Matthias Gockel
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199203222
- eISBN:
- 9780191707711
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199203222.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
The book argues that the doctrine of election in Karl Barth's early theology shows a striking resemblance to the position of Friedrich Schleiermacher, and that his later christological revision of ...
More
The book argues that the doctrine of election in Karl Barth's early theology shows a striking resemblance to the position of Friedrich Schleiermacher, and that his later christological revision of the doctrine overcomes the limitations of his earlier ‘Schleiermacherian’ position. Initially, both agree that predestination is not a pre‐temporal decision by which God has decreed once and for all who will believe and who will not believe. Instead, the outcome of the divine decision is determined when God addresses a human being here and now. Schleiermacher's concept of a single divine decree is consistent with Barth's assertion that God addresses every person in the same way, but the responses to the address are diverse. Their doctrine of election is theocentric and envisions a teleological relation between reprobation and election, in which the former always serves the purpose of the latter, without an endorsement of universalism. Whereas Schleiermacher rejects the concept of double predestination, Barth modifies it twice. In Church Dogmatics II/2 it refers no longer to the twofold possibility of faith and unbelief but to the double determination of individual human beings and God's own being. It explains that God sees every human being and also Himself in Christ.Less
The book argues that the doctrine of election in Karl Barth's early theology shows a striking resemblance to the position of Friedrich Schleiermacher, and that his later christological revision of the doctrine overcomes the limitations of his earlier ‘Schleiermacherian’ position. Initially, both agree that predestination is not a pre‐temporal decision by which God has decreed once and for all who will believe and who will not believe. Instead, the outcome of the divine decision is determined when God addresses a human being here and now. Schleiermacher's concept of a single divine decree is consistent with Barth's assertion that God addresses every person in the same way, but the responses to the address are diverse. Their doctrine of election is theocentric and envisions a teleological relation between reprobation and election, in which the former always serves the purpose of the latter, without an endorsement of universalism. Whereas Schleiermacher rejects the concept of double predestination, Barth modifies it twice. In Church Dogmatics II/2 it refers no longer to the twofold possibility of faith and unbelief but to the double determination of individual human beings and God's own being. It explains that God sees every human being and also Himself in Christ.
Adrienne Heritier
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- May 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199298129
- eISBN:
- 9780191711633
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199298129.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, European Union
This book poses the question: how and why do institutions change? Institutions, understood as rules of behaviour constraining and facilitating social interaction, are subject to different forms and ...
More
This book poses the question: how and why do institutions change? Institutions, understood as rules of behaviour constraining and facilitating social interaction, are subject to different forms and processes of change. A change may be designed intentionally on a large scale and then be followed by a period of only incremental adjustments to new conditions. But institutions may also emerge as informal rules, persist for a long time and only be formalized later. The causes, processes, and outcomes of institutional change raise a number of conceptual, theoretical, and empirical questions. While we know a lot about the creation of institutions, relatively little research has been conducted about their transformation once they have been put into place. Attention has focused on politically salient events of change, such as the Intergovernmental Conferences of Treaty reform. In focusing on such grand events, it is easy overlook inconspicuous changes in European institutional rules that are occurring on a daily basis. Thus, the European Parliament has gradually acquired a right of investing individual Commissioners. This has never been an issue in the negotiations of formal treaty revisions. Or, the decision-making rule(s) under which the European Parliament participates in the legislative process have drastically changed over the last decades starting from a modest consultation ending up with codecision. The book discusses various theories accounting for long-term institutional change, and explores them on the basis of five important institutional rules in the European Union. It proposes typical sequences of long-term institutional change and their theorization which hold for other contexts as well, if the number of actors and their goals are clearly defined, and interaction takes place under the ‘shadow of the future’.Less
This book poses the question: how and why do institutions change? Institutions, understood as rules of behaviour constraining and facilitating social interaction, are subject to different forms and processes of change. A change may be designed intentionally on a large scale and then be followed by a period of only incremental adjustments to new conditions. But institutions may also emerge as informal rules, persist for a long time and only be formalized later. The causes, processes, and outcomes of institutional change raise a number of conceptual, theoretical, and empirical questions. While we know a lot about the creation of institutions, relatively little research has been conducted about their transformation once they have been put into place. Attention has focused on politically salient events of change, such as the Intergovernmental Conferences of Treaty reform. In focusing on such grand events, it is easy overlook inconspicuous changes in European institutional rules that are occurring on a daily basis. Thus, the European Parliament has gradually acquired a right of investing individual Commissioners. This has never been an issue in the negotiations of formal treaty revisions. Or, the decision-making rule(s) under which the European Parliament participates in the legislative process have drastically changed over the last decades starting from a modest consultation ending up with codecision. The book discusses various theories accounting for long-term institutional change, and explores them on the basis of five important institutional rules in the European Union. It proposes typical sequences of long-term institutional change and their theorization which hold for other contexts as well, if the number of actors and their goals are clearly defined, and interaction takes place under the ‘shadow of the future’.
