Toward a logic of good reasons

IT is trite law that good reasons must be given to justify infringements of fundamental rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights, as incorporated into domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998. But what reasons can one count as good reasons? In Re Brewster's Application [2017] UKSC 8; [2017] 1 W.L.R. 519, the United Kingdom Supreme Court addressed the question of how much deference courts should afford to post hoc rationalisations of decisions challenged for non-compliance with the Convention. The answer given by Lord Kerr, with whom Lady Hale, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed and Lord Dyson agreed, is interesting in its own terms and may have implications outside the confines of the Convention.

Let me begin by very warmly thanking the organizers of the Society of Pakistan English Language Teachers (spelt) International Congress for inviting me to speak here today. This occasion is indeed special1. We are celebrating two decades of the Society’s life during which it has distinguished itself by introducing innovations and improvements in language teaching and learning across the country. Indeed the theme of the present conference – Teaching Learning, Learning Teaching – sums up the Society’s quest well. So, special congratulations are in order on this special occasion. But this situation is somewhat problematic for me: I have come here planning to speak On the process of teaching, which seems something like bringing coals to Newcastle. I assure you I gave the matter serious thought – but I have decided to hang on to my title for one good reason – a reason that makes sense in the context of this special occasion.

In this article we analyse the enunciative-pragmatic and rhetorical strategies that globally shape discourses in the context of a polemical discursive event, drawing on Amossy’s (2014) definition of polemics. From a corpus consisting of transcripts of debates in the Assembly of the Republic and press texts between 2018 and 2021, we approach, from an argumentative, rhetorical and pragmatic-discursive perspective, the global configuration of discourses that have euthanasia as their object. Euthanasia emerges as a source of polemic in the context of the discussion of several bills aimed at its legalization in parliament.
 In a particularly agonistic context raised from the outset by the topic at the core of the debate, one of the objectives of this analysis cannot but analyse the referentiation of the way concept of “euthanasia”: the various ways of referencing are one of the rhetorical-argumentative and discursive strategies that comes to the fore, given the role of implicitations, beliefs and common knowledge in the addressee’s response.
 The referentiation of the discursive object 'euthanasia' is therefore of particular interest, since it mirrors an axiological hierarchy of values, encyclopedic knowledge, doxal voices supporting different ideological positions, particularly in an agonal discourse around eventual decisions with (bio)ethical, religious and sociological implications. For the analysis of the referentiation of 'euthanasia' and other terms associated with it, revealing different positions and points of view, we rely on studies by Angenot (2014), Sitri (2003, 2004), Mondada (2002), amongst others.
 Closely connected with the conceptualization of “euthanasia”, one finds discursive traces of pathemization contributing to the ultimate purpose of the speakers' macro-illocutionary act. Since nowadays it is widely accepted that discourse has an emotional (or pathemic, according to Charaudeau) aspect, our objective is also to observe how emotions are interwoven — and justified — in the thread of discourses.
 Given the controversial nature of the topic under discussion, we found that the discourse(s) are the target of a process of pathemization and spectacularization (Charaudeau, 2000, 2005). The appeal to emotions, in particular to pity / compassion, is imbricated in the logos, in such a way that the dimension of pathos is intended to be validated and justified (Micheli, 2008, 2010). On the other hand, the "good reasons" (Plantin, 2011) at the base of the pathemic dimension of the discourse are indelibly linked to the construction of an ethos favorable to the Speaker and the capture of the addressee and a vast group auditorium.
 In the wake of Kerbrat-Orecchioni (1980), we are interested in analyzing the marks of polemicity that translate into enunciative-pragmatic strategies summoned as a support for the argumentative activity.
 We thus resume some aspects in the analysis of polemics already addressed in Gil (2013, 2017, 2021).

