This thesis analyzes the concept of Friendship in Aristotle&rsquo / s Nicomachean Ethics with its main aspects. Book VIII and Book IX of the Nicomachean Ethics are devoted specifically to the concept of Friendship to explore the moral and political aspects of it. Friendship has been one of the prominent topics for moral philosophers and hence contemporary discussions lead the Nicomachean account of friendship come to the fore. Thus, the main features of friendship in the Nicomachean Ethics as well as contemporary perspectives and discussions on that topic will be analyzed and explored in depth.

Alienation is a one of the central concepts in Marx&rsquo / s philosophy. It has positive and negative implications regarding man&rsquo / s self realization in nature. It is also about discussion on ontology of work. Moreover, it has led Marx to design new society models for human beings. Alienation in Marx is analyzed together with political economy and its concepts. Baudrilliard&rsquo / s alienation discourses in contemporary age include arguments in terms of consumerism and technology in today&rsquo / s developed world. While Marx&rsquo / s theory of alienation considers the relation of subject and object in political economic conditions, Baudrilliard&rsquo / s discourses discuss it in social and cultural bases. Baudrilliard rather argues that reality and meaning in contemporary world is lost, we live in a &ldquo / hyperreal&rdquo / and &ldquo / simulacrum&rdquo / world.

The goal of this thesis is to argue that science is not value free on the grounds of a community based account of ethics. It is the peculiar feature of this model that ethics is a limitation on individual&#039 / s freedom of action, and moral norms of a community reflect the structure of the community. I endeavour to resolve the problem, on an assumption that science is an activity of scientific community, that science ethics can be derived from the internal structure of scientific community. Therefore, this thesis attempts to show the relationship between scientific community and science ethics.

UK consumers bought just under 500 thousand tonnes of seafood in 2010, at a cost of £3.8bn. Despite rising prices, consumption is on a general upwards path, with the average UK adult now eating 2% more seafood than they would have eaten a generation ago, and demand predicted to grow by a further 17% by 2030. However, this demand is increasingly restricted to a narrow range of imported and wild-caught species (Cod, Haddock, Tuna) and farmed products (Salmon and Prawns) over locally-available species with the consequence that between 60% and 80% of UK domestic landings are currently exported and 80% of all the seafood eaten in the UK is one of either Cod, Haddock, Salmon, Tuna or Prawns – the so-called Big 5. The shortage of local markets for native fish species is arguably reducing the relative viability of small scale, over large-scale, fisheries in the UK. It also increases pressure upon wild stocks of commercially valuable species and is driving the rapid expansion of fish-farming operations which can have negative environmental and social implications. Considering the above, it is suggested that UK consumers could make a positive contribution to the UK economy and marine environment if they chose to buy native, locally-caught species, over farmed and exotic imports. In order to achieve this, however, significant behavioural change would need to take place; and for behavioural change initiatives to be successful, it is argued that it is first necessary to understand why these consumption patterns have developed, i.e. Why the Big 5? Accepting that no single theory has been found that can fully explain behaviours from intentions, this research used mixed methods to develop a consumer-centric view of the full range of factors that might be driving these unsustainable consumption patterns. Regular consumers of seafood from four contrasting localities in England were recruited to complete surveys, maintain shopping diaries and to take part in group and one-to-one interviews to understand their reasons for eating seafood in general and the Big 5 in particular. Drawing on the Literature on seafood consumption, demographic and geographic-induced differences in consumption were explored; and consumer understanding of, and concern for, the sustainability of their seafood was assessed. Retail behaviour was also examined by undertaking an on-line review of the seafood offered for sale by the UK’s five largest retailers. Consumers were generally ill informed and confused about the sustainability of their seafood and had little to no awareness of labelling. In their confusion/apathy, they tended to revert to habitual behaviours and safe choices tending towards the Big 5. They felt strongly that retailers should be making it easier for them to make sustainable choices. The evidence from this study is that Retail is failing in this respect. Interest in and demand for local seafood was very high, with consumers equating local with sustainable, even though the evidence to support this assertion is currently lacking. Consumer definitions of “local” and “sustainable” were found to vary from accepted policy and academic understanding, presenting the possibility of adding to consumer confusion when communicating about sustainable seafood; further, “sustainable” possessed negative connotations for these consumers who, in stark contrast to the average UK consumer, were found to score highly for Hedonism. In total, twenty eight distinct variables were identified as influencing unsustainable UK seafood consumer behaviour. Key amongst these were consumer ignorance/apathy regarding sustainability; retail behaviour; and habit – factors that are presented in the Trifold Model of Unsustainable Consumer Behaviour. This model brings much needed clarity to a complex and poorly understood area of consumer behaviour and marks a significant contribution to three areas of academic study: Sustainable Consumption; Consumer Behaviour; and Business Ethics. The Trifold Model is presented for further testing. Recommendations for policy and industry are highlighted as are areas for further research.

