investigation of academia versus industrySimon Godecharle, Ben Nemery, Kris Dierickx5A: Education: For whom, how, and what?CS05A.1 Research integrity or responsible conduct of research? What do we aim for?Mickey Gjerris, Maud Marion Laird Eriksen, Jeppe Berggren HoejCS05A.2 Teaching and learning about RCR at the same time: a report on Epigeum’s RCR poll questions and other assessment activitiesNicholas H. SteneckCS05A.4 Minding the gap in research ethics education: strategies to assess and improve research competencies in community health workers/promoteresCamille Nebeker, Michael Kalichman, Elizabeth Mejia Booen, Blanca Azucena Pacheco, Rebeca Espinosa Giacinto, Sheila Castaneda6. Country examples of research reward systems and integrityCS06.1 Improving systems to promote responsible research in the Chinese Academy of SciencesDing Li, Qiong Chen, Guoli Zhu, Zhonghe SunCS06.4 Exploring the perception of research integrity amongst public health researchers in IndiaParthasarathi Ganguly, Barna Ganguly7. Education and guidance on research integrity: country differencesCS07.1 From integrity to unity: how research integrity guidance differs across universities in Europe.Noémie Aubert Bonn, Kris Dierickx, Simon GodecharleCS07.2 Can education and training develop research integrity? The spirit of the UNESCO 1974 recommendation and its updatingDaniele Bourcier, Jacques Bordé, Michèle LeducCS07.3 The education and implementation mechanisms of research ethics in Taiwan's higher education: an experience in Chinese web-based curriculum development for responsible conduct of researchChien Chou, Sophia Jui-An PanCS07.4 Educating principal investigators in Swiss research institutions: present and future perspectivesLouis Xaver Tiefenauer8. Measuring and rewarding research productivityCS08.1 Altimpact: how research integrity underpins research impactDaniel Barr, Paul TaylorCS08.2 Publication incentives: just reward or misdirection of funds?Lyn Margaret HornCS08.3 Why Socrates never charged a fee: factors contributing to challenges for research integrity and publication ethicsDeborah Poff9. Plagiarism and falsification: Behaviour and detectionCS09.1 Personality traits predict attitude towards plagiarism of self and others in biomedicine: plagiarism, yes we can?Martina Mavrinac, Gordana Brumini, Mladen PetrovečkiCS09.2 Investigating the concept of and attitudes toward plagiarism for science teachers in Brazil: any challenges for research integrity and policy?Christiane Coelho Santos, Sonia VasconcelosCS09.3 What have we learnt?: The CrossCheck Service from CrossRefRachael LammeyCS09.4 High p-values as a sign of data fabrication/falsificationChris Hartgerink, Marcel van Assen, Jelte Wicherts10. Codes for research integrity and collaborationsCS10.1 Research integrity in cross-border cooperation: a Nordic exampleHanne Silje HaugeCS10.3 Research integrity, research misconduct, and the National Science Foundation's requirement for the responsible conduct of researchAaron MankaCS10.4 A code of conduct for international scientific cooperation: human rights and research integrity in scientific collaborations with international academic and industry partnersRaffael Iturrizaga11. Countries' efforts to establish mentoring and networksCS11.1 ENRIO : a network facilitating common approaches on research integrity in EuropeNicole FoegerCS11.2 Helping junior investigators develop in a resource-limited country: a mentoring program in PeruA. Roxana Lescano, Claudio Lanata, Gissella Vasquez, Leguia Mariana, Marita Silva, Mathew Kasper, Claudia Montero, Daniel Bausch, Andres G LescanoCS11.3 Netherlands Research Integrity Network: the first six monthsFenneke Blom, Lex BouterCS11.4 A South African framework for research ethics and integrity for researchers, postgraduate students, research managers and administratorsLaetus OK Lategan12. Training and education in research integrity at an early career stageCS12.1 Research integrity in curricula for medical studentsGustavo Fitas ManaiaCS12.2 Team-based learning for training in the responsible conduct of research supports ethical decision-makingWayne T. McCormack, William L. Allen, Shane Connelly, Joshua Crites, Jeffrey Engler, Victoria Freedman, Cynthia W. Garvan, Paul