Harald Grimen [4]H. Grimen [1]
  1.  63
    Protecting Vulnerable Research Participants: A Foucault-Inspired Analysis of Ethics Committees.T. I. Juritzen, H. Grimen & K. Heggen - 2011 - Nursing Ethics 18 (5):640-650.
    History has demonstrated the necessity of protecting research participants. Research ethics are based on a concept of asymmetry of power, viewing the researcher as powerful and potentially dangerous and establishing ethics committees as external agencies in the field of research. We argue in favour of expanding this perspective on relationships of power to encompass the ethics committees as one among several actors that exert power and that act in a relational interplay with researchers and participants. We employ Michel Foucault’s ideas (...)
    Direct download  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  2.  17
    Professional Discretion and Accountability in the Welfare State.Anders Molander, Harald Grimen & Erik Oddvar Eriksen - 2012 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 29 (3):214-230.
    The discretionary powers of welfare state professionals are in tension with the requirements of the democratic Rechtsstaat. Extensive use of discretion can threaten the principles of the rule of law and relinquish democratic control over the implementation of laws and policies. These two tensions are in principle ineradicable. But does this also mean that they are impossible to come to grips with? Are there measures that may ease these tensions? We introduce an understanding of discretion that adds an epistemic dimension (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  3.  17
    Causally Inefficient Knowledge and Functional Explanation.Harald Grimen - 1994 - Social Science Information 33 (1):117-127.
  4. Discursive Modernity.Nils Gilje & Harald Grimen (eds.) - 2007 - Universitetsforlaget.
    No categories
    Export citation  
  5.  22
    Consensus and Normative Validity.Harald Grimen - 1997 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 40 (1):47 – 61.
    A weak and a strong version of discourse theory can be distinguished. In the strong version the only source of normative validity in the nonspecific sense is rational consensus, where all parties concerned accept a norm for the same reasons, which are rationally convincing in the same way for all. In the weak version both rational and overlapping consensus can be sources of validity in the nonspecific sense. It is argued that the weak version is the more adequate, since it (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Export citation