Toward a normative theory of parole grounded in agency

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen Bell
Keyword(s):  
Normative Theory

Resonance in Dhvani Aesthetics and the Deleuzian Logic of Sensation

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-44
Author(s):  
Srajana Kaikini
Keyword(s):  
Art History ◽  
Visual Art ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Close Reading ◽  
Literary Interpretation ◽  
Sanskrit Poetics ◽  
Comparative Framework ◽  
Time Image

This paper undertakes an intersectional reading of visual art through theories of literary interpretation in Sanskrit poetics in close reading with Deleuze's notions of sensation. The concept of Dhvani – the Indian theory of suggestion which can be translated as resonance, as explored in the Rasa – Dhvani aesthetics offers key insights into understanding the mode in which sensation as discussed by Deleuze operates throughout his reflections on Francis Bacon's and Cézanne's works. The paper constructs a comparative framework to review modern and classical art history, mainly in the medium of painting, through an understanding of the concept of Dhvani, and charts a course of reinterpreting and examining possible points of concurrence and departure with respect to the Deleuzian logic of sensation and his notions of time-image and perception. The author thereby aims to move art interpretation's paradigm towards a non-linguistic sensory paradigm of experience. The focus of the paper is to break the moulds of normative theory-making which guide ideal conditions of ‘understanding art’ and look into alternative modes of experiencing the ‘vocabulary’ of art through trans-disciplinary intersections, in this case the disciplines being those of visual art, literature and phenomenology.

Foundations From Quantum Physics for a Normative Theory of Administration and Governance

Public Voices ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
R. Philip Brown
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Meaning In Life ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
The People ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Prime Meridian ◽  
Organizational Purpose ◽  
Organizing Principles

The modem American ethos is a brand of Lockean individualism gone wrong that now embraces rapacious self-interest as its prime meridian. A new ethicalmodel is necessary to combat this radical, soulless, and excessively particularistic form of individualism. The author proposes a journeyman philosophy of organization and governance for citizen and administrative practitioner alike based upon concepts from quantum theory. This normative model of administration, called authentic individualism, has certain ramifications for a more reflexive, creative and unorthodox approach to public administration. All institutions and organizations are systems guided by general organizing principles that should discard the humans as a resource model, make employee well-being an organizational purpose, encourage humans toward a sense of moral meaning in life and work, recognize legitimate leadership as emerging from the people who make up the organization, and fulfill obligations to the community that supports them and makes them successful.

Conclusion

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brooke A. Ackerly
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Power Relation ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Political Transformation ◽  
Political Responsibility ◽  
Women's Human Rights ◽  
Taking Responsibility

Just responsibility is a transformative human rights politics for taking on the complexities, power inequalities, and social normalization of injustice itself. Just responsibility is a human rights theory of political responsibility in which we understand human rights as enjoyed and shared throughout political community (and human rights entitlements as a tool toward that end), political community as defined by its web of networks, not its boundaries, accountability as a political process of discernment, not a power relation, and leadership as a quality of political community, not of individuals within it. Found within and supported by the principles-in-practice of women’s human rights activists, this grounded normative theory of responsibility guides us in a human rights enhancing way to be accountable leaders in political transformation, taking responsibility for global injustice in a just way.

Punishment and Citizenship

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milena Tripkovic
Keyword(s):  
Historical Development ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Political Organization ◽  
Citizenship Status ◽  
Criminal Conviction ◽  
Criminal Offender ◽  
Normative Foundations ◽  
Common Understanding