Neil Tennant
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199655755
- eISBN:
- 9780191742125
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199655755.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Logic/Philosophy of Mathematics, Metaphysics/Epistemology
This account of rational belief revision explains how a rational agent ought to proceed when adopting a new belief — a difficult matter if the new belief contradicts the agent’s old beliefs. Belief ...
More
This account of rational belief revision explains how a rational agent ought to proceed when adopting a new belief — a difficult matter if the new belief contradicts the agent’s old beliefs. Belief systems are modeled as finite dependency networks. So one can attend not only to what the agent believes, but also to the variety of reasons the agent has for so believing. The computational complexity of the revision problem is characterized. Algorithms for belief revision are formulated, and implemented in Prolog. The implementation tests well on a range of simple belief‐revision problems that pose a variety of challenges for any account of belief‐revision. The notion of ‘minimal mutilation’ of a belief system is explicated precisely. The proposed revision methods are invariant across different global justificatory structures (foundationalist, coherentist, etc.). They respect the intuition that, when revising one's beliefs, one should not hold on to any belief that has lost all its former justifications. The limitation to finite dependency networks is shown not to compromise theoretical generality. This account affords a novel way to argue that there is an inviolable core of logical principles. These principles, which form the system of Core Logic, cannot be given up, on pain of not being able to carry out the reasoning involved in rationally revising beliefs. The book ends by comparing and contrasting the new account with some major representatives of earlier alternative approaches, from the fields of formal epistemology, artificial intelligence and mathematical logic.Less
This account of rational belief revision explains how a rational agent ought to proceed when adopting a new belief — a difficult matter if the new belief contradicts the agent’s old beliefs. Belief systems are modeled as finite dependency networks. So one can attend not only to what the agent believes, but also to the variety of reasons the agent has for so believing. The computational complexity of the revision problem is characterized. Algorithms for belief revision are formulated, and implemented in Prolog. The implementation tests well on a range of simple belief‐revision problems that pose a variety of challenges for any account of belief‐revision. The notion of ‘minimal mutilation’ of a belief system is explicated precisely. The proposed revision methods are invariant across different global justificatory structures (foundationalist, coherentist, etc.). They respect the intuition that, when revising one's beliefs, one should not hold on to any belief that has lost all its former justifications. The limitation to finite dependency networks is shown not to compromise theoretical generality. This account affords a novel way to argue that there is an inviolable core of logical principles. These principles, which form the system of Core Logic, cannot be given up, on pain of not being able to carry out the reasoning involved in rationally revising beliefs. The book ends by comparing and contrasting the new account with some major representatives of earlier alternative approaches, from the fields of formal epistemology, artificial intelligence and mathematical logic.
Donna Harrington
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780195339888
- eISBN:
- 9780199863662
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195339888.001.0001
- Subject:
- Social Work, Research and Evaluation
Measures that are reliable, valid, and can be used across diverse populations are vital to social work research, but the development of new measures is an expensive and time-consuming process. An ...
More
Measures that are reliable, valid, and can be used across diverse populations are vital to social work research, but the development of new measures is an expensive and time-consuming process. An array of existing measures can provide a cost-effective alternative, but in order to take this expedient step with confidence, researchers must ensure that the existing measure is appropriate for the new study. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is one of the ways to do so. CFA has four primary functions—psychometric evaluation of measures, construct validation, testing method effects, and testing measurement invariance. This book provides an overview of the method, step-by-step guides to creating a CFA model and assessing its fit, and explanations of the requirements for using CFA, as well the book underscores the issues that are necessary to consider when using multiple groups or equivalent and multilevel models. Real-world examples, screenshots from the Amos software program that can be used to conduct CFA, and reading suggestions for each chapter form part of the book.Less
Measures that are reliable, valid, and can be used across diverse populations are vital to social work research, but the development of new measures is an expensive and time-consuming process. An array of existing measures can provide a cost-effective alternative, but in order to take this expedient step with confidence, researchers must ensure that the existing measure is appropriate for the new study. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is one of the ways to do so. CFA has four primary functions—psychometric evaluation of measures, construct validation, testing method effects, and testing measurement invariance. This book provides an overview of the method, step-by-step guides to creating a CFA model and assessing its fit, and explanations of the requirements for using CFA, as well the book underscores the issues that are necessary to consider when using multiple groups or equivalent and multilevel models. Real-world examples, screenshots from the Amos software program that can be used to conduct CFA, and reading suggestions for each chapter form part of the book.