Family’s Social Capital: definition, measurement and subsidies (by Riccardo Prandini) - The first purpose of this essay is to explain why in the debate about Social capital, which spread across the social scientific community in the last two decades, the family as a social relationship had no real import. In the first part of the essay, Prandini finds the answer in what he calls the modernist theoretical bias, a set of sociological prejudices (operative in different theories: rational choice, functionalism, system theory, structuration theory, etc.) which considers the family relationship as a sort of organic relict of pre-modern societies, a constraint for social development and an obstacle for the full deployment of less bonding social relations. Prandini criticizes this way of thinking and, in the second part of the essay, tries to suggest a new way for defining, measuring and subsidizing the family social capital. The family’s social capital, now embedded in the relational approach, is defined as a property and a quality of social relationships and not as an attribute of individuals or social structures; it is not a mixture of the two either. It represents that reciprocal orientations of the family’s members which, through processes of social condensation, are able to generate trustworthiness and so to engender cooperative actions ad experiences. This special kind of Social capital must be differentiated in: 1) nuclear social capital, and 2) kinship social capital (the latter including relationships with non-co-resident relatives). Furthermore, the former (nuclear social capital) can be analytically examined, differentiating it in conjugal social capital, parental social capital and brotherly social capital. Only by distinguishing these different kinds of social capital is it possible to study their actual relationships. Studying the interplay between nuclear and kinship social capital also means that the sociologists has to include time in his concepts and analysis. Only in this way is it possible to observe the generations and degenerations, the morphogenesis and morphostasis of family social capital. The third part of the essay is dedicated to the operazionalizations and measurements of social capitals. The Author suggests that each operazionalization depends upon the research design, and that it is not useful to introduce only one way to do it. Moreover, there are good reasons for utilizing a certain kind of definitions and measurement in order to develop quantitative research, and various other good reasons when the sociologist carries out a qualitative research. Nowadays network analysis provides new methodologies and measurement systems that are particularly useful to develop in deep research about social capital. The Author concludes his essay calling for new ways of subsidizing the family social capital. He suggests that the modern social welfare system is currently not skilled enough to sustain the processes that generate social capital, and that it is time to shift to a new kind of welfare, one we may call societal and pluralistic.

Nicholas Wolterstorff has given us an illuminating account of the development and main claims of Reformed Epistemology. Reformed Epistemology, he has stressed, seeks to provide an account of the epistemological status of theistic belief, not an overall philosophy of religion. In the 1980s, its project was primarily negative aiming to overcome the evidentialist challenge, alleging that theistic belief is lacking in warrant or entitlement if it is not supported by good reasons. So this phase was brush-clearing, seeking to clear away evidentialist bramble. In the 1990s, its project has become more positive, aiming, we might say, to grow, in the place of the bramble, a garden of new epistemological insights about what gives theistic belief its various doxastic merits, and what makes it deeply relevant to the theoretical and interpretive disciplines.

Ten years ago I was a junior faculty member in a UK university, doing research into the theoretical foundations of multiagent systems. I enjoyed the research, but not the salary. The opportunity arose to work for a startup company at three times my university salary, and the company had already hired some excellent agent researchers that I knew, respected, and liked from conferences and workshops. The job seemed too good to be true; and of course, it was.

Despite interest in bioethics being arguably at its highest, the history, development, and tasks of this practice remain elusive to many medical practitioners. This ambiguity is not without good reason; unlike its clinical counterparts, bioethics is not exclusively a child of medicine. Rather, bioethics also belongs to theology, philosophy, sociology, and the law. Its intellectual assumptions are multi-disciplinary and wide-reaching, in contrast to those of medicine-neatly delineated and perfected by the scientific method. Indeed, bioethics is contemplative where medicine is active, inquisitive where medicine is decisive, and measured where medicine is efficient. Although at first glance, bioethics may not appear to share much with medicine, the discipline has become an essential conduit of moral medical practice. This manuscript gives an account of the history and development of contemporary bioethics in both the Islamic and Western world, its current state of affairs, its tasks, and its future. Ultimately, it is hoped that this work will demystify the practice of bioethics and elucidate the role of the bioethicist as a partner to the practitioner, an ally to the patient, and an advocate for the moral practice of medicine.

