Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Objections on the merits.
Статті в журналах з теми "Objections on the merits"
Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями
Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Objections on the merits".
Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.
Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.
Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.
1
Orellana, Marcos A. "Saramaka People V. Suriname. Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs)." American Journal of International Law 102, no. 4 (October 2008): 841–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/20456684.
Повний текст джерела
2
Cameron, Lauren. "Mary Shelley's Malthusian Objections in The Last Man." Nineteenth-Century Literature 67, no. 2 (September 1, 2012): 177–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/ncl.2012.67.2.177.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This essay considers Mary Shelley's The Last Man (1826) as intervening in the ongoing debate between Thomas Malthus and William Godwin. Malthus published An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798) in large part as a response to Godwin's Enquiry Concerning Political Justice (1793) and “Of Avarice and Profusion” (1797); Godwin later wrote an extended refutation of Malthus in Of Population (1820). Mary Shelley uses The Last Man, a story of the end of the human species, in part as a meditation on the merits of Malthus's philosophical positions in the Essay on the Principle of Population, but she seems to disagree with a number of the mechanisms he identifies: in contrast to Malthus, Shelley identifies a blind and random nature rather than any divine plan as controlling population change, and disease rather than food scarcity as the primary cause of population reduction, but insists upon the importance of individuating and empathizing with the suffering.
3
Szaz, Paul C. "Case Analysis: Comment on the Genocide Case (Preliminary Objections)." Leiden Journal of International Law 10, no. 1 (March 1997): 163–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156597000150.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
On 11 July 1996, the International Court of Justice, in its third Substantive decision and first Judgment in respect of the dispute brought before it by Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosnia or BH) against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Yugoslavia or FRY) under Article IX of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, dismissed all the preliminary objections that had been raised by Yugoslavia, as well as several additional bases of jurisdiction invoked by Bosnia. The Court also found that it had jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute and that the application filed by Bosnia on 20 March 1993 was admissible. It thus positioned itself, over three years after the application had been filed, to resume the proceedings to consider the case on its merits, though still on an somewhat lcisurely schedule.
4
DEVOLDER, KATRIEN. "Discriminatory Conscientious Objections in Healthcare: A Response to Ancell and Sinnott-Armstrong." Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 28, no. 02 (April 2019): 316–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0963180119000124.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract:Aaron Ancell and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (A&SA) propose a pragmatic approach to problems arising from conscientious objections in healthcare. Their primary focus is on private healthcare systems like that in the United States. A&SA defend three claims: (i) many conscientious objections in healthcare are morally permissible and should be lawful, (ii) conscientious objections that involve invidious discrimination are morally impermissible, but (iii) even invidiously-discriminatory conscientious objections should not always be unlawful, as there is a better way to protect patient rights. Pursuant to (iii), A&SA propose a framework that legally allows discriminatory conscientious objections, but that shifts the financial costs associated with such objections from patients to the clinics that employ doctors who discriminate against patients. Though their proposal is controversial, it has attractive features, and merits further discussion. In this paper, I remain neutral on the third claim A&SA advance in support of their proposal, but point out a problem with the two first claims. In the light of my criticisms, I propose to modify their proposal so that costs are shifted to clinics in a broader range of cases.
5
Goligher, Ewan C., Lorenzo Del Sorbo, Angela M. Cheung, Shabbir M. H. Alibhai, Lester Liao, Alexandra Easson, Janice Halpern, E. Wesley Ely, Daniel P. Sulmasy, and Stephen W. Hwang. "Why conscientious objection merits respect." Canadian Medical Association Journal 188, no. 11 (August 8, 2016): 822.2–823. http://dx.doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.1150113.
Повний текст джерела
6
Fehige, Yiftach. "The Book of Job as a Thought Experiment: On Science, Religion, and Literature." Religions 10, no. 2 (January 24, 2019): 77. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel10020077.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This paper presents a philosophical critique of the proposal that the Book of Job is a theological thought experiment about divine providence. Eight possible objections are entertained. They guide the discussion of the proposal. It is concluded that the proposal has more merits than perils.
7
Marchuk, Iryna. "Application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russian Federation) (Preliminary Objections) (I.C.J.)." International Legal Materials 59, no. 3 (June 2020): 339–416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2020.26.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
On November 8, 2019, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered a highly anticipated judgment on the preliminary objections raised by the Russian Federation with respect to the lack of the Court's jurisdiction over the claims brought by Ukraine under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) and the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (ICSFT). The Court overwhelmingly rejected all of Russia's preliminary objections under both Conventions and confirmed the admissibility of Ukraine's claims under the CERD. Therefore, Ukraine's case will be heard on the merits in its entirety.
8
BROWN, CAMPBELL. "PRIORITY OR SUFFICIENCY …OR BOTH?" Economics and Philosophy 21, no. 2 (October 2005): 199–220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0266267105000568.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Prioritarianism is the view that we ought to give priority to benefiting those who are worse off. Sufficientism, on the other hand, is the view that we ought to give priority to benefiting those who are not sufficiently well off. This paper concerns the relative merits of these two views; in particular, it examines an argument advanced by Roger Crisp to the effect that sufficientism is the superior of the two. My aim is to show that Crisp's argument is unsound. While I concede his objections against the particular prioritarian views that he considers, I propose a different version of prioritarianism that is invulnerable to those objections.