Neil Tennant
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199655755
- eISBN:
- 9780191742125
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199655755.003.0009
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Logic/Philosophy of Mathematics, Metaphysics/Epistemology
This chapter provides further argument justifying the claim that our use of finite dependency networks entails no loss at all of theoretical generality, as far as belief revision on the part of ...
More
This chapter provides further argument justifying the claim that our use of finite dependency networks entails no loss at all of theoretical generality, as far as belief revision on the part of rational creatures is concerned. Some basic concepts in mathematical logic are defined, to lay the groundwork for the metatheorem, due to Harvey Friedman, that is proved in the next chapter.Less
This chapter provides further argument justifying the claim that our use of finite dependency networks entails no loss at all of theoretical generality, as far as belief revision on the part of rational creatures is concerned. Some basic concepts in mathematical logic are defined, to lay the groundwork for the metatheorem, due to Harvey Friedman, that is proved in the next chapter.
Graham Priest
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199263288
- eISBN:
- 9780191603631
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199263280.003.0009
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Logic/Philosophy of Mathematics
This chapter discusses an account of belief-revision that is compatible with the rational belief of contradictions. In the process, a formal account of the model of rationality of the preceding ...
More
This chapter discusses an account of belief-revision that is compatible with the rational belief of contradictions. In the process, a formal account of the model of rationality of the preceding chapter is provided. The account of belief-revision is contrasted with the familiar AGM account.Less
This chapter discusses an account of belief-revision that is compatible with the rational belief of contradictions. In the process, a formal account of the model of rationality of the preceding chapter is provided. The account of belief-revision is contrasted with the familiar AGM account.
Sean Alexander Gurd
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199837519
- eISBN:
- 9780199919505
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199837519.001.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval, Prose and Writers: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This book offers an in-depth study of the role of literary revision in the compositional practices and strategies of self-representation among Roman authors at the end of the republic and the ...
More
This book offers an in-depth study of the role of literary revision in the compositional practices and strategies of self-representation among Roman authors at the end of the republic and the beginning of the principate. It focuses on Cicero, Horace, Quintilian, Martial, and Pliny the Younger, but also offers discussions of earlier Greek material, including Isocrates, Plato, and Hellenistic poetry. The book argues that revision made textuality into a medium of social exchange. Revisions were not always made by authors working alone; often, they were the result of conversations between an author and friends or literary contacts, and these conversations exemplified a commitment to collective debate and active collaboration. Revision was thus much more than an unavoidable element in literary genesis: it was one way in which authorship became a form of social agency. Consequently, when we think about revision for authors of the late republic and early empire we should not think solely of painstaking attendance to craft aimed exclusively at the perfection of a literary work. Nor should we think of the resulting texts as closed and invariant statements sent from an author to his reader. So long as an author was still willing to revise, his text served as a temporary platform around and in which a community came into being. Much more was at stake than the text itself: like all communities, such textual communities were subject to imbalances and differentiation in taste, ideology, capability and willingness to participate, and above all power, the ability to propose and enforce a specific set of textual choices.Less
This book offers an in-depth study of the role of literary revision in the compositional practices and strategies of self-representation among Roman authors at the end of the republic and the beginning of the principate. It focuses on Cicero, Horace, Quintilian, Martial, and Pliny the Younger, but also offers discussions of earlier Greek material, including Isocrates, Plato, and Hellenistic poetry. The book argues that revision made textuality into a medium of social exchange. Revisions were not always made by authors working alone; often, they were the result of conversations between an author and friends or literary contacts, and these conversations exemplified a commitment to collective debate and active collaboration. Revision was thus much more than an unavoidable element in literary genesis: it was one way in which authorship became a form of social agency. Consequently, when we think about revision for authors of the late republic and early empire we should not think solely of painstaking attendance to craft aimed exclusively at the perfection of a literary work. Nor should we think of the resulting texts as closed and invariant statements sent from an author to his reader. So long as an author was still willing to revise, his text served as a temporary platform around and in which a community came into being. Much more was at stake than the text itself: like all communities, such textual communities were subject to imbalances and differentiation in taste, ideology, capability and willingness to participate, and above all power, the ability to propose and enforce a specific set of textual choices.
Ray A. Moore and Donald L. Robinson
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195151169
- eISBN:
- 9780199833917
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/019515116X.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
This book demonstrates that Japan's postwar Constitution has provided a solid foundation for democracy because, contrary to the conventional view that the American Occupation simply “imposed” it, ...
