15 resultados para minorities in science
em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça
Resumo:
Better access to knowledge and knowledge production has to be reconsidered as key to successful individual and social mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change. Indeed, concepts of sustainable development imply a transformation of science towards fostering democratisation of knowledge production and the development of knowledge societies as a strategic goal. This means to open the process of scientific knowledge production while simultaneously empowering people to implement their own visions for sustainable development. Advocates of sustainability science support this transformation. In transdisciplinary practice, they advance equity and accountability in the access to and production of knowledge at the science–society interface. UNESCO points to advancements, yet Northern dominance persists in knowledge production as well as in technology design and transfer. Further, transdisciplinary practice remains experimental and hampered by inadequate and asymmetrically equipped institutions in the North and South and related epistemological and operational obscurity. To help identify clear, practicable transdisciplinary approaches, I recommend examining the institutional route – i.e., the learning and adaptation process – followed in concrete cases. The transdisciplinary Eastern and Southern Africa Partnership Programme (1998–2013) is a case ripe for such examination. Understanding transdisciplinarity as an integrative approach, I highlight ESAPP’s three key principles for a more democratised knowledge production for sustainable development: (1) integration of scientific and “non-scientific” knowledge systems; (2) integration of social actors and institutions; and (3) integrative learning processes. The analysis reveals ESAPP’s achievements in contributing to more democratic knowledge production and South ownership in the realm of sustainable development.
Resumo:
Assessing and managing risks relating to the consumption of food stuffs for humans and to the environment has been one of the most complex legal issues in WTO law, ever since the Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures was adopted at the end of the Uruguay Round and entered into force in 1995. The problem was expounded in a number of cases. Panels and the Appellate Body adopted different philosophies in interpreting the agreement and the basic concept of risk assessment as defined in Annex A para. 4 of the Agreement. Risk assessment entails fundamental question on law and science. Different interpretations reflect different underlying perceptions of science and its relationship to the law. The present thesis supported by the Swiss National Research Foundation undertakes an in-depth analysis of these underlying perceptions. The author expounds the essence and differences of positivism and relativism in philosophy and natural sciences. He clarifies the relationship of fundamental concepts such as risk, hazards and probability. This investigation is a remarkable effort on the part of lawyer keen to learn more about the fundamentals based upon which the law – often unconsciously – is operated by the legal profession and the trade community. Based upon these insights, he turns to a critical assessment of jurisprudence both of panels and the Appellate Body. Extensively referring and discussing the literature, he deconstructs findings and decisions in light of implied and assumed underlying philosophies and perceptions as to the relationship of law and science, in particular in the field of food standards. Finding that both positivism and relativism does not provide adequate answers, the author turns critical rationalism and applies the methodologies of falsification developed by Karl R. Popper. Critical rationalism allows combining discourse in science and law and helps preparing the ground for a new approach to risk assessment and risk management. Linking the problem to the doctrine of multilevel governance the author develops a theory allocating risk assessment to international for a while leaving the matter of risk management to national and democratically accountable government. While the author throughout the thesis questions the possibility of separating risk assessment and risk management, the thesis offers new avenues which may assist in structuring a complex and difficult problem
Resumo:
This article deals with the European minorities in the period between the two world wars and with their final expulsion from nation-states at the end of World War II. First, the tensions which arose between the organised minorities and the successor states of the Habsburg Monarchy are accounted for primarily by the argument that the various minorities located within the successor states had already undergone a comprehensive processes of nationalisation within the Habsburg Empire. Therefore they were able to resist assimilation by the political elites of the new titular nations (Czechs, Poles, Rumanians, Serbs). A second topic is that of the use made of the minorities issue by Adolf Hitler to help achieve his expansionist aims. The minorities issue was central to the international destabilisation of interwar Europe. Finally, the mass expulsion of minorities (above all, Germans) after the end of the war is explained by strategic considerations on the part of the Allied powers as well as involving the nation-state regimes. It is argued, against a commonly held view, that German atrocities during the period of occupation had little to do with the decision to expel most ethnic Germans from their territories of settlement in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. The article shows that it is necessary to treat national minorities in the first half of the twentieth century as a single phenomenon which shares similar features across the various nation-states of East-Central Europe.
Resumo:
Anelis Kaiser is associate researcher at the Center for Cognitive Science at the University of Freiburg, Germany. Dr. Kaiser recently co-edited a special issue of the journal Neuroethics on gender and brain science. She is co-founder (with Isabelle Dussauge) of the interdisciplinary network NeuroGenderings, which brings together experts from the brain sciences, the humanities and science studies (STS) to critically study the sexed brain. She has published on sex and gender as constructed categories in science as well as on the topics of multilingualism and language processing in the brain. Co-sponsored with the Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies. - See more at: http://www.gc.cuny.edu/Page-Elements/Academics-Research-Centers-Initiatives/Centers-and-Institutes/Center-for-the-Study-of-Women-and-Society/Center-Events#sthash.bDeBg5fk.dpuf
Resumo:
If we postulate a need for the transformation of society towards sustainable development, we also need to transform science and overcome the fact/value split that makes it impossible for science to be accountable to society. The orientation of this paradigm transformation in science has been under debate for four decades, generating important theoretical concepts, but they have had limited impact until now. This is due to a contradictory normative science policy framing that science has difficulties dealing with, not least of all because the dominant framing creates a lock-in. We postulate that in addition to introducing transdisciplinarity, science needs to strive for integration of the normative aspect of sustainable development at the meta-level. This requires a strategically managed niche within which scholars and practitioners from many different disciplines can engage in a long-term common learning process, in order to become a “thought collective” (Fleck) capable of initiating the paradigm transformation. Arguing with Piaget that “decentration” is essential to achieve normative orientation and coherence in a learning collective, we introduce a learning approach—Cohn's “Theme-Centred Interaction”—which provides a methodology for explicitly working with the objectivity and subjectivity of statements and positions in a “real-world” context, and for consciously integrating concerns of individuals in their interdependence with the world. This should enable a thought collective to address the epistemological and ethical barriers to science for sustainable development.