Haidet, Joel Hockensmith, William McElroy, Erik Sander, Rebecca Volpe, Michael F. VerderameCS12.4 Research integrity and career prospects of junior researchersSnezana Krstic13. Systems and research environments in institutionsCS13.1 Implementing systems in research institutions to improve quality and reduce riskLouise HandyCS13.2 Creating an institutional environment that supports research integrityDebra Schaller-DemersCS13.3 Ethics and Integrity Development Grants: a mechanism to foster cultures of ethics and integrityPaul Taylor, Daniel BarrCS13.4 A culture of integrity at KU LeuvenInge Lerouge, Gerard Cielen, Liliane Schoofs14. Peer review and its role in research integrityCS14.1 Peer review research across disciplines: transdomain action in the European Cooperation in Science and Technology “New Frontiers of Peer Review ”Ana Marusic, Flaminio SquazzoniCS14.2 Using blinding to reduce bias in peer reviewDavid VauxCS14.3 How to intensify the role of reviewers to promote research integrityKhalid Al-Wazzan, Ibrahim AlorainyCS14.4 Credit where credit’s due: professionalizing and rewarding the role of peer reviewerChris Graf, Verity Warne15. Research ethics and oversight for research integrity: Does it work?CS15.1 The psychology of decision-making in research ethics governance structures: a theory of bounded rationalityNolan O'Brien, Suzanne Guerin, Philip DoddCS15.2 Investigator irregularities: iniquity, ignorance or incompetence?Frank Wells, Catherine BlewettCS15.3 Academic plagiarismFredric M. Litto16. Research integrity in EuropeCS16.1 Whose responsibility is it anyway?: A comparative analysis of core concepts and practice at European research-intensive universities to identify and develop good practices in research integrityItziar De Lecuona, Erika Löfstrom, Katrien MaesCS16.2 Research integrity guidance in European research universitiesKris Dierickx, Noémie Bonn, Simon GodecharleCS16.3 Research Integrity: processes and initiatives in Science Europe member organisationsTony Peatfield, Olivier Boehme, Science Europe Working Group on Research IntegrityCS16.4 Promoting research integrity in Italy: the experience of the Research Ethics and Bioethics Advisory Committee of the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Cinzia Caporale, Daniele Fanelli17. Training programs for research integrity at different levels of experience and seniorityCS17.1 Meaningful ways to incorporate research integrity and the responsible conduct of research into undergraduate, graduate, postdoctoral and faculty training programsJohn Carfora, Eric Strauss, William LynnCS17.2 "Recognize, respond, champion": Developing a one-day interactive workshop to increase confidence in research integrity issuesDieter De Bruyn, Bracke Nele, Katrien De Gelder, Stefanie Van der BurghtCS17.4 “Train the trainer” on cultural challenges imposed by international research integrity conversations: lessons from a projectJosé Roberto Lapa e Silva, Sonia M. R. Vasconcelos18. Research and societal responsibilityCS18.1 Promoting the societal responsibility of research as an integral part of research integrityHelene IngierdCS18.2 Social responsibility as an ethical imperative for scientists: research, education and service to societyMark FrankelCS18.3 The intertwined nature of social responsibility and hope in scienceDaniel Vasgird, Stephanie BirdCS18.4 Common barriers that impede our ability to create a culture of trustworthiness in the research communityMark Yarborough19. Publication ethicsCS19.1 The authors' forum: A proposed tool to improve practices of journal editors and promote a responsible research environmentIbrahim Alorainy, Khalid Al-WazzanCS19.2 Quantifying research integrity and its impact with text analyticsHarold GarnerCS19.3 A closer look at authorship and publication ethics of multi- and interdisciplinary teamsLisa Campo-Engelstein, Zubin Master, Elise Smith, David Resnik, Bryn Williams-JonesCS19.4 Invisibility of duplicate publications in biomedicineMario Malicki, Ana Utrobicic, Ana Marusic20. The causes of bad and wasteful research: What can we do?CS20.1 From countries to individuals: unravelling the causes of bias and misconduct with multilevel meta-meta-analysisDaniele Fanelli, John PA