Drawing on the classification of expertise developed by Collins and Evans, this study explores the expertises held by members of NHS Research Ethics Committees (RECs) and how they differ from the ones described by the regulations. The study used Q methodology followed by ten semi-structured interviews with Lay and Expert REC members. The results show that committee members see themselves as part of a team, with individual members making different contributions to a collective task. Viewing REC members in this way allows their different expertises to be formally recognised and leads to the creation of two new membership categories, specialist and generalist, based on these expertises. Specialists have expertises such as statistics and pharmacy that are required by the current legislation and which would be present on recruitment. Generalists possess the other expertises needed by the committee but which not required by statute. These include the clinical expertises possessed by healthcare professionals and the other professional expertises – legal, academic, IT and so on – that are typically found amongst those currently classed as Lay members. All REC members, be they specialist or generalist, would also be trained in the ethical and regulatory expertises required to deliver an ethical review. Emphasising how all REC members, whether specialist or generalise, have expertises that contribute to the ethical review enables recruitment activities to focus on the skills needed by the committee rather than current concerns with population demographics. This provides a solution to many of the recruitment issues identified by participants. In particular, it enables the replacement of skills on a ‘like for like’ basis using clearly defined person specifications. Not only would such a process comply with the Nolan principles it be more likely to maintain the integrity and function of the committee regardless of personnel changes.

This thesis undertakes an interdisciplinary analysis of new Church of England liturgies (Common Worship) from an ecotheological point of view: making use of reader response theory, literary analysis, a social scientific survey, liberation theology, environmental and political ethics and liturgical theology. Chapter 1 considers the theological, political and sociological influences on liturgical reform, which include, inculturation, the expression of ethics in the prayer of the Church, liberation theologies, technology, and agrarianism. Chapter 2 considers methods of liturgical change and the scope for making creation visible in liturgy. Chapter 3 finds justification in reader response theory for determining ecotheological priorities for critiquing liturgy. Analysis of Common Worship texts occurs: in Chapter 4, using literary analysis; in Chapter 5 via social scientific survey of clergy using Common Worship; Chapter 6 looks in details at Collects and Post Communions and undertakes an ecotheological rewriting of 9 sample texts. Chapter 7 identifies lessons for liturgical revision in general and for eco-liturgical reform in particular, paying particular attention to the dissonant creation theologies unearthed in Common Worship, the necessity for future revisions, and the importance and implication of technological change for liturgical writers and commentators.

The aim of this study is to attempt a re-conceptualisation of ethics and politics away from the well-rehearsed structure of singularity versus community, particularity or individuality versus universality, as well as from the inadequate dyadic positioning of these sets of terms. Dominant scholarship on Lévinas's and Derrida's work has generally been divided into those who see Derrida's work as continuing the Lévinasian legacy, and thus having little to offer to the political, and those who would like to divorce the trajectory of deconstruction from the Lévinasian heritage, and thus reveal it as being inherently political. The above split in opinion is largely based on a divergence in the interpretation of Lévinas's own writings as essentially about ethics, and therefore as either having little to offer to our thinking of the political, or as undergoing something like a ‘split', with the focus coming to rest more clearly on politics through the figure of the third, in later writings. My contribution to this impasse is to foreground a recent, though much overlooked notion within Jacques Derrida's work as an alternative to thinking being-with: that of community of singularities. I also suggest the notions of alteronomy and fiendship as alternatives to thinking being-with, which take into account the way in which the other-within-the-self restructures the concepts of freedom and autonomy and takes them beyond a humanist context. I will be arguing from two overarching points: a) that Lévinas's own work can convincingly be interpreted as not only concerned with the political from his earliest writings, but as setting up the political as the interruptive force within the ethical, thus providing a shift in perspective for what is essentially a mutually-interruptive relation between ethics and politics, and b) that Derrida's own writing need not be ‘divorced' from Lévinas's trajectory of thought, in order to be considered as having something to offer to our re-thinking of the relation between ethics and politics.

This thesis aims to examine the question of freedom in its relation to political authority in social contract theories of Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). In order to do that, discussions on human nature, evolution into political association and the foundations of legitimate governments are focused on. As the social contract theories of Hobbes and Rousseau mainly seek for rational justification of political obligation, the primary aim of this thesis is to analyze the nature of political obligation in order to discuss the relation between subject and sovereign in the framework of freedom.

This thesis aims to contribute to Norman Daniels&#039 / expansion of Rawls&#039 / theory of Justice as Fairness to health care by considering individual responsibility in maintaining and restoring health. The thesis also considers transplantation as a special case and develops a Rawlsian model for transplantation.

One of the prevalent notions in the late twentieth century&lsquo / s political philosophy, justice lies at the heart of ethics, politics and jurisprudence. In this study, while I insist on the dominion of politics and the economic mode of production over morality and law, I consider the ethical realm to be also very important in justifying political movements and transformations. Defining the concept of justice plays a role more or less in the realization of justice on the Earth. I try to reveal the bases of justice in the second chapter. My attitude can be defined as foundationalism and realism molded with historical materialism. Subsequently, I attempt to deal with the bearers of justice / i.e., individuals, institutions, or structures. The contemporary political theories on justice pay attention to the notion of the individual and the faculty of rationality. Although I admit the role ofindividuals in ensuring justice, social structures are the main bearers of justice. In the fourth chapter, I cover the main principles or pillars of justice, namely, equality, freedom, and rights. Equality can be classified as legal, political, social, economic and moral. I claim that economic equality is the principal one among others since economic inequality usually generates other inequalities. Economic equality can be satisfied through just production in which alienation and exploitation do not take place. Absence of exploitation is also required for realization of freedoms and human rights. Thus, I propose the principle of absence of exploitation as a primary justice principle, which is necessary but not sufficient to eradicate injustices in the world.