9
McDonnell, Bianca. "Theodoros Adamakopoulos and Others v. Republic of Cyprus, ICSID Case No ARB/15/49, Decision on Jurisdiction, 7 February 2020." European Investment Law and Arbitration Review Online 5, no. 1 (December 11, 2020): 315–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/24689017_013.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This case note examines the findings of the Tribunal in the Decision on Jurisdiction in Adamakopoulos v. Cyprus, focusing on Respondent’s objections based on the alleged incompatibility of the BIT S and the EU Treaties, and the mass claim nature of the proceeding. The decision of the majority of the Tribunal in dismissing the EU law objection adds to a body of investment arbitration jurisprudence in which similar reasoning has been used to dismiss comparable objections. However, the dissenting opinion of Marcelo Kohen is the first time that an arbitrator, presented with an intra- EU investment arbitration claim, has considered that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction on the basis of the incompatibility between the relevant BIT S and EU law. Furthermore, Adamakopoulos is one of the few ‘mass claim’ arbitrations brought under the ICSID Rules. If it proceeds to the merits stage as planned, it will provide an opportunity for the Tribunal to resolve questions regarding the management of the procedure under the ICSID framework with such a large group of claimants, whilst maintaining the right to be heard, procedural equality and fairness.
10
Oral, Nilüfer, and Massimo Lando. "International Procedure between Past and Future – Procedural Developments in Law of the Sea Dispute Settlement in 2021." Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 21, no. 1 (March 15, 2022): 198–224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341470.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract Only two decisions in law of the sea dispute settlement cases were issued in 2021. Not a single arbitral award was issued in 2021, and the only case decided by the International Court of Justice was on the merits in the maritime dispute between Somalia and Kenya. Finally, a Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea rendered a judgment on preliminary objections in the maritime dispute between Mauritius and the Maldives.
11
Purcell, Sebastian. "Liberation Politics as a (New) Socialist Politics." Radical Philosophy Review 21, no. 1 (2018): 53–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/radphilrev201832982.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Liberation philosophy was born from radical, socialist roots. Yet recent developments by major figures in the tradition, including Enrique Dussel, would appear to position the movement unhelpfully closer to liberalism. The present article argues that this is a misconception, and that Liberation philosophy rather suggests a new ideal for conceptions of political justice, one that also helpfully avoids a number of common objections that dog traditional socialist proposals. The work of John Rawls is used as a dialogical counter point to suggest the relative merits for the new approach Liberation philosophy suggest for socialism.
12
Rusavuk, Andre Leo. "Optimistic Molinism." Philosophia Christi 21, no. 2 (2019): 371–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/pc201921233.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Some Molinists claim that a perfectly good God would actualize a world that is salvifically optimal, that is, a world in which the balance between the saved and damned is optimal and cannot be improved upon without undesirable consequences. I argue that given some plausible principles of rationality, alongside the assumptions Molinists already accept, God’s perfect rationality necessarily would lead him to actualize a salvifically optimal world; I call this position “Optimistic Molinism.” I then consider objections and offer replies, concluding that Optimistic Molinism is undefeated (for now) and merits further exploration.
13
Schatz, Valentin Johannes. "The Status of Crimea and the Sea of Azov as a Jurisdictional Hurdle in Ukraine v. Russia." Review of Central and East European Law 46, no. 3-4 (December 8, 2021): 400–415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15730352-bja10053.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract On 21 February 2020, the arbitral tribunal constituted under Annex vii of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) in the Dispute Concerning Coastal State Rights in the Black Sea, Sea of Azov, and Kerch Strait (Ukraine v. the Russian Federation) rendered its award concerning preliminary objections. This comment focuses on the arbitral tribunal’s findings concerning Russia’s two most important and far-reaching objections, both of which concern jurisdiction ratione materiae. First, it argues that the arbitral tribunal convincingly declined jurisdiction over those of Ukraine’s claims, which would have required the arbitral tribunal to decide the dispute between Ukraine and Russia concerning sovereignty over Crimea. Second, this comment analyzes the arbitral tribunal’s conclusion that the parties’ dispute concerning the status of the Sea of Azov and Kerch Strait was not of an exclusively preliminary character and must, therefore, be reserved for the proceedings on the merits.
14
Green, Fergus, and Ingrid Robeyns. "On the Merits and Limits of Nationalising the Fossil Fuel Industry." Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 91 (April 4, 2022): 53–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1358246122000030.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractWe explore the desirability of an idea that has not received the attention it deserves by political philosophers: that governments should bring privately-owned fossil fuel companies into public ownership with a view to managing their wind-down in the public interest – often simply referred to as ‘nationalising the fossil fuel industry’. We aim to make a conditional case for public ownership of fossil fuel companies. We will assume certain conditions about government motivations and capacities that are similar to assumptions made generally in the philosophical and economic analysis of climate policies: that the government is suitably motivated, has effective control over the companies it acquires, and is able to sustain this motivation and control for long-enough to wind-down acquired companies in the public interest. We argue that bringing fossil fuel companies into public ownership, under these conditions, allows the government to take ten actions that are in the public interest, which will enhance social justice, enable a fair division of burdens and benefits, and strengthen democracy. We consider four plausible objections. While some of these point to the need for further research, they do not undermine our claim that nationalising the fossil fuel industry is a policy option that merits serious consideration.
15
Bodansky, Daniel, and Barbara Kwiatkowska. "Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago. Award on Jurisdiction and Merits." American Journal of International Law 101, no. 1 (January 2007): 149–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0002930000029602.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago. Award on Jurisdiction and Merits. At <http://www.pca-cpa.org/ENGLISH/RPC/>, available at 45 ILM 800 (2006).UN Convention on the Law of the Sea Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal, April 11, 2006.The dispute addressed in the Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago arbitration emerged during nine rounds of negotiations concerning delimitation of die maritime boundary in the western, central, and eastern sectors of their overlapping claims to the continental shelf and 200-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the Caribbean Sea (five rounds), along with associated questions posed by the continuing access for Barbadian fisherfolk to flying fish stocks south of a prospective equidistance line in the western sector (four rounds). In February 2004, according to Barbados, the prime minister of Trinidad and Tobago declared the issue of the maritime boundary “intractable” (para. 56) and invited Barbados to proceed, if it so wished, with arbitration. Barbados then invoked the compulsory arbitration provisions of Part XV, Section 2, of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOS Convention). Upon its establishment, the Annex VII Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago Arbitral Tribunal [Tribunal], which comprised President Stephen M. Schwebel and arbitrators Ian Brownlie, Vaughan A. Lowe, Francisco Orrego Vicuña, and Sir Arthur Watts, adopted its Rules of Procedure and issued four orders by year's end. After joining Trinidad and Tobago's preliminary objections to the merits phase, the Tribunal held hearings in London on October 17-28,2005. The vital interests of the two states in valuable oil and fishery resources were reflected in the high intensity of the factual and legal (both procedural and substantive) contentions forcefully disputed by the parties as represented by leading international counsel, and a number of procedurally incidental issues arose in the context of the proceedings’ confidentiality and the treatment of evidence.
