Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 2006 / Includes bibliographical references (p. 387-431). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2003. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 297-317).

Thesis (M.A.)--Catholic Theological Union at Chicago, 1993. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 105-106).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 2002. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 205-246).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 2006 / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (p. 387-431).

Thesis (M.A.)--York University, 2008. Graduate Programme in Political Science. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 144-151). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:MR51562

No description available.

Thesis advisor: Zine Magubane / Considering the extent and nature of violence against LGBTQ+ communities and communities of color in the United States, this paper assesses the significance of the "protected" status of populations under the United Nations' genocide policy. Despite the fact that people of color are considered a "protected" group and LGBTQ+ persons are not, this study explores how a structural foundation of co-dependent capitalism and colonialism target both populations similarly. The author considers the extent to which violence against both populations meets criteria for genocidal risk factors and definitions, suggesting a case for concern for the unprotected status of queer folks and the state of violence against people of color today. / Thesis (BA) — Boston College, 2018. / Submitted to: Boston College. College of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Departmental Honors. / Discipline: Sociology.

Much of contemporary mainstream political philosophy operates under the assumption that if reasonable people deliberate about matters of basic justice in the right conditions, agreement will emerge. This assumption implies that although reasonable people will likely disagree about private matters concerning the nature of the good life, they will nonetheless agree about public matters of justice. I reject this assumption, and in this dissertation I argue that reasonable people are likely to experience deep and persistent disagreements about matters of basic justice. I concede that there are some domains of justice where broad agreement has been achieved in modern democratic societies, namely those concerning the scope and content of civil and political liberties. However, when it comes to the scope and content of economic liberties, there is little agreement to be had. This is because reasonable people can be committed to radically different premises about matters of basic justice as well as the fact that basic agreed-upon concepts can be interpreted and interconnected in significantly different ways. Even in ideal theory, then, where we restrict ourselves to idealized reasonable people, rational consensus is not a feasible goal on certain core matters of justice. From here, I turn to the realm of non-ideal deliberation about justice and explore the difficult problem of rational political ignorance. I further discuss the effects of the Internet on non-ideal political deliberation, and I look at the ways in which online deliberation can fuel normal cognitive biases and deepen political polarization. I argue that matters of economic justice are characterized by both moral pluralism and epistemic complexity, both of which tend to be downplayed within the deliberative enclaves that proliferate on the Internet. How are we to deal with these problems of political disagreement and polarization? To help answer this question, I turn to the tradition of American pragmatism, and especially the writings of William James, to suggest a re-orientation of political philosophy away from the assumption of rational consensus and toward a more humble, but more constructive, vision in which the philosopher attempts to fashion new ideals that might help overcome currently entrenched disagreements.

Pun Hei Wa. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1990. / Bibliography: leaves 154-162. / Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter I. --- "The Methodology of Weber and Braudel The Methodological View of Weber. Weber's Concept and Methodology of History. Causality, Verstehen and Ideal Type. The Historical View and Methodo1ogy of Braudel Braucle1's Historical Thought" --- p.12 / Chapter II. --- "Capitalism in Max Weber Rationality , Rationalism and Rationalization. Capitalisrn: Capitalism in Ancient Times. The Protestant Ethic and the Rise of Capitalism. Weber's Economic Rationalication ： A Historica1 Reconstruction. Exp1anation to Modern Capita1ism" --- p.44 / Chapter III. --- The Three-Tier Level of Historical Reality and the Deve1opinent of Capita1ism From Material Life to Market Economy and Capitalism Nature of Capitalism. The Three-Tier Model at Work. Towards An Explanation to the Rise of Capitalism in Europe --- p.70 / Chapter IV. --- Weber and Braucle1 on the Rise of Capitalism: A Comparison --- p.121 / Conclusion --- p.130 / Appendix: Weber and Braude1 on China: The Retardation of Capitalist Process --- p.136 / Bibliography