Academic literature on the topic 'Justificatory evaluative political theory'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Justificatory evaluative political theory.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Justificatory evaluative political theory"
1
WHITHAM, WILLIAM. "A Reconsideration of John Stuart Mill's Account of Political Violence." Utilitas 26, no. 4 (August 8, 2014): 409–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820814000168.
Full textAbstract:
The received view that John Stuart Mill opposed the use of violence to attain desirable political goals has been undermined by authors stressing Mill's defence of revolutionary causes during his lifetime and his efforts to outline a justificatory theory of political violence. In light of this scholarship, claims of Mill's ostensible ‘gradualism’ with regard to the appropriate methods and pace of social progress may merit reassessment. At the same time Mill's account appears to sanction violence that respects criteria of justice but not of expediency and vice versa, making it untenable as a cogent guide for carrying out or evaluating acts of violence. That this tension is analogous to tensions elsewhere in Mill's writings provides more evidence for the view that his theoretical project was a systematic one, and raises new questions about his philosophical enterprise.
2
Moss, Giles. "Media, capabilities, and justification." Media, Culture & Society 40, no. 1 (April 24, 2017): 94–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0163443717704998.
Full textAbstract:
In this article, I evaluate the use of the ‘capability approach’ developed by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum as a normative perspective for critical media research. The concept of capabilities provides a valuable way of assessing media and captures important aspects of the relationship between media and equality. However, following Rainer Forst’s critique of outcome-oriented approaches to justice, I argue that the concept is less well placed to address important questions of power and process. In particular, when it comes to deciding which capabilities media should promote and what media structures and practices should promote them, the capability approach must accept the priority of deliberative and democratic processes of justification. Once we do this, we are urged to situate the concept of capabilities within a more process-oriented view of justice, focused not on capabilities as such but on outlining the conditions required to support such justificatory processes. After discussing the capability approach, I will outline the process-oriented theory of justice Forst has developed around the idea of the ‘right to justification’. While Forst does not discuss media in depth, I argue his theory of justice can provide a valuable alternative normative standpoint for critical media research.
3
Cowan, Robert. "Epistemic perceptualism and neo-sentimentalist objections." Canadian Journal of Philosophy 46, no. 1 (February 2016): 59–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00455091.2015.1123037.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractEpistemic Perceptualists claim that emotions are sources of immediate defeasible justification for evaluative propositions that can (and do) sometimes ground undefeated immediately justified evaluative beliefs. For example, fear can constitute the justificatory ground for a belief that some object or event is dangerous. Despite its attractiveness, the view is apparently vulnerable to several objections. In this paper, I provide a limited defence of Epistemic Perceptualism by responding to a family of objections which all take as a premise a popular and attractive view in value theory – Neo-Sentimentalism – according to which values are analysed in terms of fitting emotions.
4
Christiano, Thomas, and Gerald F. Gaus. "Justificatory Liberalism: An Essay on Epistemology and Political Theory." Philosophical Review 107, no. 3 (July 1998): 455. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2998448.
Full text
5
Estlund, David, and Gerald F. Gaus. "Justificatory Liberalism: An Essay on Epistemology and Political Theory." Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59, no. 3 (September 1999): 821. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2653803.
Full text
6
Edmundson, William A. "WHY LEGAL THEORY IS POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY." Legal Theory 19, no. 4 (December 2013): 331–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1352325213000189.
Full textAbstract:
The concept of law is not a theorist's invention but one that people use every day. Thus one measure of the adequacy of a theory of law is its degree of fidelity to the concept as it is understood by those who use it. That means “saving the truisms” as far as possible. There are important truisms about the law that have an evaluative cast. The theorist has either to say what would make those evaluative truisms true or to defend her choice to dismiss them as false of law or not of the essence of law. Thus the legal theorist must give an account of the truth grounds of the more central evaluative truisms about law. This account is a theory of legitimacy. It will contain framing judgments that state logical relations between descriptive judgments and directly evaluative judgments. Framing judgments are not directly evaluative, nor do they entail directly evaluative judgments, but they are nonetheless moral judgments. Therefore, an adequate theory of law must make (some) moral judgments. This means that an adequate theory of law has to take a stand on certain (but not all) contested issues in political philosophy. Legal theory is thus a branch of political philosophy. Moreover, one cannot be a moral-aim functionalist about legal institutions without compromising one's positivism about legal norms.
