This thesis assesses the centrality of care relationships in George Eliot’s Middlemarch and, by doing so, seeks to provide a nuanced understanding of individual and collective morality. Using the ethics of care as a methodological framework to acknowledge the importance of care acts and successful care relations – especially those complicated by the presence of dichotomized socioeconomic hierarchies – will allow readers to engage more fully with this text, its author, her relations, her characters, and the community of readers; reading Eliot’s work from this lens will allow us to validate every interaction, every thread of connectedness, and every act of care to better understand Eliot’s webs of relation. This thesis argues that it is the atypical or unexpected social figure that arises as the most effective care practitioner, regardless of social class. In order to arrive at this point, it will provide a foundational understanding of both care ethics – from the work of Nel Noddings to that of more contemporary theorists like Talia Schaffer and Sandra Laugier – and the economic theories circulating during Eliot’s time – Smithian, Ruskinian, and Socialist. Through an assessment of Dorothea Brooke, Fred Vincy, Mary Garth, and others within the Middlemarch community, this thesis integrates varying notions of political economy, reciprocity, engrossment, and genuine care for both compensated or uncompensated care acts. By doing so, it strives to privilege the success of authentic care, thereby triumphing the value of relationships over personal gain or ambition.

[pt] A desconstrução de Jacques Derrida e a ética da discussão de Jürgen Habermas são duas perspectivas ou modos de proceder filosóficos maiores na filosofia contemporânea que guardam entre si problemas comuns, ainda que pensados de maneira profundamente distintas. Esse trabalho visa atravessar alguns dos problemas filosóficos compartilhados por ambas as filosofias, produzindo um confronto entre os trabalhos de Habermas e Derrida onde ele não aconteceu, ou acompanhando esse confronto onde ele foi protagonizado por esses autores. Deste modo, três campos de problemas fundamentais serão explorados pela tese: a questão da linguagem e da comunicação, o problema dos limites da filosofia (e sua relação com campos vizinhos como a literatura, por exemplo), e as heranças políticas da modernidade: a razão ou racionalização do mundo e o cosmopolitismo como possibilidade racional de pensar o universal na política. Para além dessas duas orientações filosóficas de maneira estrita, a tese visa fomentar algumas discussões que possam contribuir para o próprio campo filosófico. Nesse sentido, a estratégia de investigação desses temas opera a partir de dois conjuntos de temas maiores. Em primeiro lugar, minha preocupação foi a de perseguir o fio da ética no pensamento de Habermas e Derrida, encontrando as condições de desenvolvimento desse tema, explícito para ambos os autores, ainda que nem sempre colocado em relevo desde os primeiros de seus desenvolvimentos filosóficos. Derrida jamais negou que a desconstrução, como pensamento da alteridade é ela própria ética. Desde suas formulações iniciais sobre o quase-conceito de rastro, o problema do outro já ganhava a cena central do pensamento da desconstrução e a importância de um pensamento ético do outro vai pouco a pouco se tornando mais explícito sob a letra dos escritos derridianos. Em outra via, uma teoria da ação comunicativa visa desde suas origens pensar uma alternativa a racionalidade instrumental de modo que aquilo que Habermas chama desde muito cedo de interesse emancipatório tributário do Iluminismo pudesse orientar uma racionalidade voltada para uma comunicação amparada por pressupostos capazes de garantir uma discussão livre de violência e de pressão externa. Do mesmo modo, pouco a pouco Habermas vai reconhecer na estrutura mesma dessa comunicação livre, um princípio ético-universalista capaz de reunir os falantes em um consenso ainda que não seja forçoso o compartilhamento entre esses falantes de valores morais fortes. Como segundo eixo temático operante nesta tese surge a problemática da modernidade. Ora, Habermas faz derivar do próprio processo de racionalização moderno - conceitualmente oriundo de uma reinterpretação de Hegel e de Max Weber - o falibilismo e a comunicação orientada por pretensões de validade argumentativa que asseguram o solo possível para uma ética da discussão. Os temas específicos desse trabalho operam, portanto, a partir da relação entre ética e modernidade ou do rastro da modernidade que marca a ética (Habermas), tanto quanto sobre o rastro inapelável da ética operando sobre o conceito de modernidade em um Iluminismo por vir (Derrida). / [en] Jacques Derrida s deconstruction and Jurgen Habermas discourse ethics are two major philosophical perspectives or modes of investigation in contemporary philosophy. Both of them shares commun philosophical problems even if they are thought in radical different ways. This work s aim is to follow the confrontation between the works of Habermas and Derrida when it was starred by the authors and to produce philosophical confrontations of these works when it haven t effectively happened. Three major problematic fields will be explored by this thesis: the question of language and communication, the problem of the limits of philosophy (and its relation with literature and neighboor fields) and the question of the political heritage of modernity: reason or rationalization of the world and cosmopolitanism as the rational possibility of the universal in politics. Beyond these specific philosophical orientations, this work s aim is to offer some intellectual discussion to contribute to the philosophical field itself. In this sense, the research strategy developed here was to operate with two axes as starting points. First, my concern was to follow the guideline of ethics in the derridian and habermasian thought, trying to find in their works this theme s conditions of development, not necessarily embossed since its early philosophical developments. Derrida never denied that deconstruction is an ethical question in itself. Since his early formulations on the concept of trace, the question of the other occupied the central scene of deconstruction s thought. In other hand, the communicative action theory since its origins tried to think an alternative to the instrumental rationality as the possibility to recover what Habermas called early in his work: the emancipatory interest of the Enlightenment based in the communication supported by rules able to secure a free of violence and external pressure discussion. Habermas will recognize in the structure of this free of violence communication an universalist and ethical principle capable to bring together the speakers in a consensus, even if it is not mandatory that they share strong moral values. As a second problematical axe, arises the problem of modernity. Habermas makes communication oriented by validity claims derive from the modern process of rationalization - conceptually oriented by the reinterpretation of Hegel and Weber -, wich ensures the possible soil for the discourse ethics. This work s themes will operate over the relation between ethics and modernity or the trace of modernity wich marks the ethics (Habermas) or the trace of the ethics wich works over the concept of modernity in an Enlightenment to come (Derrida).

