You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
In the fourth edition of The Philosophy of Sex, distinguished philosophers and social critics confront a variety of issues, including prostitution, adultery, masturbation, homosexuality, and the different attitudes men and women have about sex. The fourth edition includes an entirely new section on Kant and sex, as well as new essays by Michael E. Levin, Cheshire Calhoun, Irving Singer, Pat Califia, and Alan Soble. Visit our website for sample chapters!
The question of what constitutes sexual harassment—from suggestive remarks to outright threats, from off-color jokes to lewd posters on office walls—is contentious, as is the question of how to address sexual harassment. Do all instances of sexual harassment constitute sex discrimination? Are some instances merely sexual attraction gone wrong? Do social policies aimed at eliminating sexual harassment in the workplace violate freedom of expression or do they make working relationships possible between women and men? In this uncompromising yet respectful debate, two philosophers of widely divergent views present clear arguments and then respond directly to each other's reasoning. LeMonchek argues for a feminist perspective on sexual harassment that is sensitive to the politics of gender. Hajdin contends that this perspective is both morally confusing and legally problematic, and that sexual harassment can be better addressed by traditional moral and legal categories.
No theory is more passionately and widely defined, or decried, than is liberalism in contemporary Anglo-American philosophy. But what is this theory, on which so much ink is spilled? This collection of original essays by leading specialists in political philosophy, legal theory, and economics offers answers to that question, by exploring the theoretical commitments of liberals and some of the practical implications of their view. Among the topics explored is the distinction between liberalism and conservatism, and the degree to which liberals must be committed to neutrality, individualism, equality, freedom, and a contractarian theory of justification. The practical implications of liberalism are further examined by considerations of the proper role of the liberal state in undertaking egalitarian redistribution, the provision of public goods, and retributive punishment. The papers assembled by Narveson and Dimock will be of benefit to anyone working in the areas of political philosophy, political theory, or political economics.
Drawing on implications from ethics, theology, law, politics, and education, this book argues that we can decide what is right by describing particular cases in detail, without the aid of ethical theories and principles.
The aim of this collection is to present the work of Yugoslav philosophers who approach philosophy in a analytic manner. I have sought contributions from all philosophers of whom I knew to be working in this tradition. Not all sent their contributions; but I should say that the majority did. As a consequence of so wide an appeal, the papers published here exhibit not only a variety of topics but also differences in quality. This, I think, is to be expected given that the aim is to present the work of a group of philosophers who share only a poorly defined and general approach to philosophy. Of many people who have helped me bring out this collection, I can mention only a few. Jovan Babic gav...
Section I examines historical philosophical understandings of expertise in order to situate the current institution of bioethics. Section II focuses on philosophical analyses of the concept of expertise, asking, among other things, how it should be understood, how it can be acquired, and what such expertise warrants. Finally, section III addresses topics in bioethics and how ethics expertise should or should not be brought to bear in these areas, including expertise in the court room, in the hospital room, in the media, and in making policy. 2. A GUIDED HISTORICAL TOUR As Scott LaBarge points out, Plato’s dialogues can be viewed as an extended treatment of the concept of moral expertise, s...
Appendix C: Bibliography -- Appendix D: Keyword Index -- About the Editor
Do all animals have rights? Is it morally wrong to use mice or dogs in medical research, or rabbits and cows as food? How ought we resolve conflicts between the interests of humans and those of other animals? Philosophical inquiry is essential in addressing such questions; the answers given must have enormous practical importance. Here for the first time in the same volume, the animal rights debate is argued deeply and fully by the two most articulate and influential philosophers representing the opposing camps. Each makes his case in turn to the opposing case. The arguments meet head on: Are we humans morally justified in using animals as we do? A vexed and enduring controversy here receives its deepest and most eloquent exposition.
This vigorous debate between two distinguished philosophers presents two views on a topic of worldwide importance: the role of religion in politics. Audi argues that citizens in a free democracy should distinguish religious and secular considerations and give them separate though related roles. Wolterstorff argues that religious elements are both appropriate in politics and indispensable to the vitality of a pluralistic democracy. Each philosopher first states his position in detail, then responds to and criticizes the opposing viewpoint. Written with engaging clarity, Religion in the Public Square will spur discussion among scholars, students, and citizens.
R. M. Hare has brought together in this volume the best of his uncollected essays in moral philosophy, several of them previously unpublished or revised for this collection. They span the whole range of his ethical interests; from the most abstract to the most down-to-earth. The reader will find here the bases of his ethical theory in Kantian prescriptivism, utilitarianism, and the logic of imperatives, and will see that theory applied to issues of bioethics, medical ethics, business ethics, loyalty and obedience, and racism.