IoannidisCS20.2 Reducing research waste by integrating systems of oversight and regulationGerben ter Riet, Tom Walley, Lex Marius BouterCS20.3 What are the determinants of selective reporting?: The example of palliative care for non-cancer conditionsJenny van der Steen, Lex BouterCS20.4 Perceptions of plagiarism, self-plagiarism and redundancy in research: preliminary results from a national survey of Brazilian PhDsSonia Vasconcelos, Martha Sorenson, Francisco Prosdocimi, Hatisaburo Masuda, Edson Watanabe, José Carlos Pinto, Marisa Palácios, José Lapa e Silva, Jacqueline Leta, Adalberto Vieyra, André Pinto, Mauricio Sant’Ana, Rosemary Shinkai21. Are there country-specific elements of misconduct?CS21.1 The battle with plagiarism in Russian science: latest developmentsBoris YudinCS21.2 Researchers between ethics and misconduct: A French survey on social representations of misconduct and ethical standards within the scientific communityEtienne Vergès, Anne-Sophie Brun-Wauthier, Géraldine VialCS21.3 Experience from different ways of dealing with research misconduct and promoting research integrity in some Nordic countriesTorkild VintherCS21.4 Are there specifics in German research misconduct and the ways to cope with it?Volker Bähr, Charité22. Research integrity teaching programmes and their challengesCS22.1 Faculty mentors and research integrityMichael Kalichman, Dena PlemmonsCS22.2 Training the next generation of scientists to use principles of research quality assurance to improve data integrity and reliabilityRebecca Lynn Davies, Katrina LaubeCS22.3 Fostering research integrity in a culturally-diverse environmentCynthia Scheopner, John GallandCS22.4 Towards a standard retraction formHervé Maisonneuve, Evelyne Decullier23. Commercial research and integrityCS23.1 The will to commercialize: matters of concern in the cultural economy of return-on-investment researchBrian NobleCS23.2 Quality in drug discovery data reporting: a mission impossible?Anja Gilis, David J. Gallacher, Tom Lavrijssen, Malwitz David, Malini Dasgupta, Hans MolsCS23.3 Instituting a research integrity policy in the context of semi-private-sector funding: an example in the field of occupational health and safetyPaul-Emile Boileau24. The interface of publication ethics and institutional policiesCS24.1 The open access ethical paradox in an open government effortTony SavardCS24.2 How journals and institutions can work together to promote responsible conductEric MahCS24.3 Improving cooperation between journals and research institutions in research integrity casesElizabeth Wager, Sabine Kleinert25. Reproducibility of research and retractionsCS25.1 Promoting transparency in publications to reduce irreproducibilityVeronique Kiermer, Andrew Hufton, Melanie ClyneCS25.2 Retraction notices issued for publications by Latin American authors: what lessons can we learn?Sonia Vasconcelos, Renan Moritz Almeida, Aldo Fontes-Pereira, Fernanda Catelani, Karina RochaCS25.3 A preliminary report of the findings from the Reproducibility Project: Cancer biologyElizabeth Iorns, William Gunn26. Research integrity and specific country initiativesCS26.1 Promoting research integrity at CNRS, FranceMichèle Leduc, Lucienne LetellierCS26.2 In pursuit of compliance: is the tail wagging the dog?Cornelia MalherbeCS26.3 Newly established research integrity policies and practices: oversight systems of Japanese research universitiesTakehito Kamata27. Responsible conduct of research and country guidelinesCS27.1 Incentives or guidelines? Promoting responsible research communication through economic incentives or ethical guidelines?Vidar EnebakkCS27.3 Responsible conduct of research: a view from CanadaLynn PenrodCS27.4 The Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity: a national initiative to promote research integrity in DenmarkThomas Nørgaard, Charlotte Elverdam28. Behaviour, trust and honestyCS28.1 The reasons behind non-ethical behaviour in academiaYves FassinCS28.2 The psychological profile of the dishonest scholarCynthia FekkenCS28.3 Considering the implications of Dan Ariely’s keynote speech at the 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity in MontréalJamal Adam, Melissa S. AndersonCS28.4 Two large surveys on psychologists’ views on peer review and replicationJelte WichertsBrett Buttliere29. Reporting and publication bias and how to overcome itCS29.1 Data sharing: Experience at two open-access general medical journalsTrish GrovesCS29.2 Overcoming publication bias and selective reporting: completing the published recordDaniel ShanahanCS29.3 The EQUATOR Network: promoting responsible reporting of health research studiesIveta Simera, Shona Kirtley, Eleana Villanueva, Caroline Struthers, Angela MacCarthy, Douglas Altman30. The research environment and its implications for integrityCS30.1 Ranking of scientists: the Russian experienceElena GrebenshchikovaCS30.4 From cradle to grave: research integrity, research misconduct and cultural shiftsBronwyn Greene, Ted RohrPARTNER SYMPOSIAPartner Symposium AOrganized by EQUATOR Network, Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health ResearchP1 Can we trust the medical research literature?: Poor reporting and its consequencesIveta SimeraP2 What can BioMed Central do to improve published research?Daniel Shanahan, Stephanie HarrimanP3 What can a "traditional" journal do to improve published research?Trish GrovesP4 Promoting good reporting practice for reliable and usable research papers: EQUATOR Network, reporting guidelines and other initiativesCaroline StruthersPartner Symposium COrganized by ENRIO, the European Network of Research Integrity OfficersP5 Transparency and independence in research integrity investigations in EuropeKrista Varantola, Helga Nolte, Ursa Opara, Torkild Vinther, Elizabeth Wager, Thomas NørgaardPartner Symposium DOrganized by IEEE, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics EngineersRe-educating our author community: IEEE's approach to bibliometric manipulation, plagiarism, and other inappropriate practicesP6 Dealing with plagiarism in the connected world: An Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers perspectiveJon RokneP7 Should evaluation of raises, promotion, and research proposals be tied to bibliometric indictors? What the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers is doing to answer this questionGianluca SettiP8 Recommended practices to ensure conference content qualityGordon MacPhersonPartner Symposium EOrganized by the Committee on Freedom and Responsibility in the Conduct of Science of ICSU, the International Council for ScienceResearch assessment and quality in science: perspectives from international science and policy organisationsP9 Challenges for science and the problems of assessing researchEllen HazelkornP10 Research assessment and science policy developmentCarthage SmithP11 Research integrity in South Africa: the value of procedures and processes to global positioningRobert H. McLaughlinP12 Rewards, careers and integrity: perspectives of young scientists from around the worldTatiana Duque MartinsPartner Symposium FOrganized by the Online Resource Center for Ethics Education in Engineering and Science / Center for Engineering, Ethics, and Society of the National Academy of EngineeringP13 Research misconduct: conceptions and policy solutionsTetsuya Tanimoto, Nicholas Steneck, Daniele Fanelli, Ragnvald Kalleberg, Tajammul HusseinPartner Symposium HOrganized by ORI, the Office of Research Integrity; Universitas 21; and the Asia Pacific Research Integrity NetworkP14 International integrity networks: working together to ensure research integrityPing Sun, Ovid Tzeng, Krista Varantola, Susan ZimmermanPartner Symposium IOrganized by COPE, the Committee on Publication EthicsPublication without borders: Ethical challenges in a globalized worldP15 Authorship: credit and responsibility, including issues in large and interdisciplinary studiesRosemary ShinkaiPartner Symposium JOrganized by CITI, the Cooperative Institutional Training InitiativeExperiences on research integrity educational programs in Colombia, Costa Rica and PeruP16 Experiences in PeruRoxana LescanoP17 Experiences in Costa RicaElizabeth HeitmanP18 Experiences in ColumbiaMaria Andrea Rocio del Pilar Contreras NietoPoster Session B: Education, training, promotion and policyPT.01 The missing role of journal editors in promoting responsible researchIbrahim Alorainy, Khalid Al-WazzanPT.02 Honorary authorship in