The present study evaluated the efficacy of a four-week seminar which emphasized the principles of Agentive Theory. This theory, which is compatible with theories of a phenomenological/ existential perspective, was first developed by C. T. Warner, an American philosopher. Agentive Theorists/Therapists emphasize that our negative emotions, ie., depression, anger, etc. , are assertions or judgments we make and not merely feelings we are responsible for controlling or expressing. Forty-eight outpatients who sought help with personal/emotional problems from a department of behavioral medicine were assigned to either a treatment or waiting-list control Group. Following a four-week treatment phase, the treatment group was shown to have made significantly greater improvement than the waiting-list control group with respect to general mental health, somatization, depression, anxiety, hostility, phobic anxiety, psychoticism, anger, and guilt.

<p>For hermeneutics, liberal universality—the belief that rights for being humans <em>as such</em> are universally true—is a sort of <em>subjective</em> universality. Subjectivity is just another way of saying that universality is historically situated, and whoever claims universality cannot objectify herself from her own history; accordingly, universality is not universality-as-the-thing-is (a sort of “objective” universality), but universality-for-person P -in-her-historical-situation, even if the claimer is totally unaware of the restrictions imposed by her own tradition and historicity.</p> <p>Subjective universality reveals the fact that the content of universality is affected by the <em>personal dimension</em> of its claimer. That is, the claimer’s personal background, including culture, language, tradition, education, social-economical aspects, even gender and race, are reflected, consciously or unconsciously, explicitly or implicitly, directly or indirectly, in her view of what universality ought to be.</p> <p>How to treat the <em>other­</em>— a political and metaphysical category of existence that is radically different from oneself—reveals the subjective nature of liberal universality. In history, this subjectivity worked negatively, for liberals, to select and exclude some groups e.g. women, the propertyless, and the colonized subjects. But in light of our contemporary understanding of what is truly free and equal, this subjectivity can function positively to assure respect for the other and avoid producing new types of alienated other. The advocated liberal approach is a hermeneutic approach, which asserts the practices of being humble, dialogical, non-violent, and voluntarily self-dislocated, in dealing with the other.</p> / Master of Philosophy (MA)

<p>I propose a Deweyan understanding of the relationship between epistemology and politics. The standards of legitimate political debate are an irreducibly political concern and cannot be invoked to justify the politics they facilitate. Yet, such standards cannot be left outside of the scope of legitimate political discourse, because they are both politically contestable and politically significant. A Deweyan account of inquiry, extended to moral and political questions, provides fruitful ground for integrating epistemological concerns within a political framework without reducing either kind of consideration to the other.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Servant leadership, which promotes virtuousness and altruism, is gaining attention as a potential solution to the perceived leadership crisis, as evidenced by the ethical breakdown of some of America's largest corporations. Entrepreneurs, who represent 99% of all employers, play a significant role in the American economy as innovative risk takers and early adopters. As such, it is important to understand how they relate to servant leadership. The purpose of this quantitative study was to explore research questions related to (a) the extent to which servant leadership is practiced by small business entrepreneurs, and (b) the relationship between their levels of spirituality (i.e., virtuousness) and servant leadership. The study was grounded in both servant leadership theory and motivation (expectancy value and self-efficacy) theories. To address the research questions, the Spirituality Assessment Scale and the Servant Leadership Profile (Revised) were used to measure the levels of spirituality and servant leadership, respectively. Descriptive and inferential statistics (i.e., simple linear regression) were used to analyze data from surveys completed by a representative sample of 48 small business entrepreneurs. This analysis revealed (a) a 21% level of servant leadership practice among the sample of small business entrepreneurs, and (b) a statistically significant, negative correlation between spirituality and servant leadership. These findings suggest that (a) a positive connection between spirituality and servant leadership should not be presumed, and (b) servant leadership research should take its place among nonreligious perspectives on leadership. This study contributes to social change by fostering the growth of servant leadership in a broader segment of the leadership population, thus addressing the perceived leadership crisis more effectively.