Resumo:
Die Theology & Science Community, die vor einem halben Jahrhundert begründet worden ist, blüht und gedeiht. Von Anfang an lag dabei die Methodenfrage im Zentrum: wie kann man diese so verschiedenen Gebiete in Beziehung setzen? Dies soll im Folgenden unter Berücksichtigung von Fragen der Erkenntnistheorie, Fragen der Natur wissenschaftlicher und religiöser Sprache und Fragen der Theoriekonstruktion, Theoriewahl und Theorieverteidigung zu beantworten versucht werden.
Resumo:
This presentation concentrates on the role that the deportation of Christian minorities in Anatolia during the First World War played in the context of the history of law. Terminologies and the use of legal notions by contemporaries will be a special focus, because this is still helpful in the context of present-day discussions. Therefore a contextualisation as precise as possible is important, when the topic of deportation and genocide is addressed. At the same time it is important not to confuse historical and legal appraisals. In this presentation the general discussion as to the prospects and potential of a judicial punishment of violations of international legal norms before as well as during the First World War will therefore be included as much as the attitude of jurists in regard to the position of the Ottoman Empire within the international community of law abiding states. Finally this presentation will also focus on discussions at the end of the war around the trials in Istanbul and the purpose of the Paris Peace Conference. In this context and following ideas of Mahmood Mamdani the discourse on law can be shown to have served not only as a way of giving victims a voice, but also as a language of power already at the beginning of the 20th century.
Resumo:
Viktor von Weizsäcker has been a German medical doctor and philosopher, well known throughout Europe, but hardly received in the Anglo-American culture. He focusses on the crucial epistemological question how one can conduct research on living beings. The article’s title represents a key quote of his opus magnum “Der Gestaltkreis”, which works out a theory of the unity of perception and motion. According to Viktor von Weizsäcker, one cannot separate the two, meaning that we locate ourselves in a fundamental union with the living world, which has lasting influence on our capacity of perception. This idea does not seem too different from Ian Barbour’s idea about critical realism, exploring a “consciousness of ourselves as arising out of rapport, interconnection and participation in processes reaching beyond ourselves.” Both authors, Viktor von Weizsäcker and Ian Barbour, still have lasting influence on the dialog between religion and science, each in their respective cultures – a further reason to compare their core ideas, after presenting Viktor von Weizsäcker’s life and thought. Finally, the theological impact of von Weizsäcker’s thought will be assessed. Following his philosophy, it becomes clear that the miracle of creation is the condition of the possibility of any perception.
Resumo:
Previous studies have shown medical students in Germany to have little interest in research while at the same time there is a lack of physician scientists. This study’s aim is to investigate factors influencing publication productivity of physicians during and after finishing their medical doctorate. We conducted a PubMed search for physicians having received their doctoral degree at Ludwig-Maxmilians-University Munich Faculty of Medicine between 2011 and 2013 (N = 924) and identified the appropriate impact factor (IF) for each journal the participants had published in. Gender, age, final grade of the doctorate, participation in a structured doctoral study program and joint publication activities between graduate and academic supervisor were defined as factors. For analyses we used nonparametric procedures. Men show significantly more publications than women. Before their doctoral graduation men publish 1.98 (SD ± 3.64) articles on average, women 1.15 (±2.67) (p < 0.0001, d = 0.27). After completion of the doctorate (up to 06/2015), 40 % of men still publish, while only 24.3 % of women (p < 0.0001, φ = 0.17) continue to publish. No differences were found concerning the value of IFs. Similar results were found regarding the variable ‘participation in a structured doctoral study program’. Until doctoral graduation, program participants publish 2.82 (±5.41) articles, whereas participants doing their doctorate individually only publish 1.39 (±2.87) articles (p < 0.0001, d = 0.46). These differences persist in publication activities after graduation (45.5 vs. 29.7 %, p = 0.008, φ = 0.09). A structured doctorate seems to have positive influence on IFs (4.33 ± 2.91 vs. 3.37 ± 2.82, p = 0.006, d = 0.34). Further significant results concern the variables ‘final grade’ and ‘age’: An early doctoral graduation and an excellent or very good grade for the doctoral thesis positively influence publication productivity. Finally, joint publication activities between the graduate and his/her academic supervisor result in significantly higher IFs (3.64 ± 3.03 vs. 2.84 ± 2.25, p = 0.007, d = 0.28). The study’s results support the assumption about women’s underrepresentation in science as well as the relevance of structured doctoral study programs for preparing and recruiting young academics in medicine for scientific careers. Promoting women and further development of structured doctoral study programs are highly recommended.