More
This book demonstrates that Japan's postwar Constitution has provided a solid foundation for democracy because, contrary to the conventional view that the American Occupation simply “imposed” it, there was considerable Japanese input in its making.The first two chapters analyze a sharp clash, during the American planning of the Occupation, over the fate and role of Emperor Hirohito. Papered over in the Potsdam Declaration and never resolved in official Washington, the dispute gave General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP), an opportunity to protect the emperor and use his authority to support MacArthur's own objectives.In the fall of 1945, both American and Japanese officials determined that democratization required constitutional revision and that Japan should take the lead in revising its Constitution. Accordingly, Japanese scholars and officials began advancing their ideas. Meanwhile, both the emperor and the cabinet named commissions (headed by Konoe Fumimaro and Matsumoto Jōji, respectively) to study the need for amendments. However, poor communication from the American side and political chaos among the Japanese doomed these fledgling efforts.In early February 1946, MacArthur, alarmed by the Moscow Agreement that created the Far Eastern Commission (FEC) and fearing that he might lose control over the political reform of Japan, ordered his Government Section (GS) to draft a model constitution for Japan, then pressured Prime Minister Shidehara's cabinet to present it as a Japanese government draft. Japanese attempts to modify SCAP's draft, an effort that achieved some success in the face of determined American resistance, have been largely ignored by those who slight Japan's contribution to its own postwar democratization.Chapters 12 through 20 trace the deliberations of the Japanese parliament (called the Diet) during the summer of 1946. It is a mistake to pass over this stage quickly, as most accounts of Japan's postwar democratization do. This was a critical juncture in postwar Japan's commitment to constitutional democracy, affording politicians in the recently elected House of Representatives and in the House of Peers a major opportunity to put their imprint on the document. Intense struggles took place over the role of the emperor, Article 9 (renouncing war and armed forces), the bill of rights and provisions for parliamentary governance.The Conclusion emphasizes that, as Japan currently deliberates whether to amend its postwar Constitution, it is important to understand that the transformation of Japan into a stable constitutional democracy was a joint achievement, to which both American and Japanese contributions were substantial and crucial.Less
This book demonstrates that Japan's postwar Constitution has provided a solid foundation for democracy because, contrary to the conventional view that the American Occupation simply “imposed” it, there was considerable Japanese input in its making.
The first two chapters analyze a sharp clash, during the American planning of the Occupation, over the fate and role of Emperor Hirohito. Papered over in the Potsdam Declaration and never resolved in official Washington, the dispute gave General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP), an opportunity to protect the emperor and use his authority to support MacArthur's own objectives.
In the fall of 1945, both American and Japanese officials determined that democratization required constitutional revision and that Japan should take the lead in revising its Constitution. Accordingly, Japanese scholars and officials began advancing their ideas. Meanwhile, both the emperor and the cabinet named commissions (headed by Konoe Fumimaro and Matsumoto Jōji, respectively) to study the need for amendments. However, poor communication from the American side and political chaos among the Japanese doomed these fledgling efforts.
In early February 1946, MacArthur, alarmed by the Moscow Agreement that created the Far Eastern Commission (FEC) and fearing that he might lose control over the political reform of Japan, ordered his Government Section (GS) to draft a model constitution for Japan, then pressured Prime Minister Shidehara's cabinet to present it as a Japanese government draft. Japanese attempts to modify SCAP's draft, an effort that achieved some success in the face of determined American resistance, have been largely ignored by those who slight Japan's contribution to its own postwar democratization.
Chapters 12 through 20 trace the deliberations of the Japanese parliament (called the Diet) during the summer of 1946. It is a mistake to pass over this stage quickly, as most accounts of Japan's postwar democratization do. This was a critical juncture in postwar Japan's commitment to constitutional democracy, affording politicians in the recently elected House of Representatives and in the House of Peers a major opportunity to put their imprint on the document. Intense struggles took place over the role of the emperor, Article 9 (renouncing war and armed forces), the bill of rights and provisions for parliamentary governance.
The Conclusion emphasizes that, as Japan currently deliberates whether to amend its postwar Constitution, it is important to understand that the transformation of Japan into a stable constitutional democracy was a joint achievement, to which both American and Japanese contributions were substantial and crucial.
Matthias Gockel
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199203222
- eISBN:
- 9780191707711
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199203222.003.0006
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion
The chapter shows how Barth's second revision of the doctrine, culminating in Church Dogmatics II/2, puts the doctrine on a new foundation. Predestination now is identical with the election of Jesus ...
