No description available.

At war’s most basic form, it is a very bizarre concept: soldiers who have never interacted and may have even got along with each other under different circumstances are ordered to take the other’s life. If you were in a similar situation, would you be able to kill him? Would you see the enemy as a human or a lowly creature? Would you kill him because you wanted to (weather it be out of fear or patriotism) or because you felt there was social pressure on you to do so? Would you be able/willing to pull your trigger at all? Years ago, someone came up with the idea that armies fight in order to preserve peace. Frankly, that is inaccurate. Armies fight to win wars: intermittent political confrontations between countries that manifest as physical, deathly battles between citizens that do not know each other, and the price of which is billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives. These are the reasons why training is so important, but even more than that, why putting soldiers through the best training available is so important. If a country is going to throw all this money and life at war with no guarantee of getting any of it back, they want to make sure the outcome is worth it. In order to do that, however, their side needs to win, and in order to win that side must be more prepared and better trained then the opposing force; and not only better trained on how to survive because that can be irrelevant, but better trained on how to defeat/kill the enemy. That is, how to tactically overpower them and either force them to retreat or surrender (Woods and Baltzly, 1915). Training soldiers for battle however, proved to be a more psychologically complex task than originally thought to be. In WWII, Brigadier General Marshall (1968) conducted “after action interviews” where he surveyed thousands of combat soldiers immediately after they participated in combat engagements where shots were fired and soldiers were killed, asking them whether or not they had participated in the actual killing of the enemy (the physical pointing and shooting of a weapon). Marshall reveals his findings, stating that he found about 75-80 percent of the soldiers either refused or could not convince themselves to participate in the actual killing of the enemy, even when their lives and/or the lives of their buddies were in danger. Marshall’s findings suggested that the training of the time did not translate to effective fire during battle. Training programs thought discipline, procedural knowledge and loss of individuality would lead to the shaping of soldiers who would follow orders and provide effective fire. They were wrong. Perhaps without realizing it, training programs were relying on two human tendencies in their attempt to create the best soldiers possible: When in a group, people often get pulled into a group mentality and allow their beliefs and perceptions to succumb to the crowd’s sentiment. (Asch, 1955; Myers, 2013; Zimbardo, 1970) When one is made to feel like a subordinate to someone, they are likely to follow that person’s direction even if it conflicts with their morals. (Milgram, 1963, 1974; Myers, 2013) They had not anticipated the existence nor the strength of a third human tendency: Most humans have a very strong drive to avoid killing their fellow man. (Grossman, 2009; Griffith, 1989; Keegan and Holmes, 1985; Lorenz, 1963) After witnessing the struggle that leaders faced with getting their men to fire during combat, Marshall declares in his book that all combat arms had been unsuccessful in coming up with a well-founded and authoritative intent. Without intent, training institutions and instructors had no endstate or goal to try to accomplish through training. Therefore, they could not generate productive training schedules or exercises. Marshall then goes on to stress the need for more effective fire and challenges training programs and instructors to come up with innovative and practical training methods that will actually be applicable to wartime activities and thus increase the amount of effective fire. In response, the Navy generated its Fighter Weapons School (Top Gun) in 1969 that included lectures followed by practical applications in which recruits would compete against Top Gun instructors in flight (Grossman, 2009). Upon seeing the success and benefits for the training, (Chatham & Braddock, 2001; Fletcher & Chatham, 2010) the Army integrated and diversified this style of training in the early 1980’s with the development and refinement of numerous tactical simulators: Squad and Platoon Tactical Exercise Lanes, DARWARS, EST, America’s Army, Cultural trainers, which have been used to train thousands of soldiers (Chatham, 2011).