16
Sarzo, Matteo. "Res judicata, Jurisdiction ratione materiae and Legal Reasoning in the Dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia before the International Court of Justice." Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 16, no. 2 (December 5, 2017): 224–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341355.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract With the aim of barring Nicaragua’s fresh request for the delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, Colombia raised the issue of the res judicata effect of the previous decision of 2012, rendered in the Territorial and Maritime Dispute, whereby the icj had apparently settled the case and dismissed on the merits the same request. In the Judgment on preliminary objections of 2016, relating to the “new” case Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Nicaragua and Colombia beyond 200 nautical miles from the Nicaraguan Coast, the icj held that no binding force attached to the operative part of the 2012 ruling. The outcome of the incidental proceedings was not predictable as one might have expected, given that the decision was taken with the casting vote of the President and prompted a strong dissent among some judges. This occurrence gives clear evidence of the interplay between several intertwined issues of international law, which the majority was called upon to deal with and balance in the present case, such as the interpretation of Article 76, paragraph 8 of the unclos, the principles of res judicata and jurisdiction ratione materiae and the duty to give reasons. The article aims to demonstrate that the Court dismissed Colombia’s third preliminary objection for underlying reasons of judicial policy, namely to secure its previous judgment of 2012 from any potential claim relating to inadequate reasoning, if construed as a final rejection on the merits.
17
Pundik, Amit. "Statistical Evidence and Individual Litigants: A Reconsideration of Wasserman's Argument from Autonomy." International Journal of Evidence & Proof 12, no. 4 (November 2008): 303–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1350/ijep.2008.12.4.304.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The use of statistical evidence in court has attracted long-running controversy. Some uses of statistical evidence seem intuitively wrong, both in real cases (for example, Sally Clark) and in hypothetical examples (for example, the Gatecrasher Paradox). Yet, explaining why has proven to be difficult. One promising approach is that of Wasserman, who claims that using statistical evidence demeans the litigant's individuality and autonomy. This article presents Wasserman's argument, explores its merits, and defends it from some objections. However, the article also identifies six significant weaknesses, which have to be overcome before Wassermann's account can successfully identify the circumstances in which statistical evidence should be used or restricted.
18
R Gillham, Alex. "How Problematic is an Unpopulated Hell?" Forum Philosophicum 25, no. 1 (June 25, 2020): 107–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.35765/forphil.2020.2501.7.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The Problem of Suffering (PoS) claims that there is tension between the existence of a perfect God and suffering. The Problem of Hell (PoH) is a version of PoS claiming that a perfect God would lack morally sufficient reasons to allow individuals to be damned to Hell eternally. A few traditional solutions have been developed to PoH, but each of them is problematic. As such, if there is a solution to PoH that is resilient to these problems, then it deserves our attention. In this paper, I develop such a solution. I call this the Unpopulated Hell View (UHV), which claims that Hell exists as a place where eternal damnation could take place, although it never does. First, I explain how UHV solves PoH. Next, I develop four objections against UHV and defend UHV against them. I argue that although some of these objections do more damage to UHV than others, UHV has satisfying responses to all of them. Ultimately I conclude that UHV merits consideration as a novel solution to PoH because it is less problematic than the traditional ones.
19
R Gillham, Alex. "Threats, Coercion, and Willingness to Damn." Forum Philosophicum 25, no. 2 (December 4, 2020): 235–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.35765/forphil.2020.2502.16.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In this paper, I develop and evaluate three new objections to the Un- populated Hell View (UHV). First, I consider whether UHV is false because it presupposes that God makes threats, which a perfect being would not do. Second, I evaluate the argument that UHV is false because it entails that God coerces us and therefore limits our freedom to an objectionable degree. Third, I consider whether UHV is false because it implies that God is willing to damn some individuals to Hell. I conclude that none of these objections defeats UHV. First, even if God’s creation or allowance of Hell constitutes a threat, a perfect God might choose to threaten us when doing so is in our best interest. Second, God’s creation or allowance of Hell is not coercive and does not limit our freedom to an objectionable degree. Third, although damnation in Hell is possible, God is unwilling to actualize it. In light of these findings, I stand by the conclusion from my initial article: UHV merits further consideration as a solution to the Problem of Hell.
20
Lando, Massimo, and Nilüfer Oral. "Jurisdictional Challenges and Institutional Novelties – Procedural Developments in Law of the Sea Dispute Settlement in 2020." Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 20, no. 1 (March 29, 2021): 191–221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341444.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract In 2020, law of the sea tribunals rendered one decision on jurisdiction and decided one case on the merits. First, the arbitral tribunal in the Azov Sea and Kerch Strait dispute dismissed the jurisdictional objections raised by the Russian Federation and thus will proceed to hear the merits of Ukraine’s claims. Second, the arbitral tribunal in the Enrica Lexie Incident case found, after upholding its jurisdiction in relation to the dispute before it, that the Italian marines who had shot an Indian fisherman in India’s Exclusive Economic Zone were entitled to immunity under international law and that Italy had breached certain provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). These two arbitral awards have confirmed and developed certain trends in the jurisprudence of law of the sea tribunals. In addition, a novelty in 2020 was the conclusion of a Model Agreement between Singapore and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), for the latter to be able to discharge its judicial business in Singapore. Last, the Meeting of the States Parties to UNCLOS elected five new members of ITLOS and re-elected two.
