The Modified Direct Analysis Method: an Extension of the Direct Analysis Method

The purpose of this research project is to study an innovative method for the stability assessment of structural steel systems, namely the Modified Direct Analysis Method (MDM). This method is intended to simplify an existing design method, the Direct Analysis Method (DM), by assuming a sophisticated second-order elastic structural analysis will be employed that can account for member and system instability, and thereby allow the design process to be reduced to confirming the capacity of member cross-sections. This last check can be easily completed by substituting an effective length of KL = 0 into existing member design equations. This simplification will be particularly useful for structural systems in which it is not clear how to define the member slenderness L/r when the laterally unbraced length L is not apparent, such as arches and the compression chord of an unbraced truss. To study the feasibility and accuracy of this new method, a set of 12 benchmark steel structural systems previously designed and analyzed by former Bucknell graduate student Jose Martinez-Garcia and a single column were modeled and analyzed using the nonlinear structural analysis software MASTAN2. A series of Matlab-based programs were prepared by the author to provide the code checking requirements for investigating the MDM. By comparing MDM and DM results against the more advanced distributed plasticity analysis results, it is concluded that the stability of structural systems can be adequately assessed in most cases using MDM, and that MDM often appears to be a more accurate but less conservative method in assessing stability.

An Analysis of Capacities, Moral Hierarchies, and the Moral Status of Non-Human Animals in Contemporary Animal Rights Work

The primary objective of this thesis is to demonstrate the pernicious impact that moral hierarchies have on our perception and subsequent treatment of non-human animals. Moral hierarchies in general are characterized by a dynamic in which one group is considered to be fundamentally superior to a lesser group. This thesis focuses specifically on the moral hierarchies that arise when humans are assumed to be superior to non-human animals in virtue of their advanced mental capabilities. The operative hypothesis of this thesis is essentially that moral hierarchies thwart the provision of justice to non-human animals in that they function as a justification for otherwise impermissible actions. When humans are assumed to be fundamentally superior to non-human animals then it becomes morally permissible for humans to kill non-human animals and utilize them as mere instrumentalities. This thesis is driven primarily by an in-depth analysis of the approaches to animal rights that are provided by Peter Singer, Tom Regan, and Gary Francione. Each of these thinkers claim that they overcome anthropocentrism and provide approaches that preclude the establishment of a moral hierarchy. One of the major findings of this thesis, however, is that Singer and Regan offer approaches that remain highly anthropocentric despite the fact that each thinker claims that they have overcome anthropocentrism. The anthropocentrism persists in these respective approaches in that each thinkers gives humans Regan and Singer have different conceptions of the criteria that are required to afford a being moral worth, but they both give preference to beings that have the cognitive ability to form desires regarding the future.. As a result, a moral hierarchy emerges in which humans are regarded to be fundamentally superior. Francione, however, provides an approach that does not foster a moral hierarchy. Francione creates such an approach by applying the principle of equal consideration of interests in a consistent manner. Moreover, Francione argues that mere sentience is both a necessary and sufficient condition for being eligible and subsequently receiving moral consideration. The upshot of this thesis is essentially that the moral treatment of animals is not compatible with the presence of a moral hierarchy. As a result, this thesis demonstrates that future approaches to animal rights must avoid the establishment of moral hierarchies. The research and analysis within this thesis demonstrates that this is not a possibility, however, unless all theories of justice that are to accommodate animals abandon the notion that cognition matters morally.

Three Strategies for Promoting Intellectual Engagement in Advanced Undergraduate Seminars

With the humanities increasingly contested, we must adopt pedagogical approaches that promote the integral role of humanistic inquiry in student academic achievement. Whether they explore the eighteenth-century novel, cultural artifacts of the Third Republic, or sociopolitical controversies in contemporary literature, the three models described in this article propose innovative learning strategies for advanced undergraduate French and Francophone Studies seminars that fulfill the humanistic goals of the American university. From directed close reading exercises to analysis of the historical archive to creative exploratory writing, these activities engage students intellectually with complex cultural and narrative materials from diverse traditions and periods.