More
The chapter shows how Barth's second revision of the doctrine, culminating in Church Dogmatics II/2, puts the doctrine on a new foundation. Predestination now is identical with the election of Jesus Christ. It is a primal decision, by which God determines not only humankind but also Himself, and a gracious choice, by which God chooses reprobation for Himself and election for human beings. The idea of Jesus Christ as the subject and object of election overcomes the traditional distinction between God's will in Jesus Christ and God's eternal will. Barth's second revision of the doctrine succeeds in defining election more concretely. The teleological view of reprobation and election is preserved, but with a new focus on Jesus Christ, the ‘atoning substitute’ (Schleiermacher). The christological revision leads to a consideration of the election of the congregation and of the individual, two topics neglected in the Göttingen Dogmatics.Less
The chapter shows how Barth's second revision of the doctrine, culminating in Church Dogmatics II/2, puts the doctrine on a new foundation. Predestination now is identical with the election of Jesus Christ. It is a primal decision, by which God determines not only humankind but also Himself, and a gracious choice, by which God chooses reprobation for Himself and election for human beings. The idea of Jesus Christ as the subject and object of election overcomes the traditional distinction between God's will in Jesus Christ and God's eternal will. Barth's second revision of the doctrine succeeds in defining election more concretely. The teleological view of reprobation and election is preserved, but with a new focus on Jesus Christ, the ‘atoning substitute’ (Schleiermacher). The christological revision leads to a consideration of the election of the congregation and of the individual, two topics neglected in the Göttingen Dogmatics.
Paloma Aguilar
- Published in print:
- 2001
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199240906
- eISBN:
- 9780191598869
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199240906.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
In all processes of political change the emerging regime must face the difficult task of deciding what to do with the legacies of the former dictatorship, which people were working for the previous ...
More
In all processes of political change the emerging regime must face the difficult task of deciding what to do with the legacies of the former dictatorship, which people were working for the previous civil and military administration preserve, and whether or not to put on trial those responsible for having violated human rights under the previous regime. This chapter analyses what was done, and what was deliberately put aside in the Spanish case. The Spanish transition to democracy has been praised as mainly exemplary, and as demonstrating success in the stabilization of the new democratic regime. However, the final positive result should not obscure the fact that, because of the correlation of forces of the transitional period, and also because of the traumatic collective memory of the Spanish civil war, the victims of the Francoist repression were not properly rehabilitated and the dictatorship was not condemned in the Spanish parliament until 2002. In fact, a very broad Amnesty Law was passed in 1977 that not only allowed all ETA prisoners to get out of jail, but also impeded the judicial revision of the dictatorial past. None of these limitations have impeded the consolidation of democracy in Spain, but some important sectors of society feel that justice has not been done, which explains the very recent political, social and even cultural initiatives to face the authoritarian past.Less
In all processes of political change the emerging regime must face the difficult task of deciding what to do with the legacies of the former dictatorship, which people were working for the previous civil and military administration preserve, and whether or not to put on trial those responsible for having violated human rights under the previous regime. This chapter analyses what was done, and what was deliberately put aside in the Spanish case. The Spanish transition to democracy has been praised as mainly exemplary, and as demonstrating success in the stabilization of the new democratic regime. However, the final positive result should not obscure the fact that, because of the correlation of forces of the transitional period, and also because of the traumatic collective memory of the Spanish civil war, the victims of the Francoist repression were not properly rehabilitated and the dictatorship was not condemned in the Spanish parliament until 2002. In fact, a very broad Amnesty Law was passed in 1977 that not only allowed all ETA prisoners to get out of jail, but also impeded the judicial revision of the dictatorial past. None of these limitations have impeded the consolidation of democracy in Spain, but some important sectors of society feel that justice has not been done, which explains the very recent political, social and even cultural initiatives to face the authoritarian past.
Ray A. Moore and Donald L. Robinson
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195151169
- eISBN:
- 9780199833917
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/019515116X.003.0015
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
On June 29, the speaker of the House of Representatives named 70 members (chosen to represent the parties proportionally) to serve as an ad hoc committee on [constitutional] revision. This chapter ...
More
On June 29, the speaker of the House of Representatives named 70 members (chosen to represent the parties proportionally) to serve as an ad hoc committee on [constitutional] revision. This chapter shows that, from the outset, members displayed considerable anguish about the draft's language (was it a mere translation of a foreign proposal?), and particularly its rude restrictions on the emperor's role. It examines the mounting tensions led, in mid‐July, to a dramatic quarrel between Colonel Kades and the cabinet minister in charge of the revision project, Kanamori Tokujirō, focusing on whether kokutai (Japan's unique polity) had survived in the revision.Less
On June 29, the speaker of the House of Representatives named 70 members (chosen to represent the parties proportionally) to serve as an ad hoc committee on [constitutional] revision. This chapter shows that, from the outset, members displayed considerable anguish about the draft's language (was it a mere translation of a foreign proposal?), and particularly its rude restrictions on the emperor's role. It examines the mounting tensions led, in mid‐July, to a dramatic quarrel between Colonel Kades and the cabinet minister in charge of the revision project, Kanamori Tokujirō, focusing on whether kokutai (Japan's unique polity) had survived in the revision.