21
Mogensen, Andreas L. "Meaning, Medicine, and Merit." Utilitas 32, no. 1 (September 23, 2019): 90–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0953820819000360.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractGiven the inevitability of scarcity, should public institutions ration healthcare resources so as to prioritize those who contribute more to society? Intuitively, we may feel that this would be somehow inegalitarian. I argue that the egalitarian objection to prioritizing treatment on the basis of patients’ usefulness to others is best thought of as semiotic: i.e. as having to do with what this practice would mean, convey, or express about a person's standing. I explore the implications of this conclusion when taken in conjunction with the observation that semiotic objections are generally flimsy, failing to identify anything wrong with a practice as such and having limited capacity to generalize beyond particular contexts.
22
Francescotti, Robert. "Maximality, Function, and the Many." Metaphysica 20, no. 2 (October 25, 2019): 175–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mp-2019-2016.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract In the region where some cat sits, there are many very cat-like items that are proper parts of the cat (or otherwise mereologically overlap the cat), but which we are inclined to think are not themselves cats, e.g. all of Tibbles minus the tail. The question is, how can something be so cat-like without itself being a cat. Some have tried to answer this “Problem of the Many” (a problem that arises for many different kinds of things we regularly encounter, including desks, persons, rocks, and clouds) by relying on a mereological maximality principle, according to which, something cannot be a member of a kind K if it is a large proper part of, or otherwise greatly mereologically overlaps, a K. It has been shown, however, that a maximality constraint of this type, i.e. one that restricts mereological overlap, is open to strong objections. Inspired by the insights of, especially, Sutton and Madden, I develop a type of functional-maximality principle that avoids these objections (and has other merits), and thereby provides a better answer to the Problem of the Many.
23
Coleman, Sam. "The merits of higher-order thought theories." Trans/Form/Ação 41, spe (2018): 31–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0101-3173.2018.v41esp.04.p31.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract Over many years and in many publications David Rosenthal has developed, defended and applied his justly well-known higher-order thought theory of consciousness.2 In this paper I explain the theory, then provide a brief history of a major objection to it. I suggest that this objection is ultimately ineffectual, but that behind it lies a reason to look beyond Rosenthal's theory to another sort of HOT theory. I then offer my own HOT theory as a suitable alternative, before concluding in a final section.
24
Evans, Malcom D., and Chanaka Wickremasinghe. "I. Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Cango v Belgium), Preliminary Objections and Merits, Judgment of 14 February 2002." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 52, no. 3 (July 2003): 775–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/52.3.775.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
On declining to make an order for provisional measures in the case concerning the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000, the International Court of Justice nevertheless indicated that it was desirable that the Court should deal with the issues raised by the case ‘as soon as possible’, and that it was appropriate therefore to seek to determine the application ‘with all expedition’.1 In the event, questions of admissibility and the merits were taken together and the Parties agreed to file a single set of written pleadings each, enabling the Court to hold oral hearings in October 2001 and to render a final judgment on 14 February 20022 (ie, only about 16 months after the original application by the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)). Despite the speed with which the Court dealt with the case, its judgment has come in for considerable comment and criticism from a number of quarters3 as much for what is not said, as for what is in fact contained in the rather spare terms of the judgment. It will be suggested here that the ratio decidendi of the case is in fact rather confined, and that caution should be adopted in seeking to draw wider implications from what was said or left unsaid.
25
Mohammad Amin Al- Manasyeh, Mohammad Amin Al Manasyeh. "The rule of meeting for Friday Lesson between following and fabrication "Jurisprudence fundamentalism study": حكم الاجتماع لدرس الجمعة بين الاتباع والابتداع " دراسة أصولية فقهية "". Journal of Islamic Sciences 4, № 7 (30 грудня 2021): 103–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.26389/ajsrp.m181121.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This research aims to indicate the ruling of the meeting for the study before Friday according to an authentic methodology based on modern, fundamentalist, doctrinal and purpose aspects. The study adopted a complex approach of descriptive and analytical approaches based on extrapolation and comparison, taking into account the steps and conditions of scientific research used in Islamic studies. After examining the merits of the meeting to examine Friday between the followers and the innovation of evidence and objections, it was found that it was permissible to say that it was permissible, both in terms of the validity and preponderance of the evidentiary orientation, in terms of the strength and implications of the evidence and its implications for the purpose, and documents that emerged through a set of evidence; fundamentalism and jurisprudence.
26
Fontanelli, Filippo, and Attila Tanzi. "Jurisdiction and Admissibility in Investment Arbitration. A View from the Bridge at the Practice." Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 16, no. 1 (June 21, 2017): 3–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341339.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals and the admissibility of inter-State claims under international law are central to international adjudication, operating as a gateway to the litigation on the merits – the end goal of the proceedings. Still, these concepts remain inherently under-defined, and can be shaped in multiple ways to formulate preliminary objections in international litigation in general. International investor-State arbitration adds specific aspects and complexities to the issue. This introductory contribution accounts for the theoretical deficiencies underpinning the notions of jurisdiction and admissibility, with a special focus on international investment arbitration, and introduces the selected case-studies which form the subject-matter of the articles in this Special Issue. The recent Urbaser award is also used as an example of the unexplored potential of novel – and critical – legal argumentation relating to the jurisdiction of investment tribunals.