NURSE FACULTY WHOSE ROLE INCLUDES A RESEARCH EXPECTATION ARE INCREASINGLY ENGAGING IN INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH, AND WITH GOOD REASON. The benefits abound. An interdisciplinary research team enables the investigator to gain the perspectives of multiple experts and strengthens all aspects of a study. Social and biological scientists, as well as statisticians, provide the specialized knowledge that enhances the credibility of the research. Other interdisciplinary resources exist within a research-intensive institution. Few nurse faculty consider the untapped potential of undergraduate students as collaborators. Typically, students are relegated to roles such as data collection and literature review--important roles, yet not idea-generating. Faculty pursuing R-15 (AREA) funding through NIH understand the expectation to include students in research. Yet the abilities of undergraduate students are so much greater. They can think outside the box in which so many nursing faculty and students find themselves trapped. Undergraduate students from other disciplines expand the expertise needed for quality investigation. They bring fresh ideas absorbed from faculty in their disciplines, and they generate thought-provoking questions relevant to the research that the solitary discipline strategy frequently ignores: Why? How? What is the benefit? Have you considered this approach? How can nursing faculty connect with these interdisciplinary undergraduate students? Many colleges and universities have honors programs in which undergrads must complete capstone projects. These programs are a rich source of bright, energetic young people who have an interest in the research process. The students have a requirement for a culminating experience, and nurse faculty have a responsibility to conduct research--a perfect match. Our Experience The Honors College at our institution includes a computer-based honors program (CBHP). Each semester, the CBHP director solicits faculty sponsors for student projects. Students develop contracts with their faculty sponsors and report their progress in weekly CBHP seminars. Near the end of the semester, the students present their projects to their peers and faculty. Initially, the nurse faculty member of the team hoped to test the feasibility of collecting data using personal digital assistants (PDAs). Having no technical knowledge, the researcher submitted an abstract to the CBHP director seeking assistance from students to translate the research instruments into PDA format. Two students replied immediately: one was an English literature major, and the other was from biology. Recognizing the need for a technology expert, these students located another faculty member with that strength. A team was born! The expertise of each student member of the team was varied; neither had ever been involved in health care or with research involving health. Learning about human participant protection and institutional review board ORB) requirements was their first step. Although their experience had been with computers, poetry, and viruses, these students were intensely interested in the human application of technology in health care. …

In knowledge disputes about the paradigmatic status of management and organisation studies, many commentators have debated whether or not interpretations of Thomas Kuhn’s work have been accurate, and have deplored the lack of a common and shared use of notions like ‘paradigm’ and ‘incommensurability’. By looking at the role of ambiguity and polysemy in knowledge disputes, the position developed here is one that recognises that the meaning of concepts is an important site of contestation. Ambiguity and polysemy are not merely obstacles to the resolution of controversies; they are rhetorical resources mobilised in the construction of positions and arguments. Thus, for very good reasons, attempts to generate shared meaning of concepts are likely to encounter important difficulties. This is illustrated by a rhetorical reading of two texts from the ‘paradigm debate’.

‘There’s a good reason they are called al- Qaeda in Iraq. They are al- Qaeda . . . in . . . Iraq.’ The impossibility of a global counter- terrorism strategy, or the end of the nation state