Ray A. Moore and Donald L. Robinson
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195151169
- eISBN:
- 9780199833917
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/019515116X.003.0023
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
Surveys proposals for amending the 1947 Constitution. With the end of the Occupation in 1952, critics were free to propose amendments to the constitution. In its hearings, the Commission on the ...
More
Surveys proposals for amending the 1947 Constitution. With the end of the Occupation in 1952, critics were free to propose amendments to the constitution. In its hearings, the Commission on the Constitution (1956‐1964) produced a host of arguments in favor of revision, but the conservative parties have never had the two‐thirds majority in the Diet required to pass an amendment. The 1991 Gulf War again stirred debate on the antiwar clause (Article 9) and stimulated a national debate on revision. In 1999, both houses of the Diet established commissions on the constitution and two years later, in May 2001, announced that public hearings would begin.Less
Surveys proposals for amending the 1947 Constitution. With the end of the Occupation in 1952, critics were free to propose amendments to the constitution. In its hearings, the Commission on the Constitution (1956‐1964) produced a host of arguments in favor of revision, but the conservative parties have never had the two‐thirds majority in the Diet required to pass an amendment. The 1991 Gulf War again stirred debate on the antiwar clause (Article 9) and stimulated a national debate on revision. In 1999, both houses of the Diet established commissions on the constitution and two years later, in May 2001, announced that public hearings would begin.
Lars Hoffmann and Anna Vergés‐bausili
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- April 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199257409
- eISBN:
- 9780191600951
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/019925740X.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, European Union
Examines the European Convention (the European Convention on the Future of Europe) within the process of constitutional reform in the EU, with an emphasis on the institutionalization of treaty ...
More
Examines the European Convention (the European Convention on the Future of Europe) within the process of constitutional reform in the EU, with an emphasis on the institutionalization of treaty reform. After an introductory section, the chapter next looks at institutionalist questions on treaty revision processes, discussing the traditional method used, that of the Intergovernmental Conferences (IGCs), and aiming to identify a ‘less intergovernmental’ view of reform processes. The third section provides a historical and up‐to‐date review of the European Convention, focussing on its background, operation, and decision‐making processes. The fourth argues that choices regarding the nature of the Convention's remit and its working methods have reinforced a new landscape of constitutional reform, namely, an institutionalized setting more complex in both the players involved and its dynamics, and where institutional choices are likely to affect significantly the classic key variables of intergovernmentally driven processes. The underlying theme of the chapter is that the outcomes of the 2004 IGC will not be able to be accounted for by focussing solely on governments’ preferences and power.Less
Examines the European Convention (the European Convention on the Future of Europe) within the process of constitutional reform in the EU, with an emphasis on the institutionalization of treaty reform. After an introductory section, the chapter next looks at institutionalist questions on treaty revision processes, discussing the traditional method used, that of the Intergovernmental Conferences (IGCs), and aiming to identify a ‘less intergovernmental’ view of reform processes. The third section provides a historical and up‐to‐date review of the European Convention, focussing on its background, operation, and decision‐making processes. The fourth argues that choices regarding the nature of the Convention's remit and its working methods have reinforced a new landscape of constitutional reform, namely, an institutionalized setting more complex in both the players involved and its dynamics, and where institutional choices are likely to affect significantly the classic key variables of intergovernmentally driven processes. The underlying theme of the chapter is that the outcomes of the 2004 IGC will not be able to be accounted for by focussing solely on governments’ preferences and power.
Alec Stone Sweet
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- April 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780198297710
- eISBN:
- 9780191601095
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297718.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
The growing interdependence between law‐making and constitutional judging is explored, proceeding from the view that constitutional courts ought to be conceptualized as specialized legislative ...
More
The growing interdependence between law‐making and constitutional judging is explored, proceeding from the view that constitutional courts ought to be conceptualized as specialized legislative organs. Judicialization also engenders and institutionalizes new modes of legislative discourse and practice. The conclusion is drawn that constitutional adjudication transformed the nature of parliamentary governance unexpectedly and with significant effects.Less
The growing interdependence between law‐making and constitutional judging is explored, proceeding from the view that constitutional courts ought to be conceptualized as specialized legislative organs. Judicialization also engenders and institutionalizes new modes of legislative discourse and practice. The conclusion is drawn that constitutional adjudication transformed the nature of parliamentary governance unexpectedly and with significant effects.