7
Brake, Elizabeth. "Rawls and Feminism: What Should Feminists Make of Liberal Neutrality?" Journal of Moral Philosophy 1, no. 3 (2004): 293–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/174046810400100305.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractI argue that Rawls’s liberalism is compatible with feminist goals. I focus primarily on the issue of liberal neutrality, a topic suggested by the work of Catharine MacKinnon. I discuss two kinds of neutrality: neutrality at the level of justifying liberalism itself, and state neutrality in political decision-making. Both kinds are contentious within liberal theory. Rawls’s argument for justice as fairness has been criticized for non-neutrality at the justificatory level, a problem noted by Rawls himself in Political Liberalism. I will defend a qualified account of neutrality at the justificatory level, taking an epistemic approach to argue for the exclusion of certain doctrines from the justificatory process. I then argue that the justification process I describe offers a justificatory stance supportive of the feminist rejection of state-sponsored gender hierarchy. Further, I argue that liberal neutrality at the level of political decision-making will have surprising implications for gender equality. Once the extent of the state’s involvement in the apparently private spheres of family and civil society is recognized, and the disproportionate influence of a sexist conception of the good on those structures—and concomitant promotion of that ideal—is seen, state neutrality implies substantive change. While—as Susan Moller Okin avowed—Rawls himself may have remained ambiguous on how to address gender inequality, his theory implies that the state must seek to create substantive, not merely formal, equality. I suggest that those substantive changes will not conflict with liberal neutrality but instead be required by it.
8
Pilapil, Renante D. "Disrespect and political resistance." Thesis Eleven 114, no. 1 (February 2013): 48–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0725513612454363.
Full textAbstract:
This article examines the critical potential of Honneth’s theory or ethics of recognition by raising two concerns as regards the success of such a project. Firstly, this article argues that Honneth’s ethical turn in critical theory might not be completely warranted and that there are good reasons to supplement his theory of recognition with an account of justificatory practices. Secondly, it argues that the complexity of the beginnings of political resistance proves that an explanative gap remains to be filled to account for the way in which personal experience of disrespect can be transformed into a collective struggle for recognition. By way of conclusion, this article posits that instead of rejecting the critical potential of Honneth’s theory, the concerns raised therein are invitations to specify his theory further, so that contemporary struggles for recognition can be understood more profoundly.
9
Knight, Jack, and Melissa Schwartzberg. "Institutional Bargaining for Democratic Theorists (or How We Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Haggling)." Annual Review of Political Science 23, no. 1 (May 11, 2020): 259–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-060118-102113.
Full textAbstract:
Contemporary political science takes bargaining to be the central mechanism of democratic decision making, though political theorists typically doubt that processes that permit the exercise of unequal power and the use of threats can yield legitimate outcomes. In this review, we trace the development of theories of institutional bargaining from the standpoint of pluralism and positive political theory before turning to the treatment of bargaining in the influential work of John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas. Their ambivalence about bargaining gave rise to a new focus on the value of negotiation and compromise but this literature constitutes an unstable midpoint between the justificatory ambitions of deliberative democracy and the desire to provide plausible models of political decision making. Instead of advocating changes in mindset or motivation, we argue that a fair bargaining process requires institutional reform, as well as a justificatory framework centered on the preservation of egalitarian decision making.
10
Trosow, Samuel E. "The Illusive Search for Justificatory Theories: Copyright, Commodification and Capital." Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 16, no. 2 (July 2003): 217–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0841820900003702.