Taiwan: why and who should be in charge?Chien Chou, Sophia Jui-An PanPT.03 Authorship and citation manipulation in academic researchEric Fong, Al WilhitePT.04 Open peer review of research submission at medical journals: experience at BMJ Open and The BMJTrish GrovesPT.05 Exercising authorship: claiming rewards, practicing integrityDésirée Motta-RothPT.07 Medical scientists' views on publication culture: a focus group studyJoeri Tijdink, Yvo SmuldersPoster Session B: Education, training, promotion and policyPT.09 Ethical challenges in post-graduate supervisionLaetus OK LateganPT.10 The effects of viable ethics instruction on international studentsMichael Mumford, Logan Steele, Logan Watts, James Johnson, Shane Connelly, Lee WilliamsPT.11 Does language reflect the quality of research?Gerben ter Riet, Sufia Amini, Lotty Hooft, Halil KilicogluPT.12 Integrity complaints as a strategic tool in policy decision conflictsJanneke van Seters, Herman Eijsackers, Fons Voragen, Akke van der Zijpp and Frans BromPoster Session C: Ethics and integrity intersectionsPT.14 Regulations of informed consent: university-supported research processes and pitfalls in implementationBadaruddin Abbasi, Naif Nasser AlmasoudPT.15 A review of equipoise as a requirement in clinical trialsAdri LabuschagnePT.16 The Research Ethics Library: online resource for research ethics educationJohanne Severinsen, Espen EnghPT.17 Research integrity: the view from King Abdulaziz City for Science and TechnologyDaham Ismail AlaniPT. 18 Meeting global challenges in high-impact publications and research integrity: the case of the Malaysian Palm Oil BoardHJ. Kamaruzaman JusoffPT.19 University faculty perceptions of research practices and misconductAnita Gordon, Helen C. HartonPoster Session D: International perspectivesPT.21 The Commission for Scientific Integrity as a response to research fraudDieter De Bruyn, Stefanie Van der BurghtPT. 22 Are notions of the responsible conduct of research associated with compliance with requirements for research on humans in different disciplinary traditions in Brazil?Karina de Albuquerque Rocha, Sonia Maria Ramos de VasconcelosPT.23 Creating an environment that promotes research integrity: an institutional model of Malawi Liverpool Welcome TrustLimbanazo MatandikaPT.24 How do science policies in Brazil influence user-engaged ecological research?Aline Carolina de Oliveira Machado Prata, Mark William NeffPoster Session E: Perspectives on misconductPT.26 What “causes” scientific misconduct?: Testing major hypotheses by comparing corrected and retracted papersDaniele Fanelli, Rodrigo Costas, Vincent LarivièrePT.27 Perception of academic plagiarism among dentistry studentsDouglas Leonardo Gomes Filho, Diego Oliveira GuedesPT. 28 a few bad apples?: Prevalence, patterns and attitudes towards scientific misconduct among doctoral students at a German university hospitalVolker Bähr, Niklas Keller, Markus Feufel, Nikolas OffenhauserPT. 29 Analysis of retraction notices published by BioMed CentralMaria K. Kowalczuk, Elizabeth C. MoylanPT.31 "He did it" doesn't work: data security, incidents and partnersKatie SpeanburgPoster Session F: Views from the disciplinesPT.32 Robust procedures: a key to generating quality results in drug discoveryMalini Dasgupta, Mariusz Lubomirski, Tom Lavrijssen, David Malwitz, David Gallacher, Anja GillisPT.33 Health promotion: criteria for the design and the integrity of a research projectMaria Betânia de Freitas Marques, Laressa Lima Amâncio, Raphaela Dias Fernandes, Oliveira Patrocínio, and Cláudia Maria Correia Borges RechPT.34 Integrity of academic work from the perspective of students graduating in pharmacy: a brief research studyMaria Betânia de Freitas Marques, Cláudia Maria Correia Borges Rech, Adriana Nascimento SousaPT.35 Research integrity promotion in the Epidemiology and Health Services, the journal of the Brazilian Unified Health SystemLeila Posenato GarciaPT.36 When are clinical trials registered? An analysis of prospective versus retrospective registration of clinical trials published in the BioMed Central series, UKStephanie Harriman, Jigisha PatelPT.37 Maximizing welfare while promoting innovation in drug developmentFarida LadaOther posters that will be displayed but not presented orally:PT.38 Geoethics and the debate on research integrity in geosciencesGiuseppe Di Capua, Silvia PeppoloniPT.39 Introducing the Professionalism and Integrity in Research Program James M. DuBois, John Chibnall, Jillon Van der WallPT.40 Validation of the professional decision-making in research measureJames M. DuBois, John Chibnall, Jillon Van der Wall, Raymond TaitPT.41 General guidelines for research ethicsJacob HolenPT. 