27
White, Nigel. "Case Analysis: To Review or Not to Review? The Lockerbie Cases Before the World Court." Leiden Journal of International Law 12, no. 2 (June 1999): 401–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156599000187.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
On 27 February 1998, the International Court of Justice rejected the preliminary objections of the US and of the UK in the cases concerning Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention Arising From the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie. The arguments made to the Court, and its decisions on jurisdiction and admissibility, are examined with a view to ascertaining the issues facing the Court, as well as the possible outcomes, if the cases reach the merits stage. The disputes over the Montreal Convention are considered, but particular attention is paid to the legal effects and, more widely, the legality of the relevant Security Council resolutions (Resolutions 748 and 883). The underlying question to be considered is whether there are any indications in the judgments that the Court is moving towards review of those resolutions.
28
Williams, Howard. "Metamorphosis or Palingenesis? Political Change in Kant." Review of Politics 63, no. 4 (2001): 693–722. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034670500032137.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This article looks at Kant's attitude to political change by examining closely the contrast he draws between palingenesis and metamorphosis in his doctrine of right (1797). The article attempts to explain why Kant prefers the use of metamorphosis as an analogy and looks closely at his objections to the use of palingenesis. Here Kant's treatment of palingenesis is compared with the use of the term made by the eighteenth-century Genevan biologist Charles Bonnet. It is suggested that Kant's rejection of rebellion and revolution is connected to his advocacy of gradual, organic change as conveyed in the notion of metamorphosis. This notion is explored according to eighteenth-century and present scientific understandings of the term. The conclusion stresses the merits of Kant's approach to political change, and indicates why it might be superior to the conservative and revolutionary alternatives.
29
Sztucki, Jerzy. "Case Analysis: Case Concerning Land and Maritime Boundary (Cameroon v. Nigeria): Provisional Measures, Order of 15 March 1996." Leiden Journal of International Law 10, no. 2 (June 1997): 341–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156597000290.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
By an application filed on 29 March 1994, Cameroon instituted proceedings against Nigeria, relying on the declarations under Article 36(2) of the Statute of the Court, made by both states without reservations. The dispute, according to the Application, related “essentially to the question of sovereignty over the Bakassi Peninsula”, where, “since the end of 1993”, the Nigerian troops were “occupying several Cameroonian localities”. Cameroon also requested the Court “to determine the course of the maritime boundary between the two states beyond the line fixed in 1975”. In an ‘Additional Application’, filed on 6 June 1994, Cameroon extended the subject of the dispute “essentially to the question of sovereignty over a part of the territory of Cameroon in the area of Lake Chad”, which had become the object of “the official […] claim […] by […] Nigeria quite recently, for the first time”; and also requested the Court “to specify definitely” the whole frontier line from Lake Chad to the sea, and to examine the two Applications as a single case. In its counter-memorial, filed within the prescribed time-limit (18 December 1995), Nigeria raised objections to the jurisdiction of the Court and the admissibility of the Cameroonian claims, whereupon the proceedings on the merits were suspended and the President of the Court fixed 15 May 1996 as the time-limit within which Cameroon might present its observations on the Nigerian objections.
30
Bekyasheva, D. I. "Structural and Procedural Factors Affecting Correct Application of the Rules of Jurisdiction in Civil Cases." Lex Russica 74, no. 1 (January 20, 2022): 18–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2022.182.1.018-028.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The maxim of the positivist approach, according to which the courts must strictly follow the letter of the law, today keeps turning into the abolition of judicial acts «in view of unclear, ambiguous legislative regulation of competence delimitation lacking specificity and due clarity,» which does not exclude referring the case for a new hearing (with proper consideration of the merits of the case in previous instances). Courts do not apply uniformly amendments to the procedural legislation (Federal Law of 28.11.2018 No. 451), as well as new clarifications that appeared in the context of the amendments (Resolution of the Plenum of the RF Supreme Court of 30.06.2020 No. 12; Resolution of the Plenum of the RF Supreme Court of 22.06.2021 No. 16) that have finally overcome contradictions between traditional understanding by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of the right to a competent court and the ideas of the ECHR concerning objections to jurisdiction only in the court of first instance. In situations when a court decision is overturned and referred for a new consideration to the court of first instance, the classical understanding of the constitutional right to defence by a competent court looks like an image, a weak effort to lend legitimacy to the arguments provided by the appellate court. Taking into account that the rules of competence and jurisdiction are far from always being determined according to the merits and features of the case, and amendments made to the procedural legislation concerning distribution of cases between courts still do not implement the proposal of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to enshrine in the law a criterion that allows determining a competent court, and that they are implemented arbitrarily, it is proposed to clearly formulate the rule restricting both participants in a disputed legal relationship to make procedural objections based on the lack of jurisdiction of the court of appeal, if such a right could have been exercised in a court of first instance, and the rule to overrule the decision only in cases where a person was really restricted in access to justice and the exercise of the right to judicial protection due to violation of jurisdictional rules.
31
Kershnar, Stephen, and Michael Tooley. "The Mathematics of Desert: Merit, Fit, and Well-Being." Philosophies 7, no. 1 (February 9, 2022): 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/philosophies7010018.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Here, we argue for a mathematical equation that captures desert. Our procedure consists of setting out principles that a correct equation must satisfy and then arguing that our set of equations satisfies them. We then consider two objections to the equation. First, an objector might argue that desert and well-being separately contribute to intrinsic goodness, and they do not separately contribute. The concern here is that our equations treat them as separate contributors. Second, our set of desert-equations are unlike equations in science because our equations involve multiple desert-equations with the applicable equation depending on how the variables are filled out. Neither objection succeeds.
32
Zawadzki, Wojciech. "The role of the Dominicans in the Christianisation of Prussia up to the mid-13th century." Masuro-Warmian Bulletin 293, no. 3 (November 23, 2016): 499–510. http://dx.doi.org/10.51974/kmw-135036.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
At the beginning of the thirteenth century, the attempts to the Christianization of Prussia were resumed. The greatest and lasting results brought the Cistercian mission, led by the missionary bishop, Christian. The arrival of the Teutonic and DominicanOrders to Prussia changed the political, social and religious situation in this area dramatically. The Teutonic Order in the thirteenth century was dealing with creating their statehood and with the military conquest of the land. In converting the pagans, they were very glad to count on the assistance of the Dominican Order. The Dominican merits in the evangelism were so large that the Holy See was entrusting the priests from this Order with the most important ecclesiastical offices. By the end of the thirteenth century the Dominican Order gained in Prussia and also abroad the universal acclaim and respect, which raised objections and concerns of the Teutonic Order.