Full textAbstract:
The traditional philosophical justifications for copyright policy fail to account for current expansionary trends. The proprietary logic of contemporary copyright policies is justified on neither utilitarian nor rights-based grounds. Instead, copyright developments are located within the broader framework of commodification and the logic of capital itself. Since copyright law has been outpaced by a technology that undermines both the legal framework and the underlying economic theory on which it is based, a critical theoretical framework rooted in political economy is needed to harmonize the use and dissemination of information with the developing productive forces in society. Central to this framework is the contradiction between use-value and exchange-value, which is inherent in every commodity. This tension, which is particularly acute in the case of the information commodity, becomes sharper with the use of new technologically enabled exclusion mechanisms, as well as with various policy initiatives that seek to expand the duration, scope, and intensity of the copyright monopoly. Reconceptualizing copyright theory through the lens of critical political economy will help raise issues that are often overlooked in the current policy environment, and should decrease the acceptance of traditional justifications without considering all of the policy alternatives.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Justificatory evaluative political theory"
1
VEZZANI, GIOVANNI. "European Muslims and liberal citizenship: reconciliation through public reason: the case of Tariq Ramadan’s citizenship theory." Doctoral thesis, Luiss Guido Carli, 2016. http://hdl.handle.net/11385/201103.
Full textAbstract:
What is politically at stake when citizens of Muslim faith are publicly presented as permanent aliens in contemporary European societies? On what grounds is such exclusion or ‘externalisation’ based? What
requirements can European citizens be reasonably expected to meet? This research analyses the subject of
Muslims’ citizenship in contemporary European societies from the perspective of normative political theory, and
more precisely from the viewpoint of John Rawls’s political liberalism, in particular in light of the idea of public reason. Whilst recent contributions in political philosophy analysing the question of citizenship of Muslims in liberal democracies from a Rawlsian standpoint have mainly focussed on the notion of an overlapping consensus, the implications of the concept of public reason on that same issue are largely unexplored. This study tries to fill
such a gap in the literature. In chapter one, I begin by framing what I call the “background problem” of the research,
namely, the claim that “Islam in Europe makes problem” and its different dimensions. I then reframe the question
under scrutiny by presenting in greater theoretical detail the problem investigated and the main research question:
Which ideal conception of citizenship should provide the common normative perspective in contemporary Western
European societies, which are characterised by both demands of inclusion of Muslims and the need for solving a
problem of mutual assurance concerning citizens’ commitment to shared terms of social cooperation, so that those
societies can be stable for the right reasons? My central thesis is that the idea of public reason provides a common
discursive platform which establishes the ground for both a public political identity for citizens and shared
standards for social and political criticism. I also argue that political liberalism specifies a peculiar evaluative
framework that allows citizens to answer the above-mentioned questions in a distinctively political way. In the
first part, I thus develop my “justificatory evaluative” methodological approach based on public reason (chapter
two). In the second part (chapters three and four), I reconstruct the idea of public reason and specify the
fundamental requirements of the justificatory evaluative approach. In the third part, I firstly attempt to demonstrate
that, with reference to the problem at hand, public reason citizenship is normatively more appealing than two
alternative ideal conceptions of citizenship, namely ‘critical republicanism’ and liberal multiculturalism (chapter
five); secondly, I apply the evaluative framework to the conception of citizenship elaborated by one of the most
renowned Muslim intellectuals in Europe: Tariq Ramadan. The purpose of such evaluation is twofold. Firstly, it
aims at examining whether and how the idea of public reason accounts for a version of European citizenship for
Muslims coming from Muslims themselves. Secondly, it aims at disclosing whether what such a Muslim
conception of citizenship in Europe says about the two dimensions of ‘stability for the right reasons’ of the system
of social cooperation (namely, inclusion and mutual assurance) is consistent with the provisions of public reason
citizenship.
Books on the topic "Justificatory evaluative political theory"
1
Justificatory liberalism: An essay on epistemology and political theory. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Find full text
2
Gaus, Gerald F., Miller David, and Alan Ryan. Justificatory Liberalism: An Essay on Epistemology and Political Theory. Oxford University Press, 1996.
Find full text
3
Justificatory Liberalism: An Essay on Epistemology and Political Theory. Oxford University Press, Incorporated, 1996.