This paper explores the concept of well-being both in theoretical and practical applications. When it comes to well-being policy, it is apparent that the government’s goal ought to be to maximize the well-being of the citizens within that particular society. In order to do so effectively, there must be a foundational understanding both of the concept of well-being itself, as well as how it functions in application. I argue that preference-based approaches to well-being, which often emply GDP as a key metric, fail to adequately reflect the well-being of a nation’s citizens. I suggest that the Capabilities Approach offers a superior approach to well-being both in theory and in practice. Though it is possible that there are other equal or better options, I find that the Capabilities Approach successfully reaches the genuine depths of a person’s well-being without allowing for one individual’s well-being to impede on another’s. While it is evident that the capabilities approach still faces a number of hurdles and room for development, I hope to have argued that it is a step forward from traditional as well as subjective approaches to well-being. With further research and development, it is evident that this shift will allow for development decisions that are unbiased, equally considering the interests of all citizens, and thus a step forward towards truly increasing the well-being of humans throughout the world.

Ever since the environment and nonhumanity became major ethical topics, human-centered worldviews have been blamed for all that is morally wrong about our dealings with nature. Those who consider themselves nonanthropocentrists typically assume that the West’s anthropocentric axiologies and ontologies underlie all of the environmental degradations associated with our species. On the other hand, a handful of environmental philosophers argue that anthropocentrism is perfectly acceptable as a foundation for environmental ethics. According to Bryan Norton’s convergence hypothesis, "If reasonably interpreted and translated into appropriate policies, a nonanthropocentric ethic will advocate the same [environmental] policies as a suitably broad and long-sighted anthropocentrism" (Norton 2004:11). Norton notes that although adherents to either ism may disagree about the relative importance of the various reasons they have for advocating such policies, they nevertheless share an equal commitment to protecting the environment. Because any form of anthropocentrism must fundamentally favor humanity over nonhumanity, nonanthropocentrists are nevertheless concerned that such favoritism is "nothing more than the expression of an irrational bias" (Taylor 1981:215). They reason that only a nonanthropocentric ethic can guarantee that policies do not arbitrarily favor humans when their interests conflict with those of nonhumans. I argue that critics of convergence fail to appreciate that Norton’s hypothesis is limited to ideologies that he deems "reasonable" and "suitably broad and long-sighted," or else they misapprehend what these terms imply. When it comes to ethics, nonanthropocentrists and anthropocentrists alike vary along a continuum according to whether their overriding intuitions are more aligned with individualistic or collectivistic axiologies and their associated timescales. The most unreasonable, narrow, and short-sighted ideologies are those that are the most individualistic. It is at the collective end of the continuum that Norton’s proposed convergence takes place. I defend a version of anthropocentrism that I term ecological anthropocentrism.

This thesis analyzes the beliefs of population theorist Julian L. Simon through the creation of a harm principle. It specifically analyzes his argument that we value our freedom to choose how many children we want above all other values in the context of overpopulation and environmental destruction. The developed harm principle is meant to give us a method to decide how to balance our personal freedom with our security-survival. I begin with an overview of Simon’s work, as well as an exposition of other prominent population theorists. I then propose a principle that is a utilitarian alternative to John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle. I apply the principle to the situation wherein overpopulation causes such great environmental damage that we must choose between upholding procreative rights and our continued survival. I conclude that in most cases we will accept limitations on our procreative freedom in order to maintain our planet and ensure our security-survival.

Self-driving cars are here. Once an advanced technology that seemed futuristic, they are now closer than most believe. Many of the largest automobile manufacturers are working on autonomous vehicle technology of their own. Perhaps most well-known, though, are the cars being developed by Tesla and Google. Both companies have well-developed prototypes of fully autonomous vehicles, meaning they require no human input or supervision, and Tesla has promised widespread, consumer availability of this technology in the next one to two years. Along with the availability of this technology to the public and transportation companies like Uber and Lyft, comes a need to establish a regulatory environment. Regulators need to contemplate a new, yet complex, technology with far-reaching implications and determine how best to regulate necessary components. In this paper, I plan to explicate and analyze the ethical impact of the proliferation of self-driving cars that regulators should consider when determining how they ought to regulate. I will do this by first clarifying any technical terms one might need to be familiar with as well as discussing some of the requisite considerations. Then, I plan to explore a some of the pitfalls regulators might be subject to as they navigate the associated complex issues. Finally, I will explain and analyze the likely benefits and potential risks resulting from roadways filled with autonomous vehicles.