42 A national forum for research ethicsAdele Flakke Johannessen, Torunn EllefsenPT.43 Evaluation of integrity in coursework: an approach from the perspective of the higher education professorClaudia Rech, Adriana Sousa, Maria Betânia de Freitas MarquesPT.44 Principles of geoethics and research integrity applied to the European Multidisciplinary Seafloor and Water Column Observatory, a large-scale European environmental research infrastructureSilvia Peppoloni, Giuseppe Di Capua, Laura BeranzoliF1 Focus track on improving research systems: the role of fundersPaulo S.L. Beirão, Susan ZimmermanF2 Focus track on improving research systems: the role of countriesSabine Kleinert, Ana MarusicF3 Focus track on improving research systems: the role of institutionsMelissa S. Anderson, Lex Bouter. (shrink)

Annemarie Schimmel, dünya dinleri, felsefe, biyografi, edebiyat gibi ko-nularda kaleme aldığı eserlerle Doğu’da ve Batı’da isminden söz ettiren velûd bir akademisyendir. Diğer yandan onun özellikle tasavvuf alanında ortaya koyduğu çalışmalar, tasavvuf düşünce geleneğinin Batılı araştırmacılar tarafından objektif bir perspektiften okunmasına ve yeniden ilgi odağı olarak değerlendirilmesine sebep olmuştur. Tasavvuf tarihi olarak değerlendirebileceğimiz Mystische Dimension des Islam, Mevlânâ Celâleddin Rûmî’nin tasavvufî görüşlerini irdelediği Ich bin Wind du bist Feuer, tasavvufa giriş niteliğinde olan Sufismus: Eine Einführung in die islamische Mystik ve Hallac-ı (...) Mansûr’u konu edindiği Al-Halladsch: Märtyrer der Gottesliebe: Leben und Legende eserleri, onun bu sahada bilinen çalışmalarından birkaçıdır. Schimmel, Yunus Emre’nin bazı şiirlerini de Ausgewählte Gedichte von Yunus Emre isimli eseriyle Almanca’ya tercüme etmiştir. Ayrıca onun Yunus Emre’nin tasavvufî görüşlerini tahkiye metoduyla anlattığı ve bazı şiirlerini irdelediği Wanderungen mit Yunus Emre ismiyle bilinen çalışması Anadolu’da tasavvuf kültürü ile irtibatlı olarak tasnif edilebilecek bir diğer eseridir. Bu makale, eserlerinden hareketle Schimmel’in Anadolu’da yetişmiş bir mutasavvıf olarak Yunus Emre telakkisini ve onun perspektifinden Anadolu’da tasavvufî düşüncenin ve kültürün izdüşümlerini konu edinmektedir. (shrink)

We describe a corpus of speech taking place between 30 Korean mother–child pairs, divided in three groups of Prelexical, Early-Lexical, and Advanced-Lexical. In addition to the child-directed speech, this corpus includes two different formalities of adult-directed speech, i.e., family-directed ADS and experimenter-directed ADS. Our analysis of the MLU in CDS, family-, and experimenter-directed ADS found significant differences between CDS and ADS_Fam, and between ADS_Fam and ADS_Exp, but not between CDS and ADS_Exp. Our finding suggests that researchers should pay more attention (...) to controlling the level of formality in CDS and ADS when comparing the two registers for their speech characteristics. The corpus was transcribed in the CHAT format of the CHILDES system, so users can easily extract data related to verbal behavior in the mother–child interaction using the CLAN program of CHILDES. (shrink)

Housed in one volume for the first time are several of the seminal essays on Du Bois's contributions to sociology and critical social theory: from DuBois as inventor of the sociology of race to Du Bois as the first sociologist of American religion; from Du Bois as a pioneer of urban and rural sociology to Du Bois as innovator of the sociology of gender and culture; and finally from Du Bois as groundbreaking sociologist of education and cultural criminologist to Du (...) Bois as critic of the disciplinary decadence of the discipline of sociology. Unlike any other anthology or critical reader on Du Bois, this new volume offers an excellent overview of the critical commentary on arguably one of the most imaginative and innovative, perceptive and prolific founders of the discipline of sociology. (shrink)