Find full text
4
Coleman, Janet. Medieval Political Theory c.1000–1500. Edited by George Klosko. Oxford University Press, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199238804.003.0012.
Full textAbstract:
This article focuses on a selection of Christian political theorists who have been considered by scholars over many generations, indeed centuries, to have contributed to a variety of distinctive discourses about the relationships between individuals and authority. There is a sense in which what political theorizing “is” during the Middle Ages is a set of positions and justificatory explanations about “sovereign power.” The attempt to fix the boundary between sacred and temporal authority during the eleventh-century pontificate of Gregory VII is normally seen to have spawned the major and long-enduring debates in medieval political theory (and beyond) over the relation between temporal and spiritual powers. This article highlights the emergence of legal experts in canon law and civil law, to whom the name “political theorists” should not seem anachronistic. It also considers how political theory was generated as a “civil science.” Finally, it looks at some themes at the heart of medieval political theory, particularly property and poverty, the Dominican political theory of Thomas Aquinas, and Franciscans' political theory.
5
Milona, Michael. On the Epistemological Significance of Value Perception. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198786054.003.0011.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter explores the epistemological significance of the view that we can literally see, hear, and touch evaluative properties (the high-level theory of value perception). Its central contention is that, from the perspective of epistemology, the question of whether there are such high-level experiences doesn’t matter. Insofar as there are such experiences, they most plausibly emerged through the right kind of interaction with evaluative capacities that are not literally perceptual (e.g., of the sort involved in imaginative evaluative reflection). Even if these other evaluative capacities turn out not to alter the content of perceptual experience, they would still be sufficient to do all the justificatory work that high-level experiences are meant to do. The chapter closes by observing that it may matter a great deal whether a certain other picture of value perception is true. This alternative picture has it that desires and/or emotions are perceptual-like experiences of value.
6
Forst, Rainer. Normativity and Power. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198798873.001.0001.
Full textAbstract:
Humans are justificatory beings—they offer, demand, and require justifications. The rules and institutions we follow rest on narratives that have evolved over time and, taken together, constitute a dynamic and tension-laden normative order. This book presents a new approach to critical theory. Each chapter reflects on the basic principles that guide our normative thinking. The book's argument goes beyond obsolete “ideal” and “realist” theories and shows how closely the concepts of normativity and power are interrelated, and how power rests on the capacity to influence, determine, and possibly restrict the space of justifications for outsiders. By combining insights from the disciplines of philosophy, history, and the social sciences, the book revaluates theories of justice, as well as of power, and provides the tools to conceptualize the “justification narratives” that form the bedrock of our social and political life.
7
Khader, Serene J. Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190664190.003.0001.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter introduces the central argument of Decolonizing Universalism. The book seeks a way out of the anti-imperialism/normativity dilemma, according to which we face a choice between (a) opposing imperialism and reducing feminism to a parochial Western conceit or (b) opposing gender injustice and embracing Western chauvinism. The solution to this dilemma is a universalism that does not treat Western values and interests as exhaustive of feminist normative possibilities. Nonideal universalism is a position according to which feminism is opposition to sexist oppression and transnational feminisms is a justice-enhancing praxis. This conception of transnational feminisms makes it possible to imagine a genuinely normative feminist position that does not license justificatory or constitutive imperialist intervention—and that does not require commitment to controversial forms of individualism or autonomy or to gender-role eliminativism. The introduction also discusses the book’s methodology and situates the book’s project within contemporary political philosophy and feminist theory.
8
Klosko, George. The Transformation of American Liberalism. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199973415.001.0001.