Robert E. Goodin
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199256174
- eISBN:
- 9780191599354
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199256179.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
Shows how Bayesian thinking should make democratic outcomes so rationally compelling. Bayes's formula provides a mathematical expression for specifying exactly how we ought rationally to update our a ...
More
Shows how Bayesian thinking should make democratic outcomes so rationally compelling. Bayes's formula provides a mathematical expression for specifying exactly how we ought rationally to update our a priori beliefs in light of subsequent evidence, and the proposal is that voters are modelled in like fashion: votes, let us suppose, constitute (among other things) ‘reports’ of the voter's experiences and perceptions; further suppose that voters accord ‘evidentiary value’ to the reports they receive from one another through those votes; and further suppose that voters are rational, and that part and parcel of their being rational is being prepared to revise their opinions in light of further evidence (including evidence emanating from one another's votes‐cum‐reports). In this process, each of us treats our own experiences and perceptions as one source of evidence, and regards our own report as right; in that sense, we are perfectly sincere when we vote in a particular way, although we also acknowledge that our own experiences and perspectives are particular and peculiar, and hence our own perceptions are themselves inconclusive; because of that, voters striving to behave rationally should sincerely want to adjust their a priori beliefs in the light of all other experiences and perceptions that are reported at an election. Bayesian updating of that sort may well lead people who started out believing (and voting) one way to end up believing (and genuinely wanting implemented) the opposite way, just so long as sufficiently many votes‐cum‐reports point in that different direction; in other words, Bayesian reasoning can, and in politically typical cases ought to, provide people with a compelling reason to accede to the majority verdict. In this way, Bayesianism ‘rationalizes’ majority rule in a pretty strong sense; indeed if anything, it underwrites majoritarianism too strongly.Less
Shows how Bayesian thinking should make democratic outcomes so rationally compelling. Bayes's formula provides a mathematical expression for specifying exactly how we ought rationally to update our a priori beliefs in light of subsequent evidence, and the proposal is that voters are modelled in like fashion: votes, let us suppose, constitute (among other things) ‘reports’ of the voter's experiences and perceptions; further suppose that voters accord ‘evidentiary value’ to the reports they receive from one another through those votes; and further suppose that voters are rational, and that part and parcel of their being rational is being prepared to revise their opinions in light of further evidence (including evidence emanating from one another's votes‐cum‐reports). In this process, each of us treats our own experiences and perceptions as one source of evidence, and regards our own report as right; in that sense, we are perfectly sincere when we vote in a particular way, although we also acknowledge that our own experiences and perspectives are particular and peculiar, and hence our own perceptions are themselves inconclusive; because of that, voters striving to behave rationally should sincerely want to adjust their a priori beliefs in the light of all other experiences and perceptions that are reported at an election. Bayesian updating of that sort may well lead people who started out believing (and voting) one way to end up believing (and genuinely wanting implemented) the opposite way, just so long as sufficiently many votes‐cum‐reports point in that different direction; in other words, Bayesian reasoning can, and in politically typical cases ought to, provide people with a compelling reason to accede to the majority verdict. In this way, Bayesianism ‘rationalizes’ majority rule in a pretty strong sense; indeed if anything, it underwrites majoritarianism too strongly.
John Jones
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198186885
- eISBN:
- 9780191674594
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198186885.003.0003
- Subject:
- Literature, Shakespeare Studies
This chapter analyses revision in the plays Richard II and Troilus and Cressilda. The revision of Troilus and Cressilda is characterized by rephrasings, reorderings, cuttings, and expansions, which ...
More
This chapter analyses revision in the plays Richard II and Troilus and Cressilda. The revision of Troilus and Cressilda is characterized by rephrasings, reorderings, cuttings, and expansions, which do not add up to a coherent style. In contrast, Richard II illustrates kinds of revision rather well. Some revisions appear as through linguistic in that they do not touch any exigency of stage and theatre. There are revisions that appear half linguistic and half other, and there are revisions which could be thought of as not linguistic at all in that they based on stage events and action. Finally, forced revision, in other words pseudo-revision, is the consequence of censorship and therefore not true revision at all: a man can be compelled to change his text but not, unless by brainwashing, his mind.Less
This chapter analyses revision in the plays Richard II and Troilus and Cressilda. The revision of Troilus and Cressilda is characterized by rephrasings, reorderings, cuttings, and expansions, which do not add up to a coherent style. In contrast, Richard II illustrates kinds of revision rather well. Some revisions appear as through linguistic in that they do not touch any exigency of stage and theatre. There are revisions that appear half linguistic and half other, and there are revisions which could be thought of as not linguistic at all in that they based on stage events and action. Finally, forced revision, in other words pseudo-revision, is the consequence of censorship and therefore not true revision at all: a man can be compelled to change his text but not, unless by brainwashing, his mind.
