Thesis (Ph.D.)--McMaster University, 2001 / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 336-362). Also available via World Wide Web.

Thesis (Th. M.)--Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, 1992. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves xviii-xxv).

Thesis (M.C.S.)--Regent College, 2001. / Abstract and vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 101-105).

Det svenska politiska systemet har under de senaste decennierna skiftat från ett korporativistiskt system, där organisationer har bjudits in att delta i det politiska beslutsfattandet, till ett mer pluralistiskt system, där lobbying är en viktig komponent. Lagstiftningen har dock inte följt utvecklingen och idag har Sverige ingen direkt lagstiftning mot lobbying.   Denna studie undersöker huruvida de svenska politikerna och de som påverkar anser att lobbying fungerar demokratiskt i Sverige idag och huruvida en lagstiftning bör instiftas eller inte. En jämförelse görs mellan de två grupperna påverkare och påverkade, för att ta reda på vad dessa respondenter anser om lobbying i Sverige utifrån ett demokratiskt perspektiv.   För att svara på syftet används tre av Robert A. Dahls demokratikriterier. Detta för att nå en förståelse huruvida lobbying fungerar demokratiskt och om en lagstiftning skulle behövas utifrån de svar som ges av de tillfrågade. En jämförelse i lagstiftning görs även med USA, som har utarbetat ett regelverk angående lobbyism. Studiens resultat visar att det finns ett demokratiskt problem med lobbying i Sverige utifrån de tre demokratikriterierna. Transparensen är ett problem samt det faktum att politiker kan gå från en politisk roll direkt till en lobbyverksamhet. En lagstiftning kring karenstid för politiker begränsar detta problem, men övrig lagstiftning, likt den i USA, tros inte ha någon effekt. Istället tros normer, moral och tryck från medborgarna vara mer effektfullt.