Full textAbstract:
With passage of the Social Security Act, in 1935, the American government took on new social welfare functions, which have expanded ever since. As a work of political theory “on the ground,” The Transformation of American Liberalism explores the arguments American political leaders used to justify and defend social welfare programs since the Social Security Act. Students of political theory note the evolution of liberal political theory between its origins and major contemporary theorists who justify the values and social policies of the welfare state. But the transformation of liberalism in American political culture is incomplete. Beginning with Franklin Roosevelt, the arguments of America’s political leaders fall well short of values of equality and human dignity that are often thought to underlie the welfare state. Individualist—“Lockean”—values and beliefs have exerted a continuing hold on America’s leaders, constraining their justificatory arguments. The paradoxical result may be described as continuing attempts to justify new social programs without acknowledging incompatibility between the arguments necessary to do so and individualist assumptions inherent in American political culture. The American welfare state is notably ungenerous in its social welfare programs. To some extent this may be attributed to the shortcomings of public justifications. An important reason for the striking absence of strong and widely recognized arguments for social welfare programs in America’s political culture is that its political leaders did not provide them.
9
Klosko, George. Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199973415.003.0001.
Full textAbstract:
With passage of the Social Security Act, in 1935, the American government took on new social welfare functions, which have expanded ever since. The Transformation of American Liberalism explores the arguments American political leaders used to justify and defend social welfare programs since 1935. Students of political theory note the evolution of liberal political theory between its origins and major contemporary theorists who justify the values and social policies of the welfare state. But the transformation of liberalism in American political culture is incomplete. Beginning with Franklin Roosevelt, the arguments of America’s political leaders fall well short of values of equality and human dignity that are often thought to underlie the welfare state. Individualist—“Lockean”—values and beliefs have exerted a continuing hold on America’s leaders, constraining their justificatory arguments. The paradoxical result may be described as continuing attempts to justify new social programs without acknowledging incompatibility between the arguments necessary to do so and individualist assumptions inherent in American political culture. The American welfare state is notably ungenerous in its social welfare programs. To some extent this may be attributed to the shortcomings of public justifications. An important reason for the striking absence of strong and widely recognized arguments for these programs in America’s political culture is that its political leaders did not provide them.
10
Bucy, Erik P., and Patrick Stewart. The Personalization of Campaigns: Nonverbal Cues in Presidential Debates. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.52.
Full textAbstract:
Nonverbal cues are important elements of persuasive communication whose influence in political debates are receiving renewed attention. Recent advances in political debate research have been driven by biologically grounded explanations of behavior that draw on evolutionary theory and view televised debates as contests for social dominance. The application of biobehavioral coding to televised presidential debates opens new vistas for investigating this time-honored campaign tradition by introducing a systematic and readily replicated analytical framework for documenting the unspoken signals that are a continuous feature of competitive candidate encounters. As research utilizing biobehavioral measures of presidential debates and other political communication progresses, studies are becoming increasingly characterized by the use of multiple methodologies and merging of disparate data into combined systems of coding that support predictive modeling.Key elements of nonverbal persuasion include candidate appearance, communication style and behavior, as well as gender dynamics that regulate candidate interactions. Together, the use of facial expressions, voice tone, and bodily gestures form uniquely identifiable display repertoires that candidates perform within televised debate settings. Also at play are social and political norms that govern candidate encounters. From an evaluative standpoint, the visual equivalent of a verbal gaffe is the commission of a nonverbal expectancy violation, which draws viewer attention and interferes with information intake. Through second screens, viewers are able to register their reactions to candidate behavior in real time, and merging biobehavioral and social media approaches to debate effects is showing how such activity can be used as an outcome measure to assess the efficacy of candidate nonverbal communication during televised presidential debates.Methodological approaches employed to investigate nonverbal cues in presidential debates have expanded well beyond the time-honored technique of content analysis to include lab experiments, focus groups, continuous response measurement, eye tracking, vocalic analysis, biobehavioral coding, and use of the Facial Action Coding System to document the muscle movements that comprise leader expressions. Given the tradeoffs and myriad considerations involved in analyzing nonverbal cues, critical issues in measurement and methodology must be addressed when conducting research in this evolving area. With automated coding of nonverbal behavior just around the corner, future research should be designed to take advantage of the growing number of methodological advances in this rapidly evolving area of political communication research.
Book chapters on the topic "Justificatory evaluative political theory"
1
"CHAPTER IV. Justificatory Democratic Theory." In Democratic Political Theory, 121–60. Princeton University Press, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781400868469-006.