La Colombiade war bis zur französischen Revolution ein in Frankreich und in den westeuropäischen Ländern vielbeachtetes Epos. Aus heutiger Sicht ist das gut lesbare Gedicht erneut von Interesse: es wägt Segnungen und Schäden der Kolonialisierung gegeneinander ab, propagiert die Idee eines auf wissenschaftlichem und humanistischem Ethos gegründeten Europas, und artikuliert das aufklärerische Selbstbewusstsein einer schreibenden Frau. Die Einführung der Herausgeberin stellt das Gedicht in den Wissenshorizont der Entstehungszeit und skizziert die Rezeption. Der Anhang informiert über Textvarianten, bringt erläuternde Anmerkungen und (...) einen bibliographischen Informationsteil. (shrink)

삶은 상처이자 치유의 과정이다! 일상으로 소환한 인문학에서 찾은 삶과 행복의 기본과 원칙 ◎ 도서 소개 인문학의 두 번째 질문, “어떻게 살 것인가?” 고은, 용타, 김상근, 최인철, 차드 멩 탄… 최고의 지성 12인의 상처를 극복하고 공생하는 방법! 존재의 본질에 대한 논의를 잇는 근원적 물음, 어떻게 살 것인가. 삶의 황폐화와 사회 가치의 퇴색, 현실 문제에 대한 근원적인 해결책의 부재로 현대인들은 인간과 삶, 죽음에 대한 근원적인 물음을 품기 시작했다. 그 물음 끝에 탄생한 『어떻게 살 것인가』는 2014년 가을 플라톤 아카데미가 주최한 동명의 대중강연을 엮은 (...) 것으로, 누적 6만 명 이상 청중들의 열광적인 호응을 불러일으켰다. 1부에서 김상근, 한명기, 조성택, 석영중, 황현산, 고은은 인류의 역사 속에 우리 삶의 이정표를 세우는 작업을 통해 너를 살피고 나를 다스리는 지혜를 설파한다. 2부에서 손봉호, 박승찬, 차드 멩 탄, 최인철, 용타, 이강호는 상처를 견디며 행복하게 살아가기 위한 고민을 통해 삶은 상처를 치유하는 과정이라고 역설한다. 삶과 행복의 기본과 원칙이 현실에 닥친 슬픔과 혼란을 극복하고 함께 앞으로 나아갈 수 있는 힘이며, 황폐해진 개인의 삶과 희미해진 사회적 가치를 극복할 수 있는 해답임을 역사와 철학, 종교와 문학 등 인문학 여러 분야를 넘나들며 증명한다. ◎ 출판사 서평 상처 입은 사회, 우리는 어떻게 살아야 할까? 공생하는 삶에 대한 12가지 실천적 철학 나는 누구인가, 어떻게 살 것인가, 어떻게 죽을 것인가. 현대인들이 잊고 살지만, 인생에서 가장 중요한 질문이다. 개인의 삶이 점점 황폐해지고 사회 가치가 희미해지는 요즘, 이러한 근원적인 물음은 우리 삶에 더욱 중요해졌다. ‘인간’을 탐구하고 ‘인생’을 공부하는 학문인 인문학 열풍이 거세진 것도 이와 같은 이유다. 그 물음 끝에 탄생한 『어떻게 살 것인가』는 2014년 가을 플라톤 아카데미가 주최한 동명의 대중강연을 엮은 것으로, 누적 6만 명 이상 청중들의 열광적인 호응을 불러일으켰다. 마치 눈앞에서 듣는 것처럼 고은, 용타, 김상근, 최인철, 차드 멩 탄 등 이 시대를 대표하는 지성 12인이 전하는 삶의 지혜와 인문학적 통찰이 뜨거운 감동과 함께 생생하게 전달된다. 우리 일상에 맞닿은 사례들을 중심으로 삶의 본질을 탐구하며, 위대한 고전과 사상가들의 핵심 메시지를 깊이 있고 흥미롭게 분석했다. 독자들은 이 책을 통해 ‘어떻게 살 것인가’라는 삶의 근원적인 물음에 명쾌한 해답을 얻을 수 있을 것이며, 흔들리고 방황하는 삶에 용기와 철학을 정립할 수 있을 것이다. 행복한 삶을 향한 역사, 철학, 종교, 문학의 성찰 어떻게 살 것인가에 관한 질문은 반드시 ‘행복’이라는 대답으로 이어진다. 역사, 철학, 종교, 문학 등 다양한 시각으로 삶의 방법을 분석한 우리 시대 최고 지성 12인이 상처를 극복하고 함께 행복하게 살아갈 수 있는 방법을 이야기한다. 개인과 사회가 서로 신뢰할 때 우리의 삶은 여유로워지고 사회는 안전해진다. 1부에서는 인류의 역사 속에 우리 삶의 이정표를 세우는 작업을 통해 너를 살피고 나를 다스리는 지혜를 배운다. 대한민국 사회를 ‘아포리아’ 시대로 규정하며 위기를 극복할 수 있는 지혜를 고대 그리스에서 찾은 김상근, 『징비록』에 담긴 역사적 기록을 통해 세계 격변의 시기에 우리가 취해야 할 자세를 고민하는 한명기, 원효의 화쟁사상을 통해 시민의 지혜와 대화의 중요성을 강조한 조성택, 톨스토이의 『안나 카레니나』를 바탕으로 몰입, 소통, 죽음 세 단계의 성장하는 삶을 이야기한 석영중, 주체로서의 나와 타자로서의 나를 소통시키는 시(詩)의 힘을 통해 잘 사는 법을 전한 황현산, 극심한 갈등 속 자기중심적 삶에서 벗어나 세계사적 의미의 통합을 이룰 것을 주장한 고은 시인을 통해 산다는 문제가 공생에 관한 논의로 확장되는 것을 경험한다. 2부에서는 상처를 견디며 행복하게 살아가기 위한 고민을 통해 삶은 상처를 치유하는 과정이라고 역설한다. 우리가 행복하지 않은 이유로 지나친 경쟁심과 불공정한 규칙을 꼽으며 정직하게 나와 타인의 행복과 이익을 함께 추구하는 것이 우리가 지켜야 할 자존심이자 원칙이라고 전하는 손봉호, 나의 ‘홀로서기’와 타인과의 ‘함께 걷기’를 통해서 고통을 넘어서는 희망을 찾을 수 있다는 대안을 제시한 박승찬, 감성지능을 개발하기 위한 세 단계인 주의력 집중, 자기 인식, 정신 습관을 통해 행복의 비법을 전한 차드 멩 탄, 행복을 마음이 아닌 몸과 연결 지어 일상에서 행복을 느낄 수 있는 방법을 찾아나가는 최인철, ‘나, 모두의 행복, 마음 천국, 관계 천국, 세상 천국’이라는 다섯 가지 원리를 통해 나를 이해하는 것에서부터 세계 평화가 시작함을 이야기한 용타, 준비하고 실행하는 삶, 주인공이 되는 삶, 기본과 원칙을 중시하고 만남을 소중히 하는 삶이라는 삶의 다섯 가지 실천을 제시한 이강호를 통해 우리는 어떻게 사는 삶이 행복한 삶인지 다시 한번 숙고하게 된다. 인문학의 목소리로 전하는 인간의 삶과 행복, 기본과 원칙은 현실에 닥친 슬픔과 혼란을 극복하고 함께 앞으로 나아갈 수 있는 힘을 전한다. 황폐해진 개인의 삶과 희미해진 사회적 가치를 극복할 해답을 인문학에서 찾았다. ◎ 본문 중에서 만약 인문학적 성찰이 ‘나는 누구인가’에만 머무른다면 그것은 매우 이기적인 일일지도 모르겠습니다. 인문학은 자기 성찰에서 출발해 이웃과 세상 사람들, 그리고 사회 속에서 행동하고 실천하는 작업까지 이어져야 합니다. 그렇기에 인문학은 반드시 두 번째 질문인 ‘어떻게 살 것인가’로 나아가야 합니다. (14쪽) 『징비록』은 조선 선조 때 영의정을 지낸 서애(西厓) 류성룡이 집필한 임진왜란(壬辰倭亂)의 전란사입니다. 제목인 징비(懲毖)는 『시경(詩經)』 「소비편(小毖篇)」의 “예기징 이비후환(豫基懲 而毖後患)”, 즉 내가 경계함은 후환을 삼가기 위함이라는 구절에서 한 글자씩 따왔습니다. (…) 그는 임진왜란 당시의 참담한 상황을 기록하면서, 동시에 난이 일어나기 이전의 일도 기록해 그 원인이 어디에 있었는지를 밝히려고 했습니다. (31~32쪽) 세상의 중심에 서서 세상을 이어주는 것이 바로 인문 정신이며 시민의 지혜라고 생각합니다. 시민의 지혜로 세상을 바라볼 때, 논쟁이 화쟁적 대화로 이어질 때, 갈등과 분쟁은 더 이상 문제 상황이 아니라 더 큰 진리가 드러나는 에너지요, 기회가 될 것입니다. (97쪽) 톨스토이는 ‘어떻게 살 것인가’라는 질문에 대한 답을 작품을 통해 보여주게 되는데요, 그 답은 바로 ‘성장’입니다. 성장이란 인간이 끊임없는 성찰과 학습을 통해 자기완성에 도달하는 과정입니다. 톨스토이는 성장에 대해 “끊임없이 보다 나은 사람이 되어가는 것”이라고 이야기합니다. (99~100쪽) 개인의 사소한 사정은 더더욱 표현하기 어렵습니다. 사회적인 문제들을 표현하기 위해서는 연대도 가능하고 협력도 가능합니다. 