Die Anzahl an börsennotierten Unternehmen in Deutschland und weiteren Industrieländern wie dem Vereinigten Königreich und den USA nimmt seit mehreren Jahren ab. Es gibt deutlich mehr Börsenabgänge als Börsengänge. Zu diesem Trend tragen verschiedene Einflussfaktoren bei. Durch eine gute Verfügbarkeit von anderen Finanzierungsquellen - wie Private-Equity-Gesellschaften - stehen den Unternehmen Alternativen zum Börsengang zur Verfügung, die weniger reguliert sind und bei denen geringere Kosten anfallen als bei einer Börsennotiz. Gleichzeitig haben sich typische Aktieninvestoren wie Banken und Versicherungen von den Börsen zurückgezogen, sodass deren Anlagekapital für Börsengänge von jungen und schnell wachsenden Unternehmen fehlt. Eine Anpassung des Regulierungsrahmens zur Erleichterung von Börsengängen erscheint trotz der aktuell insgesamt günstigen Finanzierungslage geboten. Erleichterungen für Börsengänge und damit eine Umkehr des Trends zu immer weniger an der Börse gelisteten Unternehmen sind nicht nur für die Unternehmensfinanzierung relevant, sondern auch für die privaten Anlageentscheidungen zur Altersvorsorge.

(1968). A New Attribution for the Madonna Enthroned in the Thyssen Bornemisza Collection. The Art Bulletin: Vol. 50, No. 4, pp. 354-356.

The Sino-French War of 1884-85 appears to have been forgotten by the French people, despite large quantities of veritable memoirs, archives, documents and researches resulting in an acceptable history of this war that have been done over the past 120 year. These efforts tend to fade away from the collective memory of the French people and are likely to disappear eventually. After all, only the past colonial Indochina has remained their main concern, whereas the Keelung and Tamsui Battles in Taiwan were but just some of the episodes in the nearly forgotten war. In China, by contrast, there is a bulk of published books, documents and researches concerning the Sino-French War. These accounts include several major historical events which provoked heated debates and are not yet clarified in the related literature. Futhermore, there are inconsistencies in the relevant evaluations. As time passes by, the story/history of the Sino-French War is still clouded in a complete fog of nationalism in China, as described by Hegel: ”People create history, but they don't understand the history created by them.” Taiwan was involved in this war of 1884-85 for no good reason but for the gage. The diplomatic failure or the disobedience of the generals, which led to the battles in Taiwan, showed the absurdity of this war. This paper first compares the battles in Keelung and Tamsui by popular pictorial newspapers available at that time in China and France, and further indicates the differences between the historical events and their collective memory/memories. Selected memory, motivational omission, fabrication and/or exaggeration might be one or more of the mechanisms for the distortion in collective memory. They tend to give simplified explanations and to obtain a self-satisfied image by exaggerating or embellishing the historical context. The research findings on the related literature have been published continuously, but these do not seem to have crucial effect on the people's collective memory of the period, particularly when their emotions and religious beliefs are involved. This makes clarifications in the historical events very difficult. All in all, objective research must seek truths from facts, and the public shouldn't be misled even by official records and writings.

Geological Carbon Dioxide Sequestration requires a fundamental understanding of \nmodeling multiphase flows in fractured media. Subsurface flow is highly dependent \nupon the rock structure within the flow domain, with high permeability and \nfractured regions dominating the transport of the fluids. Discrete-fracture \nsimulators often assume the cubic law relationship for single phase flow through a \nsmooth set of parallel plates, and with good reason. The number of fractures that \nneed to be modeled at the reservoir scale may greatly exceed 10,000; and the \nrelationship between the pressure field and the fluid flow needs to be easily \ndescribable in order for the model to be computationally efficient. The work \ndescribed in this paper examines two-phase, immiscible flows through rough \nfractures. Computations are performed utilizing the full multiphase Navier-Stokes \nequations for flow through CT scanned fractures in Berea sandstone. A number of \ncomputer simulations are performed, and an empirical model is generated that is \nsimilar to the cubic law, yet accounts for the roughness of the fracture and the \ninteraction of the invading and defending fluids and the effect of capillary \nforces. The fracture roughness and capillary forces are shown to restrict the \nflow; hence the standard cubic law tends to over-estimate the flow rate of the \ninvading fluid.

Mobility does not happen without a good reason and therefore it is of the greatest importance that those persons interested in NICE mobility can anticipate that their expectations regarding the mobility experience will be met.