Tradições acadêmicas no ensino da ecologia, assim como livros-texto convencionais redigidos de forma enciclopédica muitas vezes mascaram uma história de grandes controvérsias que existe por trás dos fundamentos teóricos desta disciplina. Muitos ecólogos são formados sem se darem conta dos diversos debates conflituosos que certamente circundam o corpo teórico de seus programas de pesquisa. Contudo, basta um aprofundamento mínimo na literatura para que se perceba a grande confusão que se transformou a formalização teórica da ecologia. Com suas raízes na história natural do século XIX e com uma ênfase empiricista, a ecologia passou por uma fase de formalização teórica calcada em uma episteme dedutivo-nomológica e na modelagem matemática de sistemas dinâmicos no começo do século XX. Este enfoque no aspecto conjectural da ecologia se consolidou na década de 1960 e muitos pesquisadores passaram a alegar que este seria o método ideal para a formalização de teorias sólidas e gerais. Entretanto, na década seguinte se inicia um contra-movimento, que criticou duramente esta escola alinhada ao pensamento dos físicos, culminando em debates que resultaram em posturas de radicalismo extremo em relação a qual é o objeto de estudo da ecologia e como o ecólogo deve proceder em sua atividade. Neste momento, passa a ser crucial que o cientista se volte à filosofia e à história das ciências para entender mais profundamente as origens e os motivos dessas confusões. Este conhecimento se faz necessário para que o ecólogo possa se posicionar criticamente dentro destas controvérsias e assim (re)definir seu próprio programa de pesquisa com mais coerência. Contudo, é preciso estar preparado para uma jornada psicologicamente intensa. Para muitos, esta empreitada histórico-filosófica gera um sentimento de frustração (no mínimo um grande desconforto intelectual) ao perceberem que a epistemologia não provê uma resposta simples e consensual para perguntas muito básicas como: o que é um conhecimento cientificamente válido? Quais são os fundamentos da teoria ecológica? A falta de treinamento em epistemologia associado à uma relutância psicológica em se envolver na área, mantiveram grande parte dos ecólogos afastada do debate filosófico, fazendo com que alguns equívocos sobre a ciência ecológica se propagassem por gerações. Assim, disputas intermináveis se sucederam na literatura dividindo os ecólogos ao invés de unir-los. Criou-se uma sensação geral de que há uma dicotomia entre teoria e empiria (também vista na forma de uma dicotomia conjectura-inferência), o que me parece um problema grave pois essa divisão é ilusória; a ciência é uma fusão desses dois componentes. Esta percepção dicotômica se estende a outros temas epistemológicos muito relevantes (\\textit{e.g.} indução ou dedução, descrição de padrões ou explicação por processos e mecanismos causais, generalidade ou precisão), o que a meu ver é prejudicial para um avanço fluente do conhecimento. Esta tese é uma tentativa de contextualizar historicamente o desenvolvimento do pensamento ecológico e revisar criticamente o debate epistemológico científico, assim como algumas controvérsias heurísticas relacionadas à modelagem de padrões e processos ecológicos, para então prover um argumento favorável ao pluralismo epistemológico na ecologia. Ao final, faço uma síntese das controvérsias epistemológicas, apresentando uma proposta de como conceber um programa de pesquisa em ecologia aberto ao pluralismo epistemológico. Para isso, valerei-me da noção de caixa preta epistemológica e de redes complexas de conhecimento tanto para mostrar que o pluralismo epistemológico pode ser visto como uma questão cultural intrínseca da ciência, como também para sugerir que uma postura colaborativa em detrimento de uma competitiva (conflituosa) é muito mais intuitiva e coerente para um ecólogo do século XXI. Acredito que uma predisposição ao sincretismo cultural em detrimento de um etnocentrismo “irracional” tem grande potencial de catalisar o avanço atravancado e controverso da ciência ecológica / Academic traditions in teaching ecology, as well as conventional encyclopedical textbooks often mask a history of great controversies behind the theoretical bases of this discipline. Many ecologists are trained without realizing the many conflicting debates that surround the theoretical body of the research programs they are inserted in. However, a simple deepening in the literature is enough to sense the confusion that theoretical formalization of ecology has become. With its roots in 19th century natural sciences and with empiricist emphasis, ecology went through a phase of theoretical formalization based on a deductive-nomological epistemology and in mathematical modeling of dynamic systems in the beginning of 20th century. This focus on the conjectural aspect of ecology consolidated in the 60\'s and many researchers claimed this would be the ideal method to formalize solid and general theories. Yet in the following decade a counter-movement began, strongly criticizing this school of thought aligned with physicists, culminating in debates that resulted in extreme radicalism regarding the definition of ecology\'s study subject and how the ecologist should proceed in his activity. At this point it becomes crucial to the scientist to face philosophy and the history of sciences to further understand the origins and reasons for these confusions. This knowledge enables the ecologist to critically position oneself within these controversies and thus (re)define his own research program coherently. One should be prepared however, for an intense psychological journey. For many this historical-philosophical quest brings a sense of frustration (a great intellectual discomfort at least) since the epistemology does not provide a simple and consensual answer to basic questions such as: what is a valid scientific knowledge? What are the bases of ecological theory? This way, the lack of training in epistemology associated with psychological reluctance to get involved in this area, have kept most ecologists away from the philosophical debate, allowing some mistakes and misconceptions about the ecological sciences to propagate for generations. Thus, endless disputes in the literature divided ecologists instead of uniting them. A general sense was created that there is a dichotomy between theory and empiricism (also seen as a dichotomy between conjecture-inference), which seems to me as a serious problem given this division is illusory; science is the fusion of these two components. This dichotomous perception extends to other very important epistemological themes (e.g. induction or deduction, pattern description or explanation through causal processes and mechanisms, generality or precision), what hampers the advancement of ecological knowledge. This thesis is an attempt to contextualize historically the development of ecological thought and critically review the scientific epistemological debate, as well as some heuristic controversies related to modeling of ecological patterns and processes, to provide a favorable argument towards an epistemological pluralism in ecology. Finally, I synthesize the epistemological controversies, proposing how to conceive a research program in ecology opened to epistemological pluralism. For such I\'ll make use of the notion of an epistemological black box and of complex knowledge networks, both to show that epistemological pluralism can be seen as a cultural matter intrinsic to science, and also to suggest that a collaborative attitude instead of a competitive (conflicting) is much more intuitive and coherent with the 21st century ecologist. I believe that a predisposition to cultural syncretism in place of an “irrational” ethnocentrism has great potential to catalyze the advancement of the hampered and controversial science of ecology

Dual religious belonging is a phenomenon of individuals who identify themselves as followers of more than one religious tradition. People of faiths may find themselves in different degrees of dual or multi-religious conditions due to growing up in inter-religious marriages of their parents, exposure to multi-religious traditions or inter-religious encounters. The thesis of this study is to argue for the legitimacy of “Dual Religious Belonging” for Christians coming from Asian religious backgrounds through an assessment of the threefold theology of religions. It concludes that “Universal Access Exclusivism” can be the best model for sustaining dual religious belonging from an Evangelical perspective. The study seeks to answer the following primary research questions: 1) Theologically, can Evangelical Christians belong to more than one religious tradition? What are the arguments forwarded for dual religious belonging and how do Christians develop a theological assessment of such phenomena, particularly for Christians who hold on to the finality of Jesus Christ for salvation? 2) Within the threefold model of theology of religions, which theology can best sustain dual religious belonging for Evangelical Christians? The study offers a comparative examination of the pluralist theology of Paul Knitter, the inclusivist theology of Raimon Panikkar and the exclusivist theology of Harold Netland. The secondary research question is what are some contributions of dual religious belonging theology toward an Evangelical contextual missiology? Specifically, some contributions toward “insider movements” debates and Christian discipleship for those coming from different faith traditions will be considered. The study seeks to, first, offer a critique against pluralist and inclusivist theologies for multiple and double religious belonging, and second, forward a proposal for dual religious belonging theology for followers of Jesus Christ coming from mixed religious backgrounds from an Evangelical perspective.