그러나 자기 안에 있는 문제는, 실제로 모든 사람들이 똑같이 느끼고 있음에도 불구하고 연대가 불가능하고 협력도 어렵습니다. 바로 그 사이에 다리를 놓고 협력할 수 있도록 해주는 것이 문학입니다. 또한 그것들을 표현할 말을 만들어내고, 그것들을 표현하기 위해 어떤 특별한 세계를 개발하고 또 그것들을 전파할 수 있도록 약속하는 것이 문학입니다. 그리고 그 문학의 전위가 바로 시(詩)이며, 시가 바로 그 일을 합니다. (135쪽) 아내가 “삶은 상처다”라고 아주 멋진 말을 하더군요. 그리고 삶은 상처를 치유하는 과정이라고 덧붙였습니다. 일상은 늘 상처를 만들고 상처와 만나고 그 상처를 조금씩 치유해주고 가라앉혀주는 것이라고요. 진짜 삶은 누구에 의해 혹은 누구의 규범과 교훈에 종속되어 노예로 사는 것이 아니라 자기 자신으로 살아가는 것입니다. (…) 실존의 존엄성을 우주의 그 누구도 모독할 수 없습니다. (154~155쪽) 우리는 우리의 행동이 어떤 경로를 거쳐 어떤 결과를 가져올지 알아야 하고, 그 결과에 따른 책임도 져야 합니다. 그것이 오늘날 우리에게 필요한 윤리입니다. 그러려면 선한 동기만이 아니라 지식도 있어야 하고, 능력도 있어야 합니다. (185쪽) 고통을 극복하기 위해서는 누구도 자신의 고통을 이해해주지 못한다는 사실을 받아들여야 합니다. 기대할수록 상처는 더욱 커집니다. 고통은 홀로 맞서야만 하는 주관적인 체험입니다. 그렇더라도 고통에 빠진 사람 옆에서 함께 걸어주십시오. 그러면 내가 고통스러울 때 그 사람도 나와 함께 걸어줄 것입니다. 이런 홀로서기와 함께 걷기를 통해서 우리는 고통을 넘어서는 희망을 찾을 수 있습니다. (219쪽) 행복의 비법은 바로 이것입니다. 먼저 마음을 고요하게 해보세요. 그러면 에너지가 필요 없는 기쁨의 세계로 나아갈 수 있습니다. 그리고 자기 인식 능력을 발전시켜서 번뇌로부터 벗어나세요. 마지막으로 친절과 자비를 베풀고 이를 습관화합니다. 이 모든 과정이 훈련을 통해 얼마든지 가능합니다. (238쪽) 단백질, 탄수화물, 지방이 몸을 움직이는 3대 영양소라면, 자유와 유능감과 관계는 영혼을 숨 쉬게 하는 3대 영양소입니다. 그러므로 행복한 삶을 산다는 것은 이 세 가지 에너지를 지속적으로 공급받는 것이라 할 수 있습니다. 그리고 이런 에너지는 당연히 마음 관리에서 나옵니다. 저는 신체활동이나 일상의 여러 활동을 통해 얼마든지 영혼에 에너지를 공급할 수 있다는 이야기를 하려 합니다. (248쪽) 행복한 삶을 위한 원리를 정리하면 ‘나는 모두의 행복을 위해 수심하여 마음 천국 이루고, 화합하여 관계 천국 이루고, 작선하여 세상 천국 이루리라’입니다. 우리 모두가 이 원리만 지키고 살아도 가정의 평화, 세계의 평화, 우주의 평화를 이룰 수 있습니다. (273쪽) 매일 아침, 우리에게는 똑같은 태양이 떠오릅니다. 그리고 똑같은 시간이 주어지지요. 태양과 시간을 어떻게 자기 것으로 만들어가느냐에 따라 각자의 삶이 달라질 것입니다. ‘Every dawn is a new beginning.’ 매일마다의 아침은 또 하나의 새로운 시작입니다. 여러분은 어떤 삶을 원하십니까? (297쪽). (shrink)

Intelligent neurotechnology is an emerging field that combines neurotechnologies like brain-computer interface (BCI) with artificial intelligence. This paper introduces a capability framework to assess the responsible use of intelligent BCI systems and provide practical ethical guidance. It proposes two tests, the threshold and flourishing tests, that BCI applications must meet, and illustrates them in a series of cases. After a brief introduction (Section 1), Section 2 sets forth the capability view and the two tests. It illustrates the threshold test using (...) examples from clinical medicine of BCI applications that enable patients with profound disabilities to function at a threshold level through computer mediation. Section 3 illustrates the flourishing test by exploring possible future applications of BCI involving neuroenhancements for healthy people, using examples adapted from research currently underway in the US military. Section 3 applies a capability lens to a complex case involving dual effects, both therapeutic and non-therapeutic, showing how the threshold and flourishing tests resolve the case. Section 4 replies to three objections: neurorights are the best tool for assessing BCI; the two tests are moving targets; and the analysis utilizes a capability view to do work it is not designed for. The paper concludes that a capability view offers unique advantages and gives practical guidance for evaluating the responsible use of present and future BCI applications. Extrapolating from our analysis may help guide other emerging technologies, such as germline gene editing, expected to impact central human capabilities. (shrink)

1. Kō to shi no shisōshi -- 2. Kō to shi no shakai kagaku -- 3. Nihon ni okeru kō to shi -- 4. Ō-Bei ni okeru kō to shi -- 5. Kokka to ningen to kōkyōsei -- 6. Keizai kara mita kōshi mondai -- 7. Chūkan shūdan ga hiraku kōkyōsei -- 8. Kagaku gijutsu to kōkyōsei -- 9. chikyū kankyō to kōkyōsei -- 10. 21-seiki kōkyō tetsugaku no chihei -- 14. Rīdāshippu kara kangaeru kōkyōsei.

日本人はグローバル化の潮流といかに向き合うべきなのか―そのヒントは「国学」にあった。先人たちが葛藤した問いのなかを私たちはいまも生きている。.

This is a preliminary essay on the rhetoric of ‘obosen’ of President Rodrigo Duterte. The essay discusses how the President employed the term ‘obosen’ to show his leadership quality characterized by strenght, firmness, patriotism and courage. He used ‘obosen’ as a way to persuade his target audience. The essay explicates how he was able to excellently manipulate and control the Philippine social consciousness. To soften the effects of Duterte’s ‘obosen’, his political rivals offered couinter-rhetorics which the essay also presented. To (...) cap it all, a simple summary at the end was provided. (shrink)