33
Mintz-Woo, Kian. "WILL CARBON TAXES HELP ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE?" Les ateliers de l'éthique 16, no. 1 (November 10, 2021): 57–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1083645ar.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis ought to serve as a reminder about the costs of failure to consider another long-term risk, climate change. For this reason, it is imperative to consider the merits of policies that may help to limit climate damages. This essay rebuts three common objections to carbon taxes: (1) that they do not change behaviour, (2) that they generate unfair burdens and increase inequality, and (3) that fundamental, systemic change is needed instead of carbon taxes. The responses are (1) that there is both theoretical and empirical reason to think that carbon taxes do change behaviour, with larger taxes changing it to a greater extent; (2) that undistributed carbon taxes are regressive but distributing the tax receipts can alleviate that regressivity (and, in many cases, make the overall effect progressive); and (3) that while small changes for increasing democratic decision-making may be helpful, (fundamental) change takes time and the climate crisis requires urgent action.
34
Ewan, Pauline. "Deepening the Human Security Debate: Beyond the Politics of Conceptual Clarification." Politics 27, no. 3 (October 2007): 182–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9256.2007.00298.x.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
‘Human security’ has been framed as a transformative project that seeks to reinvent the theory and practice of security beyond the national security priorities of states. Central to this project is a holistic and people-centred approach that broadens the concept of security and problematises the view that the security concerns of individual men and women are best served by the security policies of their states. Yet although these ideas have gained ground in policy circles, the academic literature in this area has been dominated by debates about the merits and demerits of human security's expansion of the contemporary security agenda. This article explores two key objections to the holistic character of human security and argues that critics underestimate the politics involved in delimiting this concept. In order to deepen our understanding of the politics of human insecurity, human security scholarship must move beyond its current preoccupation with narrow forms of conceptual clarification.
35
Mathias, Stephen. "The 2005 Judicial Activity of the International Court of Justice." American Journal of International Law 100, no. 3 (July 2006): 629–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0002930000031109.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In 2005, the International Court of Justice issued three judgments.l In February, the Court upheld an objection to its jurisdiction in Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany). In July, a chamber of the Court issued its judgment on the merits in Frontier Dispute (Benin/Niger). In December, the full Court issued its judgment on the merits in Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda).
36
Cogan, Jacob Katz. "The 2011 Judicial Activity of the International Court of Justice." American Journal of International Law 106, no. 3 (July 2012): 586–608. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.106.3.0586.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The International Court of Justice rendered four judgments in 2011: on April 1, a ruling on the respondent’s preliminary objections in Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Georgia v. Russian Federation), upholding one objection and finding that the Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the application; on May 4, two rulings on Costa Rica’s and Honduras’s applications for permission to intervene in Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia), rejecting both; and on December 5, a final decision on jurisdiction, admissibility, and the merits in Application of the Interim Accord of 13 September 1995 (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia v. Greece), finding for the applicant. The Court also issued three orders in incidental proceedings: on March 8, one on Costa Rica’s request for the indication of provisional measures in Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua); on July 4, one on Greece’s application for permission to intervene as a nonparty in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy); and on July 18, one on Cambodia’s request for the indication of provisional measures in Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case Concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) (Cambodia v. Thailand). The Court indicated provisional measures in response to both requests, and granted Greece permission to intervene.
37
Ispolinov, Aleksei, and Olga Kadysheva. "An apple of discord: pre-trial procedure in international justice and in the jurisprudence of the EAEU Court." Meždunarodnoe pravosudie 11, no. 2 (2021): 93–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.21128/2226-2059-2021-2-93-110.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The present article assesses the approaches elaborated in the decisions of international courts and tribunals as well as in the doctrine of international law towards the legal value of pre-trial requirements. The role and significance of such requirements started to increase since almost in any case submitted to a court or arbitration the respondent states try firstly to question either jurisdiction of the court or tribunal in the specific case or admissibility of the claim. As a rule, such objections are based on allegations that the claimant failed to comply with pre-trial requirements such as direct negotiations or prior notification of the respondent about the claimant’s intention to submit the dispute for compulsory adjudication. Despite an absence of customary rule of international law about the necessity and precise content of such pre-trial requirements, international treaties stipulating compulsory dispute adjudication almost by default contain such pre-trial requirements of different kind and combination. Current jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals (International Court of Justice, Court of Eurasian Economic Union, and investment arbitration tribunals) dealing with such objections by the respondents reveals a lack of consensus in the treatment of pre-trial requirements either as jurisdictional or admissibility objections. The commentators also differ on assessment of the role and normative significance of pre-trial requirement. Nevertheless, the authors view such requirements as one of jurisdictional characteristics based on the consent of the states to limits their sovereignty by agreeing in advance in the applicable international treaty to submit any future disputes for compulsory adjudication subject to stipulated limitations and conditions, for instance, necessity for a claimant to follow certain pre-trial requirements. A claimant’s failure to follow such requirements should be considered as sufficient ground for a court or tribunal handling such claim, to declare a lack of its jurisdiction in the case and to refuse to consider the merits of the case.