The murder of women in order to uphold ‘honour’ has occurred throughout history and in many contexts. Despite high rates of domestic violence and increased rates of honour killing over the last decade in Palestine, there is a paucity of empirical data about the phenomenon, the social and cultural forces underlying it and how it affects family members emotionally and socially. The standpoint of this thesis is that Palestinian society today has no solution to honour killing (HK). This study addresses two questions: the factors that contribute to HK, as reported by the participants; and the emotional and social effects and consequences of it. The study adopted a Grounded Theory method. Data were collected using individual and group interviews with family members, professionals and neighbours associated with victims of HK. The total numbers of the participants were 43 (23 family members, 15 professionals and 5 neighbours). A feminist paradigm guided the data collection and analysis. The findings of this study have revealed that the HK phenomenon is multifaceted, grounded in the interplay of several complex factors, including institutionalized patriarchy within society, families and Palestinian culture; honour and shame values in the traditional society and other societal influences (cultural norms and values, legislative and institutional systems). This study therefore concluded that HKs were patriarchal and traditional methods of disempowering and subjugating women, enabled (directly or indirectly) by families, communities, political parties, religious leaders, professionals and the state, rendering society at large as unlikely to condemn honour killing. The main result was that although family members killed their female relatives primarily in an attempt to re-establish their honour, the murder failed in this purpose and in fact made their situation worse. Understanding this significant finding gives a clear message to family members and to the public that honour killing harms perpetrators emotionally and further damages family honour, where enter into a long process which ultimately leads to social death. Thus, multiple efforts are needed to combat HK, but this is extremely difficult. Altering the attitudes and behaviour of those who believe in HK is not an easy task but one of the first and crucial steps in combating this issue is state action. This study shows that most participants, especially family members, were concerned about family reputation and endeavoured to resolve problems within the family. This makes solving the problems inside families more difficult for any external party. Therefore, it is necessary to find ways to work with families. Further research has the potential to increase our understanding of other social factors and processes involved in honour killing, which would enable concerned parties to better craft effective intervention strategies.

Just-Warists and War-Pacifists disagree on whether soldiers are morally justified in killing each other in wartime combat. Many of their respective arguments, and their contradictory conclusions, are based upon principles of self-defense. In this thesis, I examine the role that principles of self-defense play in the arguments surrounding the moral justification of killing in combat. I do so by critiquing both a Just-Warist argument that relies on self-defense (constructed from the works of Michael Walzer and Judith Jarvis Thomson) and a War-Pacifist argument (developed by Richard Norman) that condemns killing in combat based on the moral requirements of self-defense. I demonstrate that both arguments fail due to their mistaken assumptions that soldiers are not morally responsible for their actions. I conclude by arguing that--once soldiers are recognized as morally responsible agents--killing in combat can be morally justified by principles of self-defense. / Master of Arts

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・論文博士 / 博士(人間健康科学) / 乙第13006号 / 論人健博第1号 / 新制||人健||3(附属図書館) / 32934 / (主査)教授 藤井 康友, 教授 澤本 伸克, 教授 一山 智 / 学位規則第4条第2項該当 / Doctor of Human Health Sciences / Kyoto University / DFAM

That police have special moral obligations to protect others is an important moral consideration which is largely absent from discourse about the moral permissibility of police killings of civilians in self-defence. I argue that police officers, at least when acting ex officio, face a special justificatory burden such that the set of conditions under which a police officer may permissibly kill a civilian in self-defence is more tightly constrained than the set of conditions under which a civilian may kill a fellow civilian in self-defence. In other words, police officers' right to kill in self-defence is attenuated by their special moral obligation to protect others. I provide three arguments for this claim. First, police have a special obligation to protect others, even at risk to themselves. Thus, there are some situations in which, compared to a civilian, an officer must tolerate an elevated level of risk of harm to herself before she is justified in resorting to defensive harm. Second, police have a derivative obligation to minimise imposing harm on those whom they have undertaken to protect. It is a greater wrong to harm those to whom one has special moral duties. Thus, compared to the civilian, the police officer must give greater moral weight to the possibility that she is facing an innocent or non-responsible threat. The third argument rests on the view that the right to self-defence derives from the right protect oneself. I show that the special moral obligations of police officers attenuate this right and, derivatively, attenuate their right to self-defence as well. / Master of Arts / Discussions about the morality of police killings of civilians in self-defence lack an important consideration; they fail to take into account the fact that police have special moral obligations to protect others. I argue that this special obligation interferes with police officer’s self-defence rights. Because of this, the set of conditions under which it is morally permissible for a police officer kill a civilian in self-defence is more tightly constrained than the set of conditions under which it is morally permissible for a civilian may kill a fellow civilian in self-defence. I provide three arguments for this claim. First, police have a special obligation to protect others, even at risk to themselves. Because of this, there are some situations in which, compared to a civilian, an officer must tolerate an elevated level of risk of harm to herself before she is justified in resorting to defensive harm. Second, police have an obligation to minimise imposing harm on those whom they have undertaken to protect. This obligation is derived from police officers’ obligation to protect others, because it is a greater wrong to harm those to whom one has special moral duties. Thus, compared to the civilian, the police officer must give greater moral weight to the possibility that she is facing an innocent or non-responsible threatener (that is, an individual who threatens harm but who is either innocent, or is not responsible for the threat that they pose). The third argument rests on the view that the right to self-defence derives from the right protect oneself. I show that the special moral obligations of police officers attenuate this right and, derivatively, attenuate their right to self-defence as well.

