In this work, I defend the view that torture is an inexcusable practice for a democracy. Philosophical defenses of torture rely on hypothetical, abstract scenarios in which we are asked to imagine that a ticking bomb has been planted in the center of a metropolitan area and will kill thousands of innocents unless the terrorist, who has been captured by state agents but refuses to divulge the bomb’s location, is tortured. This model gives insufficient attention to the problematic relationship between pain and truth and reduces the recognition of torture as a practice of social and political domination. By taking a closer look at how democracies have practiced torture and how they have tried to reconcile its practice with democratic norms such as accountability and the rule of law, we are better equipped to understand what is at stake in justifying torture. The justifications that service and promote this violent practice fail to satisfy epistemic conditions of truth and evidence, and neglect moral restraints regarding our treatment of others as well as the profound consequences for allowing torture to persist in a democratic society. / Graduate / 0422 / jerryst.peter@gmail.com

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Syfte: Det centrala med studiens syfte är att analysera hur arbetet med barns inflytande vid val av temaarbete ser ut på en Reggio Emilia-inspirerad förskola. Studien kommer även att analysera barns syn på hur inflytande fördelas mellan de olika parterna under det tematiska arbetets gång. Frågeställningar: De frågeställningar studien utgår från är hur barn beskriver sin möjlighet till inflytande vid val av temaarbete på en Reggio Emilia-inspirerad förskola. Hur barn beskriver att alla involveras vid val av temaarbete på en Reggio Emilia-inspirerad förskola samt vad det uppkommer för utmaningar som förskollärare kan ställas inför när det gäller barns inflytande vid val av temaarbete på en Reggio Emilia-inspirerad förskola, utifrån vad barn säger. Metod: Metoden som används är kvalitativa intervjuer med förskolebarn och med hjälp av fokusgruppsintervjuer samlas data in till studien. Undersöknigen görs på en Reggio Emilia-inspirerad förskola i södra Sverige som vi har kommit i kontakt med under vår utbildning. Resultat: Studiens resultat visar att det finns intresse hos barnen att vara delaktiga vid val av temaarbete samt att ha inflytande i vardagsprocesser som rör detta temaarbete. Resultatet tyder även på att barnen inte är så delaktiga som de skulle önska samt att denna brist på inflytande vid valet av tema och dess genomförande inte beror på att barnen är ointresserade, utan snarare på grund av tidsbrist eller för stora barngrupper i verksamheten.

No description available.

This dissertation aims to evaluate the philosophy of Jürgen Habermas with reference to the arguments it provides for a theory of radical social democratic politics. Habermas is a German philosopher and social theorist whose broad concern is the defence and elaboration of the 'project of modernity'. This means that he wishes to justify modern, developed societies as viable and worthwhile forms of civilization. He attempts to specify and redeem the claim that these societies represent, potentially, the most advanced and rational way of organizing human life. Habermas is committed, among the various political programs which raise this kind of claim and seek to realize it in practice, to a form of radical social democracy. This tradition of theory and practice pursues the task of human emancipation by means of fundamental reforms to the social, cultural, economic and political institutions of contemporary modern societies. Habermas' work can be understood as one of the most systematic contributions to this tradition. The central question guiding the dissertation concerns the theoretical and political adequacy of this contribution. The dissertation establishes two general criteria for evaluating Habermas' work. The first criterion requires identifying the normative foundations of social democratic politics. It is argued that a 'theory of the rational' is needed to satisfy this. Such a theory must demonstrate that the social structures and political institutions of the modern epoch represent an hitherto unprecedented opportunity for the expression of the human capacity for rationality. The exposition of normative grounds for social democratic politics determines the basis for social criticism and political struggle. A theory of the rational, in other words, informs us of why we are struggling. Nonetheless, such a theory, on its own, cannot provide guidance about how to struggle. The second criterion of evaluation relates to this question of 'how', of what theoretical direction can be given to political practice. The dissertation contends, in this regard, that a 'theory of the irrational' is necessary. It is argued that a theory of the irrational offers a framework for orienting social movements in struggles against those obstacles which stand in the way of a further expansion of rationality. Such a theory seeks to understand the irrationality of human life in an effort to recommend political strategies that can intervene prudently in the current state of affairs. It is maintained that a satisfactory construction of both theories is essential for an adequate comprehension of radical social democratic politics. The dissertation pursues this argument by clarifying the nature of three dimensions of 'critique' within Habermas' oeuvre. Conceptions of critique represent methodological frameworks for formulating theories of the rational and the irrational. Habermas deploys these methods of critique throughout his work. It is argued, however, that his application of critique focuses primarily on providing a theory of the rational. The central thesis is that while he offers the rudiments of a theory of the irrational, this theory is underdeveloped. Since this theory addresses the question of how social movements are to struggle, it is argued that Habermas' approach lacks a practical dimension. The dissertation concludes that his contribution in this regard needs to be elaborated more consistently and in more detail. The dissertation represents an internal analysis of Habermas' work. It seeks to ascertain whether his theory achieves the philosophical and political goals required by the tradition of thought to which it belongs. The dissertation contributes to the critical literature on Habermas' writings in three substantial ways. First, it establishes a framework for understanding how the separate elements of his theory fit together. The identification of general criteria with respect to which a theory of social democracy is to be evaluated means that the political purposes of these various elements can be understood more clearly. The tensions between them can also be illustrated. Second, with the help of this framework, the dissertation expands upon and sharpens longstanding criticisms of Habermas' thinking which have pointed to a missing practical dimension. Third, the dissertation identifies theoretical resources, elaborated by Habermas himself, which it is argued can be used to overcome these problems of impracticality. With this, the dissertation also contributes, in a more indirect way, to the current debate about the meaning of and possibilities for social democratic politics.

This thesis is an exploration of the condition of critical debate in contemporary liberal democracies that is based upon a combined reading of the works of Hannah Arendt and Jurgen Habermas. It begins with an elaboration of the position that Arendt and Habermas identify a similar malaise as afflicting modern liberal democracies, which is argued to result from a shared perception that such democracies fail to create a forum for critical public engagement. The argument that their democratic theories are highly complementary is further developed through an examination of their solutions to this critical failure, for these solutions reflect a sharing of important premises concerning the nature of power and freedom on the parts of Habermas and Arendt. A complementary reading of Arendt and Habermas also allows for a synthesis of their theories that results in a highly coherent picture of the form and processes of an ideal democratic forum. This synthesis of Habermas and Arendt, however, also suggests (or, at least, allows for the theorising of) the emergence of a new genus of political actor who is unlikely to engage in such a forum – a genus hereafter referred to as homo spectaculorum. This thesis, therefore, makes three related claims. The first, and most important, is that it is possible to read Arendt and Habermas together as highly compatible democratic theorists and that their analysis of contemporary political conditions presents a single position from which to view the critical failings of liberal democracies. The second claim is that synthesising Arendt’s and Habermas’s democratic theories enables the theorising of an ideal public space, along with the emergence of homo spectaculorum. The third, and final, claim made in this thesis is that the same conditions that lead to the emergence of homo spectaculorum can be understood to undermine the emancipatory potential otherwise proffered through critical public spaces.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--McMaster University, 2006. / Supervisor: Barry Allen. Includes bibliographical references (p. 259-277).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Toronto, 2006. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-06, Section: A, page: 2340. Includes bibliographical references (p. 322-341).