38
Fallon, Francis, and James C. Blackmon. "IIT’s Scientific Counter-Revolution: A Neuroscientific Theory’s Physical and Metaphysical Implications." Entropy 23, no. 8 (July 23, 2021): 942. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/e23080942.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
IIT includes commitments about the very nature of physical reality, a fact both highly unusual for an empirical theory within neuroscience, and surprisingly underappreciated within the literature. These commitments are intimately tied to the theory; they are not incidental. This paper demonstrates as much by raising certain objections in a “naive” way, and then exposing how the principled IIT responses would rely upon metaphysical positions. Along the way we draw on the IIT literature for support for these interpretations, but also point to a need for elaboration and clarification. Section 1 applies the Placement Argument in a way that leads to problem involving zombies, treated in Section 2. Section 3 frames the zombie problem as an apparent dilemma, and addresses that dilemma by drawing on claims in the IIT literature concerning physical reality. Section 4 raises a related dilemma and treats it in a way that dovetails with the treatment in Section 3 of physical reality. All of this underscores not just the breadth of IIT, but the relevance of this breadth to a full consideration of IIT’s merits.
39
Mączka, Dorian. "Wielokulturowość a nauka." Politeja 16, no. 4(61) (December 31, 2019): 5–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.12797/politeja.16.2019.61.01.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Multiculturalism and Science
The plurality of cultural perspectives is currently an important topic in the media, politics, the social and political sciences, philosophy, ethics, and even aesthetics. It is not, however, commonly associated with science and epistemology. That being said, many discussions about relations between culture(s) and science(s) have taken place in various fields of sociology of knowledge and science studies. In this paper, I refer to these discussions and present two possible understandings of the relation between multiculturalism and science: multiculturalism in science and multiculturalism of science. Multiculturalism in science denotes cultural plurality amongst researchers, while the more controversial idea of multiculturalism of science refers to multiculturalism as a necessary condition for epistemic and scientific progress. Following the presentation of these concepts, I discuss objectivistic objections against incorporating cultural elements into discussions about the merits of science. On the other hand, I also point out some dubious and dangerous antiscientific claims of radical relativists. Finally, drawing on pragmatic premises, I present a methodological argument for the multiculturalism of science.
40
Pfeijffer, Ilja Leonard. "Shifting Helen: An Interpretation of Sappho, Fragment 16 (Voigt)." Classical Quarterly 50, no. 1 (May 2000): 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cq/50.1.1.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Denys Page, discussing this poem in his classic Sappho and Alcaeus, seemed unimpressed by its aesthetic merits. In his note on line 7 he says: ‘The sequence of thought might have been clearer.... It seems then inelegant to begin this parable, the point of which is that Helen found O Krλλιστον in her lover, by stating that she herself surpassed all mortals in this very quality’ (p. 53). His interpretative essay phrases further objections. ‘In a phrase which rings dull in our doubtful ears, she proceeds to illustrate the truth of her preamble by calling Helen of Troy in evidence’ (p. 56). About the Helen exemplum itself he says: ‘the thought is simple as the style is artless’ and ‘the transition back to the principal subject was perhaps not very adroitly; managed’ (p. 56). Page's criticism centres on the function of the exemplum of Helen. A close reconsideration of this exemplum, with special attention to the way in which it is embedded in the preceding and following context, will result in a better understanding and appreciation of this poem.
41
Steyl, Steven. "The Virtue of Care." Hypatia 34, no. 3 (2019): 507–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12481.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
There have been many attempts to define care in terms of the virtues, but meta‐analyses of these attempts are conspicuously absent from the literature. No taxonomies have been offered to situate them within the broader care ethical and virtue theoretical discourses, nor have any substantial discussions of each option's merits and shortcomings. I attempt to fill this lacuna by presenting an analysis of the claim that care is a virtue (what I call the “virtue thesis” about care). I begin by distinguishing weaker and stronger versions of the virtue thesis, arguing that the weaker version is an orthodox view among care ethicists. I then go on to develop a taxonomy of approaches available to care ethicists seeking to flesh out the virtue thesis. The three I identify are analogical approaches, according to which care is analogous to some existing virtue; supplementalist approaches, according to which care is a novel virtue; and cardinalist approaches, according to which care is a cardinal virtue. Following this, I defend the virtue thesis from some foreseeable objections and argue that its most promising version is analogical.
42
Hayden, Richard E., and David W. Stepnick. "Pharyngoesophageal Reconstruction." Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery 112, no. 5 (May 1995): P152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0194-5998(05)80404-8.
Повний текст джерела
43
Hayden, Richard E., and David W. Stepnick. "Mandible Reconstruction." Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery 112, no. 5 (May 1995): P184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0194-5998(05)80495-4.
Повний текст джерела
44
Born, Gary, Anneliese Day, and Hafez Virjee. "Remote Hearings (2020 Survey): A Spectrum of Preferences." Journal of International Arbitration 38, Issue 3 (June 1, 2021): 292–308. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/joia2021014.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
A detailed survey of users’ experience of remote hearings shows that, as of July 2020, in-house and external counsel, and arbitrators and tribunal secretaries, were generally enthusiastic about fully remote hearings, but more nuanced when it came to breaking down their preferences according to the amount in dispute and the number of witnesses and experts to be examined: for short hearings and meetings, users will very likely prefer a videoconference over meeting in person or conducting the proceeding by telephone, whereas for merits hearings and hearings dealing with major procedural issues, preferences hinge primarily on the value of the case and secondly on the number of witnesses and experts to be examined. Where parties are in disagreement as to how to hold the hearing, tribunals are likely to factor into their decision any flexibility around the hearing dates, cost considerations and the number of time-zones that need to be accommodated. The article also discusses the survey results relating to the benefits and challenges of fully remote hearings, the rate of objections to fully remote hearings and how tribunals dealt with them, and provides additional insight into the profile of fully remote hearings resulting from the pandemic.
