This chapter suggests that descriptive epidemiological studies like the Global Burden of Disease Study can usefully be divided into four tasks: describing individuals’ health states over time, assessing their health states under a range of counterfactual scenarios, summarizing the information collected, and then packaging it for presentation. The authors show that each of these tasks raises important and challenging ethical questions. They comment on some of the philosophical issues involved in measuring health states, attributing causes to health outcomes, choosing the (...) counterfactual against which to assess causes, aggregating and summarizing complex information across multiple domains, discounting, age-weighting, handling fetal deaths, measuring health inequalities, representing uncertainty, and assessing personal responsibility for health outcomes. (shrink)

Si le christianisme a survécu en Grande Syrie, c'est en raison de facteurs spécifiques: l'intégrité de la communauté chrétienne arabe indigène dans la région; l'intégration sociale des chrétiens arabes syriens dans la société musulmane; l'échec des musulmans dans le prosélytisme agressif auprès des chrétiens; l'identification ethnique de la population indigène avec les nouvelles arrivées du VIIe siècle. L'arabisation ne signifiait pas systématiquement l'islamisation. Elle encourageait même le contraire dans certaines régions comme la Palestine, coeur d'une Eglise chrétienne arabophone viable.

Originally published in 1944, this book presents the case for keeping examinations as part of the British school system. Brereton suggests potential reforms and argues that examinations have positive values in 'stimulating pupils and teachers generally, and in co-ordinating the work and aims of schools that might otherwise drift far apart'. This book will be of value to anyone with an interest in the debate surrounding the changing role of examinations in British education.

First published in 2003. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

In considering the question as to the order of composition of different portions of Aristotle's works it is necessary to start with some idea as to his method of composition. On looking at the surviving works one sees at a glance that at some date and by some hand they have been carefully arranged as a continuous series. Internal references forward and backward are frequent. The author refrains as carefully as Euclid does from anticipating ‘earlier’ discussion the answer to a (...) question which will arise ‘later.’ The forward references are merely promises that a question will be discussed. These multitudinous cross-references are so interwoven with the thought and the argument that there is little doubt that in the main they are due to Aristotle himself. On the other hand, the short transitional statements with which the ‘books’ as we have them close must always be accepted with some reservations. The book is a device of the ancient bookseller, not the unit of composition. Of course, where they could, the editors have made the ends of books correspond with important breaks in the argument; but wholly artificial book-endings do occur. There is, e.g., the end of N.E. θ, which corresponds to no important stage in the thought; and here the editor or bookseller has merely emphasized the artificiality of the division by inserting the wholly inappropriate clause, περ μν ον τοτων π τοσοῨτον ερσθω. (shrink)

The question discussed in this paper is the relation of the Topics to the two Analytics. The smaller works are here ignored.