The key issue in recent debates of Christian apologetics is whether there is any common ground of data and criteria between believers and unbelievers. Two main schools are divided on this issue, namely: evidential and presuppositional apologetics. The evidential apologists claim that a common ground exists, and that objective proofs of theism are possible from this common ground. In contrast, the presuppositional apologists argue that there is no common ground; and they maintain that theoretical arguments (including apologetic ones) are unavoidably prejudiced by religious presuppositions. In this study, both sides are claimed to have their own flaws. The former apologetics has the flaw that its epistemic foundation (i.e., “classical foundationalism”) is fatally defective; and it is criticised by the reformational philosophical tradition, as well as secular contemporary (postmodern) epistemology. In contrast, the latter apologetics has the flaw that when the existence of common ground is entirely denied, the problems of circular reasoning (hence, relativism) and total communication breakdown are unavoidable. In order to clarify and deepen the issue, the tradition of reformational philosophy, which is represented by Kuyper, Dooyeweerd and Van Til is first examined; and it is shown that all three scholars struggle with the tension between antithesis and common ground; and they attempt their own solution. Secondly, the contemporary anti-foundationalist epistemology is examined; and it is shown that the same tension exists between “radical” and “moderate” postmodern (anti-foundationalist) epistemologies; and their debate is on-going – without any satisfactory conclusion. As a solution, it is suggested that the notion of common ground should be distinguished by the ontological and epistemological dimensions. From the epistemological standpoint, all knowledge is prejudiced; and no objective conclusion (on the issue of e.g., theism) can be arrived at by so-called “neutral” rational arguments. However, from the ontological standpoint, it is undeniable that all kinds of knowledge are made possible by certain universal (transcendental) conditions, which constitute the ontic common ground. In this distinction, the confusion is caused by the false assumption that the ontic common ground is meant to function as an epistemic neutral criterion. In contrast, this study argues that the ontic common ground functions only as the condition for the possibility of legitimate knowledge (including apologetic arguments). As a result, this study claims that traditional apologetics, based on objective theistic proofs should be abandoned, and that (radical) presuppositional apologetics needs to be modified. Therefore, as an alternative approach, a new “integral apologetics” is proposed – on the basis of Dooyeweerd’s modal theory of reality. This approach emphasizes the need to utilize different types of knowledge, which together could strengthen the apologetic persuasion towards Christian theism, and take into consideration of the whole context of apologetic dialogue. / PhD (International Trade), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

This dissertation explores the prospects for Christian-Muslim dialogue regarding the ecological crisis. It compares the views of Sallie McFague and Seyyed Hossein Nasr, leaders in ecological theology and ethics. In 1990, at the Spirit and Nature symposium at Middlebury College, they dialogued unsuccessfully. They could not understand each other across the ideological gulf of McFague's postmodernism and Nasr's traditionalism. However, beneath an outer shell of significant differences, McFague and Nasr share profound common ground. They both understand the ecological crisis as a result of the desacralization of nature in human perception. They believe that Western Christianity's failure to cultivate a spiritual vision of nature set the stage for the development of a thoroughly mechanistic and desacralized worldview in the Renaissance and Enlightenment. They both articulate visions for the resacralization of nature. While unique, these visions both image the world as a body animated by the Spirit of God rather than as a lifeless machine. Furthermore, both authors find insights to support human harmony with the natural world in the mystical wisdom of their traditions. The dissertation models a process of dialogue that unveils McFague's and Nasr's common ground. The first two chapters explore their stories and contexts, modeling the importance of getting to know one's interlocutor. In chapters three and four, their overall ecological theologies are outlined. Only in chapter five, in a dialogical setting in which both authors' ideas are viewed empathetically, are their differences engaged. Chapter six looks at their common ground, tracing how it grows out of their mutual ecological concerns. Finally, chapter seven creatively synthesizes their ideas, especially their proposals for the reintegration of nature into cities and their descriptions of the mystical understanding of the God-world and human-world relationships. The dissertation explores how the mystical consciousness of the unity of the human body with the body of the world needs to be cultivated more widely, and extended into the practice of interfaith dialogue. Christians, Muslims, and all others concerned about the ecological crisis need to become more aware of our unity and see through the illusion that we are separate.

A lack of evaluation and evidence of effectiveness prompted this study of the Distributed Common Ground System's (DCGS) proficiency maintenance tool, Ready Intelligence Program (RIP). The goal was to close the gap between research and practice and inform stakeholders at the local Distributed Ground Station (DGS) of evaluation results. Guided by a logic model as the theoretical foundation, this study examined how proficiency is perceived by DCGS crewmembers because of RIP at a military installation with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions. This qualitative study used an outcomes-based program evaluation report based on interviews with 5 crewmembers, observations of program participant activities, and reviews of training documents and program reports. Data were transcribed into NVivo 10 for organization, and inductive code words and categories were applied. Data interpretations were confirmed via triangulation and then sent to the participants for member-checking. An external evaluator reviewed the study's methodology, data, and findings for veracity. The project that resulted from the study was a program evaluation report that identified 4 overarching themes. It was concluded that (a) there was a lack of awareness of RIP, (b) RIP had minimal impact on perception of proficiency, (c) the program was occasionally applied ineffectively, and (d) management of the program was insufficient. It is recommended that existing RIP training be emphasized to crewmembers to increase awareness. Additionally, an ongoing program evaluation is recommended with a quantitative measure of proficiency achievement. This study promotes social change by improving attitudes toward positional proficiency and RIP as a maintenance tool, improving program maintenance, and facilitating regular program evaluations.