Full text
2
"Evaluative political realism: a beginning." In Political Realism in International Theory, 83–101. Cambridge University Press, 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511586392.005.
Full text
3
Moore, Margaret. "What Is Territory? Conceptual Analysis and Justificatory Burdens." In A Political Theory of Territory, 15–33. Oxford University Press, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190222246.003.0002.
Full text
4
"Evaluative political realism and human nature." In Political Realism in International Theory, 127–61. Cambridge University Press, 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511586392.007.
Full text
5
"Evaluative political realism and historical realism." In Political Realism in International Theory, 162–90. Cambridge University Press, 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511586392.008.
Full text
6
"Evaluative political realism as moral realism." In Political Realism in International Theory, 191–229. Cambridge University Press, 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511586392.009.
Full text
7
March, Andrew F. "Purposes: The Place of Justificatory Comparative Political Theory." In Islam and Liberal Citizenship, 23–64. Oxford University Press, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195330960.003.0002.
Full text
8
"State and state-systems in evaluative political realism." In Political Realism in International Theory, 102–26. Cambridge University Press, 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511586392.006.
Full text
9
Solodka, Anzhelika, and Tatiiana Moroz. "POLITICAL DISCOURSE: FUNCTIONAL-PRAGMATIC FEATURES OF TRANSLATION OF EVALUATIVE LEXICAL UNITS." In Modernization of research area: national prospects and European practices. Publishing House “Baltija Publishing”, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-221-0-27.
Full textAbstract:
Political discourse is the implementation of the language of politics, the real embodiment in the language of all means of the national language that can be used in the context of political activity. The purpose of the article is to investigate the peculiarities of the reproduction of evaluative lexical units in the Ukrainian-English translation of texts that relate to political discourse. The research identifies structural-semantic and functional-pragmatic features of the implementation of evaluative vocabulary. This goal is realized by solving the following tasks: to determine the specifics of political discourse as a type of communication, its characteristics and functions; to consider the peculiarities of the functioning and specifics of the implementation of evaluative vocabulary in modern political discourse; to study the structural and semantic aspects of the reproduction of evaluative vocabulary in the translating the texts of political discourse, taking into account their typology; to identify the basic translation strategies that are implemented in the reproduction of evaluative units. Methodology. The study was based on the analyses of 300 evaluative lexical items from the texts of the Council of Europe summits, speeches and press conferences of politicians (2021) and their relevance in the translated texts. Thematically, the materials cover a wide range of both domestic and foreign policy issues. The research used qualitative and quantitative analyses. Results of the survey showed the pragmatic factors, identified as a result of the comparative analysis. They determine the translator’s focus on the implementation of one of the selected strategies. These factors include: the affiliation of the original text to a particular type of discourse, the dependence of the evaluative characteristics of foreign text and the specifics of the functioning of evaluative vocabulary from the dominant functions of the political discourse; focus on the addressee of the translation, the presence of background knowledge and evaluative stereotypes, that allows to determine the potential response; the purpose of translation, which implies that the translator has certain attitudes. Practical implications of this research is in using theoretical research results when teaching courses in translation theory and practice, sociolinguistics, pragmalinguistics, as well as in translation practice and professional activities of specialists in political technology and PR management, semiotics of business communication.Value/originality. The research developed the stratagies of intensification and deintensification for evaluative units’ translation. The focus on the intensification strategy is based on discrediting the object of evaluation; criticism of the opponent’s actions; specification of the assessed situation; attracting attention; positive presentation. The basis of the deintensification strategy is the following attitude: diplomacy in criticism, political correctness in evaluation, correction of the linguistic image of the subject of evaluation, justification and support of the political course.
10
Fowler, Timothy. "The Aims of a Moral Theory." In Liberalism, Childhood and Justice, 3–8. Policy Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529201635.003.0001.
Full textAbstract:
The chapter defends the use of ideal theory, and that moral theory should rely on insights from the social sciences. An ideal theory is one that assumes away some political constraints, while the resulting model is unrealistic it plays a vital evaluative function. The conclusions of the social sciences matter in virtue of concepts like wellbeing, which are partly empirical.