45
Gaver, Craig D. "Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary Between Mauritius and Maldives in the Indian Ocean (Mauritius/Maldives)." American Journal of International Law 115, no. 3 (July 2021): 519–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2021.24.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
On January 28, 2021, a Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) dismissed all of the respondent's preliminary objections in Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary Between Mauritius and Maldives in the Indian Ocean (Mauritius/Maldives). The proceeding arose out of Mauritius's long-running effort to regain sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, which was originally “detached” from Mauritius in 1965 by the United Kingdom (UK). Although the Judgment will allow the case to proceed to the merits, it is significant in its own right for its engagement with several earlier legal decisions, including the arbitral award in Chagos Marine Protected Area Arbitration and the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, as well as UN General Assembly Resolution 73/295 affirming the Advisory Opinion. The Special Chamber stitched together a series of legal documents that, considered individually, were either non-binding or limited in scope to achieve a determination greater than the sum of its parts—one that effectively resolved the disputed sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago.
46
Evans, Malcolm D., and Alan Boyle. "I. The Southern Bluefin Tuna Arbitration." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 50, no. 2 (April 2001): 447–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/50.2.447.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Readers of last October's I.C.L.Q. will recall that this case started life in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea when Australia and New Zealand were granted provisional measures against Japanese high seas tuna fishing in the Pacific.1 That Tribunal had held that the provisions of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (“1982 UNCLOS”) invoked by Australia and New Zealand appeared to afford a basis on which the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal might be founded; that the fact that the 1993 Convention on Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna applied between the parties did not preclude recourse to the compulsory dispute settlement procedures in Part XV of the 1982 UNCLOS; and that an arbitral tribunal would prima facie have jurisdiction over the merits of the dispute.2 Notwithstanding this necessarily provisional view, when the parties then proceeded to arbitration, Japan maintained its initial preliminary objections, and the award handed down in August 2000 thus deals only with the jurisdiction of the arbitrators.3 The facts and background to the case are set out in the earlier case-note and need not be repeated here.
47
Cortesi, Giulio Alvaro. "The Case of Certain Iranian Assets: The Standard for Joining Preliminary Objections to the Merits Revisited and the Treatment of State-Owned Enterprises before the International Court of Justice." Austrian Review of International and European Law Online 25, no. 1 (July 12, 2022): 219–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15736512-02501008.
Повний текст джерела
48
Ku, Julian G. "Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean (Bolivia v. Chile): Preliminary Objection (I.C.J.)." International Legal Materials 55, no. 1 (February 2016): 74–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/intelegamate.55.1.0074.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
On September 24, 2015, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) released its judgment on the preliminary objection filed by Chile in Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean.1 Chile had objected to the ICJ’s jurisdiction arguing that Bolivia’s application raises a dispute that had already been settled by the 1904 Peace Treaty Between Bolivia and Chile. The ICJ, however, rejected this jurisdictional objection and agreed to consider the merits of Bolivia’s claim that Chile has an obligation to negotiate in good faith the issue of Bolivia’s sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean.
49
JOBBAGY, ZOLTAN, and LASZLO SZEGO. "DISCUSSING THE NATURE OF OBJECTIVES - BASED PLANNING: A CRITIQUE." CONTEMPORARY MILITARY CHALLENGES 2011, no. 13/3 (September 15, 2011): 95–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.33179/bsv.99.svi.11.cmc.13.3.6.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The process of strategy development as seen by most Western militaries is very much shaped by Clausewitz, who regarded the political aim the ultimate goal of war. Despite all his merits and contribution to the theory of war, Clausewitz’s approach to strategy development appears to be too narrow for the military engagements we saw in Iraq and still see in Afghanistan. In counter-insurgency operations both the formulation of political goals and the application of military means are influenced by so many factors that strategy development often appears as a messy and painful process of trial-and-error. The authors expand on this issue and deliver a critique to the wide spread objective-based approach to developing strategy.
50
Al-Imam, Ahmed, Marek A. Motyka, and Hend J. Al-Doori. "Surface Web Merits for SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic in Iraq." Journal of the Faculty of Medicine Baghdad 62, no. 4 (February 21, 2021): 117–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.32007/jfacmedbagdad.6241795.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Background: Data on SARS-CoV-2 from developing countries is not entirely accurate, demanding incorporating digital epidemiology data on the pandemic.
Objectives: To reconcile non-Bayesian models and artificial intelligence connected with digital and classical (non-digital) epidemiological data on SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Iraq.
Results: Baghdad and Sulaymaniyah represented statistical outliers in connection with daily cases and recoveries, and daily deaths, respectively. Multivariate tests and neural networks detected a predictor effect of deaths, recoveries, and daily cases on web searches concerning two search terms, "كورونا" and "Coronavirus" (Pillai's Trace value=1, F=1106915.624, Hypothesis df=3, Error df=12, p-value<0.001, Partial Eta Squared=1). Using hierarchical clustering, we identified distinctive aggregates involving the Iraqi capital, Kurdistan region, and the south of Iraq. Three search terms were most prevalent among Iraqi web users, including "كورونا", "كوفيد-19", and "Coronavirus". Significant bivariate correlations were all positive except for those involving the search term "لقاح كورونا". Al-Muthanna governorate residents were least interested in data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.Methods: Our study design is longitudinal, for the period from 24 February 2020 to 25 September 2020. We retrieved data from the Iraqi Ministry of Health on the daily cases, recoveries, and deaths from SARS-CoV-2, and incorporated collateral data from Google Trends using five search terms, "Coronavirus", "كورونا", "COVID-19", "كوفيد-19", and "لقاح كورونا". The search terms "كورونا", "كوفيد-19", and "لقاح كورونا" represent the Arabic translations for "Coronavirus", "COVID-19", and "COVID-19 Vaccine". We implemented multivariate tests and machine learning to scrutinize the spatio-temporal trends of the pandemic in Iraq and interpret the causality influencing Iraqis to seek digital knowledge, via the web, on SARS-CoV-2.
Conclusion: Our analyses were triumphant in syncretizing non-Bayesian and machine learning models, using two forms of epidemiology data on the pandemic in Iraq. We opine that the current study is exquisite and precious for decision-makers at the Iraqi Ministry of Health.