Albert Casullo
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195115055
- eISBN:
- 9780199786190
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195115058.003.0004
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Metaphysics/Epistemology
This chapter articulates the requirements of fallible a priori justification. It distinguishes two senses of fallibility: c-fallibility, justification that does not guarantee truth; and ...
More
This chapter articulates the requirements of fallible a priori justification. It distinguishes two senses of fallibility: c-fallibility, justification that does not guarantee truth; and p-fallibility, justification that is defeasible. It argues that although these senses are logically independent of one another, there are some significant relations between them mediated by the concepts of self-revision, overriding defeater, and undermining defeater. It is shown that several alternative fallibilist accounts of a priori justification face difficulties that are avoided by the account defended in Chapter 2.Less
This chapter articulates the requirements of fallible a priori justification. It distinguishes two senses of fallibility: c-fallibility, justification that does not guarantee truth; and p-fallibility, justification that is defeasible. It argues that although these senses are logically independent of one another, there are some significant relations between them mediated by the concepts of self-revision, overriding defeater, and undermining defeater. It is shown that several alternative fallibilist accounts of a priori justification face difficulties that are avoided by the account defended in Chapter 2.
Albert Casullo
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195115055
- eISBN:
- 9780199786190
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195115058.003.0009
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Metaphysics/Epistemology
This chapter addresses two questions: Is there synthetic a priori knowledge? Is the analytic/synthetic distinction cogent? The epistemic significance of the first derives from the assumption that ...
More
This chapter addresses two questions: Is there synthetic a priori knowledge? Is the analytic/synthetic distinction cogent? The epistemic significance of the first derives from the assumption that synthetic a priori knowledge raises difficult explanatory problems that are circumvented by analytic a priori knowledge. The epistemic significance of the second derives from the assumption that if the analytic/synthetic distinction is not cogent, then the cogency of the a priori/a posteriori distinction is also doubtful. It is argued that both assumptions are false, and that resolving the controversies surrounding these two questions is not necessary to answer the primary epistemological questions about a priori knowledge.Less
This chapter addresses two questions: Is there synthetic a priori knowledge? Is the analytic/synthetic distinction cogent? The epistemic significance of the first derives from the assumption that synthetic a priori knowledge raises difficult explanatory problems that are circumvented by analytic a priori knowledge. The epistemic significance of the second derives from the assumption that if the analytic/synthetic distinction is not cogent, then the cogency of the a priori/a posteriori distinction is also doubtful. It is argued that both assumptions are false, and that resolving the controversies surrounding these two questions is not necessary to answer the primary epistemological questions about a priori knowledge.
David J. Collins
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780195329537
- eISBN:
- 9780199870134
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195329537.003.0004
- Subject:
- Religion, History of Christianity
A common kind of revision humanists made to older narratives, regardless of the type of saint being portrayed, was to the geographical and cultural setting. Often they inserted excurses of ...
More
A common kind of revision humanists made to older narratives, regardless of the type of saint being portrayed, was to the geographical and cultural setting. Often they inserted excurses of descriptive geography and historical chronicle not before associated with the given saints. Chapter three investigates how and why humanist authors amended the lives in these novel and sometimes tendentious ways. The chapter associates such chorographical changes with the Germania illustrata project, a wider movement among German humanists to investigate, construct, and glorify an ancient and medieval past that was truly German.Less
A common kind of revision humanists made to older narratives, regardless of the type of saint being portrayed, was to the geographical and cultural setting. Often they inserted excurses of descriptive geography and historical chronicle not before associated with the given saints. Chapter three investigates how and why humanist authors amended the lives in these novel and sometimes tendentious ways. The chapter associates such chorographical changes with the Germania illustrata project, a wider movement among German humanists to investigate, construct, and glorify an ancient and medieval past that was truly German.
D. D. Raphael
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- May 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199213337
- eISBN:
- 9780191707544
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199213337.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy
The main subject of The Theory of Moral Sentiments is moral judgement but it does have a second minor subject, the nature of virtue, discussed at length in a new part added to the sixth edition. Thus ...
More
The main subject of The Theory of Moral Sentiments is moral judgement but it does have a second minor subject, the nature of virtue, discussed at length in a new part added to the sixth edition. Thus the version of Smith's moral philosophy in the sixth edition is substantially different from that of editions 1–5.Less
The main subject of The Theory of Moral Sentiments is moral judgement but it does have a second minor subject, the nature of virtue, discussed at length in a new part added to the sixth edition. Thus the version of Smith's moral philosophy in the sixth edition is substantially different from that of editions 1–5.
