Empirical Evidence: Anglo-American Race, Literature, and History

2001 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-133
Author(s):  
Jones DeRitter
1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 445-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan Landsman

Partisan expert witnesses, selected, prepared, and presented by the parties, are one of the central features of Anglo-American judicial proceedings. They provide fact finders with essential technical information and are authorized to propound a range of opinions and conclusions that other witnesses are not. Their views are often the deciding factor in hard-fought cases. Yet their association with one party and their apparent partiality have long troubled legal commentators. These concerns have grown in recent years along with the perception, not based on a great deal of empirical evidence, that more and more experts are being used to prove more and more different things in modern American trials.


2001 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
PAUL HELM

The article examines a central methodological tenet of Grace Jantzen's Becoming Divine. In this book she turns her back on what she calls Anglo-American philosophy of religion in favour of what she calls a continental approach. I argue that for her, belief is as indispensable in religion and in the philosophy of religion as it is for the Anglo-American philosophy of religion which she rejects. Further, the only argument that she offers for her position is a genetic argument for the origins of religious belief. Consistently with her position, she does not consider any empirical evidence relevant to this causal claim. However, the logic of such genetic claims is that for every empirically grounded genetic argument for A there is a corresponding genetic argument for not-A. So if such an argument invalidates A, it also invalidates not-A.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 241-263
Author(s):  
Lucille Micheletto

Abstract The Anglo-American harm principle, and its European counterparts – the legal goods theory and the offensività principle – attempt to provide an answer to the question of which conducts can be prima facie legitimately criminalised. Despite the historical, conceptual, and practical differences between these criminalisation approaches, they share important elements, particularly from a functional and operational perspective. By merging the key aspects of these theories, this work elaborates an instrument to assess the prima facie legitimacy of criminalisation – the Integrated Legitimacy Test – that embeds their essential elements and further conceptualises them. The Test strives to overcome some of the criticisms directed against the Anglo-American and European theories by narrowly defining their core elements and linking them to empirical evidence. Moreover, its transnational nature makes it suitable to feed the criminalisation debate at the European Union level.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirko Uljarević ◽  
Giacomo Vivanti ◽  
Susan R. Leekam ◽  
Antonio Y. Hardan

Abstract The arguments offered by Jaswal & Akhtar to counter the social motivation theory (SMT) do not appear to be directly related to the SMT tenets and predictions, seem to not be empirically testable, and are inconsistent with empirical evidence. To evaluate the merits and shortcomings of the SMT and identify scientifically testable alternatives, advances are needed on the conceptualization and operationalization of social motivation across diagnostic boundaries.


2020 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Corbit ◽  
Chris Moore

Abstract The integration of first-, second-, and third-personal information within joint intentional collaboration provides the foundation for broad-based second-personal morality. We offer two additions to this framework: a description of the developmental process through which second-personal competence emerges from early triadic interactions, and empirical evidence that collaboration with a concrete goal may provide an essential focal point for this integrative process.


2004 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marianne Schmid Mast

The goal of the present study was to provide empirical evidence for the existence of an implicit hierarchy gender stereotype indicating that men are more readily associated with hierarchies and women are more readily associated with egalitarian structures. To measure the implicit hierarchy gender stereotype, the Implicit Association Test (IAT, Greenwald et al., 1998) was used. Two samples of undergraduates (Sample 1: 41 females, 22 males; Sample 2: 35 females, 37 males) completed a newly developed paper-based hierarchy-gender IAT. Results showed that there was an implicit hierarchy gender stereotype: the association between male and hierarchical and between female and egalitarian was stronger than the association between female and hierarchical and between male and egalitarian. Additionally, men had a more pronounced implicit hierarchy gender stereotype than women.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document