The book develops a normative theory of criminal disenfranchisement and determines which offenders may justifiably lose electoral rights after criminal conviction. Having examined the historical development of the practice and contemporary electoral restrictions—which reveal that disenfranchisement is still widespread in European democracies—the book goes on to explore the nature of this sanction and its normative foundations. Diverging from common understanding, the book proposes that criminal disenfranchisement is not a form of punishment, but a citizenship sanction that aims to reduce membership entitlements of disenfranchised criminals and deplete their citizenship status. To determine whether criminal disenfranchisement can be justified, it is necessary to understand the substance of membership in a polity and the requirements that a citizen ought to satisfy to enjoy a full range of rights attached to this status. To account for possible differences in citizenship requirements between diverse types of polities, the book develops three ideal-typical models, which are loosely tied to the liberal, republican, and communitarian forms of political organization. The book contends that, regardless of internal differences, only one kind of criminal offender fails to satisfy citizenship requirements in all three types of polity and may thus incur electoral restrictions—a person who has seriously and irreversibly severed citizenship ties with her polity owing to an incorrigible lack of moral conscience. The book concludes by specifying additional conditions that ought to be satisfied before restrictions can be enacted, but also suggests reasons for which polities may abstain from imposing them.

Barking Up the Wrong Trees

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Goodhart
Keyword(s):  
Global Economy ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Global Order ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Scope Of Justice ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Ideological Context

This chapter shows that three of the central debates within global normative theory are afflicted by the three pathologies associated with the dominant approach. Constructivist methods for identifying principles of justice are both blatantly undemocratic and severely distortional; debates about the scope of justice are depoliticizing, question begging, and philosophically irresolvable; claims about how the global order affects the poor depoliticize and distort power relations in the global economy and ignore the ideological context in which the claims themselves operate. The argument is not that IMT gives problematic answers to these questions but rather that the questions themselves are unhelpful and unnecessary, artifacts of the approach. In making these arguments, the chapter continues the work of defamiliarization begun in the previous chapter.

Four Underlying Principles of Contract Law and the Foundational Contract-Law Standard

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melvin A. Eisenberg
Keyword(s):  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Standard Contract

Chapter 3 develops four underlying principles of contract law and the foundational contract law standard. Under the most fundamental principle of contract law the aim of contract law should be to effectuate the objectives of parties to promissory transactions, provided that appropriate policy and moral conditions, such as freedom from duress and fraud, are satisfied, and subject to appropriate constraints, such as capacity and legality. The normative theory of contract law, taken together with the four underlying principles described in this chapter, comprise the foundational contract-law standard. Contract-law rules that are supported by the foundational standard are justified. Contract-law rules that are not so supported are unjustified.

Forms of Injustice and Regression

2020 ◽  
Vol 2019 (4) ◽  
pp. 314-328
Author(s):  
Regina Kreide
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Critical Theory ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Global Poverty ◽  
Border Politics ◽  
Communicative Power

AbstractOver the last years, the debate over global justice has moved beyond the divide between statist and cosmopolitan, as well as ideal and non-ideal approaches. Rather, a turn to empirical realities has taken place, claiming that normative political philosophy and theory need to address empirical facts about global poverty and wealth. The talk argues that some aspects of the earlier “Critical Theory” and its notions of negativity, praxis, and communicative power allow for a non-empiristic link between normative theory and a well-informed social science analysis that is based on experienced injustice. The analysis of border politics and housing politics will serve as an example for a critical theory of global injustice that addresses regressive as well as emancipative developments in society.

Media Ethics, Moral Controversies, and the Sociology of Critique

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Hove
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Research ◽  
Social Background ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Moral Evaluation ◽  
Media Ethics ◽  
Social Settings ◽  
The Social ◽  
Descriptive Approach ◽  
Descriptive Framework ◽  
Normative Justification

Abstract Communication scholars have begun to investigate various links between empirical research and normative theory. In that vein, this article explores how Boltanski and Thévenot’s sociology of critique can enhance our empirical and normative understanding of controversies in media ethics. The sociology of critique and its justification model provide a comprehensive descriptive framework for studying practices of moral evaluation and the social goods at stake in them. First, I discuss some prevailing approaches in media ethics. Second, I explicate how the sociology of critique defines situations of normative justification and supplies a model of their basic requirements. Third, I show how this model can be used to analyze the social background of a media ethics controversy. Last, I suggest how the descriptive approach of the sociology of critique can identify conditions in morally pluralistic social settings that pose challenges to normative theories.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document