In the first two Chapters I outline the theory and background of separation of variables as an ansatz for solving fundamental partial differential equations (pdes) in Mathematical Physics. Two fundamental approaches will be highlighted, and more modern approaches discussed. In Chapter 3 I calculate the general trace-free conformal Killing tensor defined in Euclidean space - from the sum of symmetric tensor products of conformal Killing vectors. In Chapter 4 I determine the subcases with rotational symmetry and recover known examples pertaining to classical rotational coordinates. In Chapter 5 I obtain the induced action of the conformal group on the space of trace-free conformal Killing tensors. In Chapter 6 I use the invariants of trace-free conformal Killing tensors under the action of the conformal group to characterize, up to equivalence, the symmetric R-separable webs in E^3 that permit conformal separation of variables of the fundamental pdes in Mathematical Physics. In Chapter 7 the asymmetric R-separable metrics are obtained via a study of the separability conditions for the conformally invariant Laplace equation.

In the first two Chapters I outline the theory and background of separation of variables as an ansatz for solving fundamental partial differential equations (pdes) in Mathematical Physics. Two fundamental approaches will be highlighted, and more modern approaches discussed. In Chapter 3 I calculate the general trace-free conformal Killing tensor defined in Euclidean space - from the sum of symmetric tensor products of conformal Killing vectors. In Chapter 4 I determine the subcases with rotational symmetry and recover known examples pertaining to classical rotational coordinates. In Chapter 5 I obtain the induced action of the conformal group on the space of trace-free conformal Killing tensors. In Chapter 6 I use the invariants of trace-free conformal Killing tensors under the action of the conformal group to characterize, up to equivalence, the symmetric R-separable webs in E^3 that permit conformal separation of variables of the fundamental pdes in Mathematical Physics. In Chapter 7 the asymmetric R-separable metrics are obtained via a study of the separability conditions for the conformally invariant Laplace equation.

Neutrophils are one of the main effector cells of innate immunity and were shown to kill bacteria by phagocytosis more than 100 years ago. Neutrophils are also capable of antimicrobial activity by producing extracellular structures named neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs). This thesis is an investigation of porcine neutrophils and their ability to produce NETs, as well as the antimicrobial ability of secretions from activated porcine neutrophils in combating a variety of common porcine pathogens. Porcine neutrophils were found to produce NET-like structures, and secretions from activated neutrophils were found to possess variable bactericidal activity against common pathogens of swine. Antimicrobial proteins dependent on elastase activity were shown to be partially responsible for the bactericidal activities of activated neutrophils. Several antimicrobial proteins and peptides were identified via proteomic techniques. This work allows for better understanding of innate immunity in swine, and identification of potential targets for addressing porcine health. / Ontario Ministry of Agriculture Food & Rural Affairs, Ontario Pork, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

CoordenaÃÃo de AperfeiÃoamento de NÃvel Superior / Deduzimos uma estimativa interior do gradiente para a equaÃÃo da curvatura mÃdia para grÃficos de Killing em variedades riemanianas inspirado na tÃcnica de pertubaÃÃes normais devido a N. Korevaar. / We deduce an interior gradient estimate for the mean curvature equation for Killing graphs in Riemannian manifolds inspired by the normal perturbation technique due to N. Korevaar.