This thesis rejects the position, dominant in political philosophy since Plato that the authority of states may be explained by means of a moral theory of legitimacy. It denies that it is possible even in principle to determine a principle that can endow a state with the moral entitlement to rule and create for its citizens a moral obligation of obedience which thereby authorises it to coerce them. The thesis argues that a Lockean understanding of the state leads more naturally to the position that the state is properly understood as a necessary evil granted qualified justification to coerce in order to protect people from each other. It locates this ambiguity in the moral psychology of the individuals from which a Lockean state must derive its powers and through whom it acts. It further claims that, Government officials being no different in character than the individuals over whom they rule, further coercion may be justified to raise funds by taxation to set up political institutions such as a separation of powers, and to ensure that citizens may equip themselves with the skills needed to avoid being financially dependent on the state. This justification is nonetheless provisional, and the responsibility to weigh the necessity of public coercion against the evil that it involves falls upon individual voters as much as parliamentarians and prime ministers.

Postmodern phenomena in law Abstract This thesis examines postmodernity and its manifestation in law and legal science. The first part is dedicated to achieving as precise definition of the term postmodernity as possible, as there is no general consensus, due to the fragmentary nature and instability of postmodern philosophy. Because of a limited quantity of comprehensive resources, describing postmodernity, available the historical perspective was applied in order to build a clear and compact narrative. The modernity movement is defined as it precedes postmodernity historically and philosophically. Postmodernity arose in reaction to the historical events which shaped the world of the twentieth century. From the detailed historical narrative are then synthesized the main defining characteristics of postmodernity. Those characteristics are: erosion, plurality, globalization, the fragmentary and liquid nature of society. The second part is predominantly dedicated to the topic of plurality as it is the basic element of postmodern thought. The comparative approach was chosen due to the ongoing globalization. Plurality as a postmodern phenomenon manifests itself significantly in the form of legal pluralism. The emphasis is put on defining legal pluralism, the additional meta-questions that head towards pondering...

Hållbar utveckling är ett centralt tema i högstadiets biologiundervisning. Det finns dock olika förståelser av hållbar utveckling inom svensk skola. Det ses bland annat i de tre undervisningstraditionerna faktabaserad, normativ och pluralistisk som förekommer i undervisningen. Av dessa är endast den pluralistiska kompatibel med styrdokumenten. Syftet med denna studie var att undersöka på vilket sätt dessa undervisningstraditioner finns representerade i läroböcker i biologi. Specifikt om det finns skillnader i representationen av undervisningstraditionerna inom delar av innehållet. Eftersom läroboksanvändningen bland NO-lärare är hög får läroböckernas innehåll och eventuell representation av undervisningstraditionerna påverkan på lärarnas undervisningspraktik. För analysen användes idealtyper där texterna i läroböckerna jämfördes, analyserades och kategoriserades utifrån undervisningstraditionerna. Resultatet visar att alla tre undervisningstraditioner återfinns i läroböckerna, dock finns skillnader i representationen mellan böckerna. Denna skillnad mellan böckerna kan få betydelse för lärares undervisningspraktik och som konsekvens leda till en bristande likvärdighet i undervisningen.

This document is submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree: Master of Architecture Professional at the School of Architecture and Planning, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2017. / This research report explores the spatial needs required to culturally experience public spaces through a brief study of the Mauritian context: historical, social, physical and cultural. The latter leads to theoretical research on how cultural behaviour in the Mauritian society informs an appropriate architectural design. A photographic analysis was implemented to identify the different aspects of ‘urban street culture’ as a tool to implement the ‘cultural street fair’, when creating cultural spaces in an urban environment. This has led to a better understanding of human scale and its economic and spatial limitations in a Mauritian urban context. More in-depth research on urban conditions and street functions, to fulfill required characteristics of street life was investigated to understand how to manipulate threshold features such as physical barriers, access, shelter, and opportunity for interaction. As a contextual point of view, the site, as a physical fragment of the present urban decay, was analysed through the urban theory: Finding lost spaces. This theory comprises of Figure-ground theory, Linkage theory and Place theory and multiple urban design principles / XL2018