Objectives: The objective of this thesis is to identify and understand communication and information exchange events and their influencing factors that are precursors to medical errors. Methods: Palliative Sedation Therapy is used as a case study to understand how communication and information sharing occur on an in-patient palliative care unit. Data sources were non-participant observation and interviews. Directed content analysis was used to analyze the data, with previously published conceptual models of communication acting as the guides for this analysis. Results/Discussion: Results identified several communication issues that have the potential to act as precursors to medical error at different points in the communication act. A model identifying the points where these precursors can impact communication was created. Conclusion: These results can be used to identify how improvements to communication and information exchange can increase the effectiveness of communication and reduce the likelihood of medical errors occurring.

This thesis explores the experiences and practices of disaster relief volunteers. This thesis is based on ethnographic fieldwork conducted over a period of fifty-three days in the summer of 2007 at the post-hurricane Katrina Lower Ninth Ward of New Orleans, Louisiana. Through innovative practices and a commitment to the principle of “solidarity not charity” volunteers produce not just material aid, but an ideology of social justice. This thesis is also an exercise in engaged scholarship in that the author directly participated in the disaster relief effort as a volunteer.

Flygledare övervakar alla flygplan som färdas världen över genom att se till attflygplanen håller separationsgränserna. Flygledarna jobbar i pass på cirka en timme ochbyts sedan av, en så kallad positionsöverlämning. Det är viktigt att den som tar överpositionen får all information den behöver för att kunna fortsätta leda flygplanen på ett säkert sätt och eventuellt vidta åtgärder för att säkerställa en välordnad flygtrafik. Incidentrapporter visar att ett oproportionerligt stort antal incidenter sker 5- 15minuter efter en positionsöverlämning. På grund av detta vill LFV undersöka hur positionsöverlämningarna går till för att senare kvalitetssäkra dem. Syftet med denna rapport har varit att beskriva positionsöverlämningar på ATCC Stockholm. Resultatet visar att flygledarna till stor del använder sig av en memorerad checklista som inte skiljer sig mycket från den fysiska de har framför sig och följer därmed ett generellt mönster. Det visar även att det svåra kan vara att upprätthålla uppmärksamheten under alla överlämningarna. Resultaten ger LFV en utgångspunkt till att börja med kvalitetssäkringen. Ur ett akademiskt perspektiv visar resultaten en tillämpning på hurde teorier som används i studien kan appliceras i kontexten positionsöverlämningar mellan flygledare.

<p>This thesis explores how cognitive artefacts contribute to the process of reaching common ground within collaborative groups through a study of both Clark's theory of Common Ground and of how artefacts are understood to be used, both by individuals and as seen in distributed cognition. This was accompanied by an ethno-methodologically inspired study in the natural setting of a kitchen to observe how artefacts are used when negotiationg common ground. After the study's completion, participants were interviewed in order to establish whether common ground was successfully established ant to look for consistency between obeservations from the study and how the participants motivate their actions. The study was analysed in order to find patterns, of which four distinct kinds were indentified; these categories were then related to facts established in the study of Common Ground and artefacts.</p>

Objectives: The objective of this thesis is to identify and understand communication and information exchange events and their influencing factors that are precursors to medical errors. Methods: Palliative Sedation Therapy is used as a case study to understand how communication and information sharing occur on an in-patient palliative care unit. Data sources were non-participant observation and interviews. Directed content analysis was used to analyze the data, with previously published conceptual models of communication acting as the guides for this analysis. Results/Discussion: Results identified several communication issues that have the potential to act as precursors to medical error at different points in the communication act. A model identifying the points where these precursors can impact communication was created. Conclusion: These results can be used to identify how improvements to communication and information exchange can increase the effectiveness of communication and reduce the likelihood of medical errors occurring.

Despite disaster managers’ best efforts, inter-organizational disaster management suffers from varying levels of success. One factor that is likely to account for these variations is team mutual understanding, also known as common ground. To validate the potential effect of common ground in disaster management, the thesis investigates common ground in several interviews with disaster managers and in an experimental study involving an inter-organizational disaster event scenario. Analysis of interviews revealed that disaster managers perceived gaps in understanding between responders, the importance of mutual understanding, and perceived common ground similarly to depictions in theory with a few exceptions. Analyses of the experimental study indicated that contextual factors of Team composition, Problem solving approach and Type of tasks differently impacted measures of performance and implicit coordination, and that implicit coordination partially mediated and supressed the relationship between contextual factors and decision quality. Findings suggest the variation in disaster managers’ performance can be ascribed to common ground, implicit coordination, and contextual factors. Moreover, results showed the satisfaction with outcome did not correlate with expert rated quality of decision; and that while satisfaction related to consensus and quality of the decision was linked to generating alternative ideas and debate. Collaboration proved to be more effective in public communication tasks, especially for homogenous team composition. The findings support initiatives for more cross-training and further lab and field experiments.

Thesis (M.A.)--York University, 2009. Graduate Programme in Geography. / 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:MR51536