Anglo-American Tradition Research Articles

Review Essay—Jhumpa Lahiri: Between Longing and Belonging

Review Essay—Jhumpa Lahiri: Between Longing and Belonging

Sovereignty: Seventeenth-Century England and the Making of the Modern Political Imaginary. Feisal G. Mohamed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. Pp. viii+220.

<i>Sovereignty: Seventeenth-Century England and the Making of the Modern Political Imaginary</i>. Feisal G. Mohamed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. Pp. viii+220.

Intellectual History as History of Engagement? The French Scholarship

Few intellectual histories of France by non-French authors in recent years have produced the bitter polemic that Tony Judt's Past Imperfect: French intellectuals (1944–1956) elicited. Published in French at the same time as the English edition in 1992, the book was held to account for its questionable historiographical legitimacy, alleged inaccuracy in the treatment of sources, and not-so-hidden partisanship, even if it also received some positive reviews from authoritative specialists in the field in important national newspapers. Nevertheless, the general tone and content of the French academic reviews were largely negative, and in many ways this response was unsurprising: how could a study arguing that a certain dominant (and still alive) Jacobin philosophical tradition was characterized by a “marked absence of a concern with public ethics or political morality” be read otherwise? Further, in an often caustic style, Judt accused the postwar French intellectuals of being seduced by totalitarian tendencies. Such charge, not surprisingly, provoked a pointed defence of the intellectual and historiographical national sensibility, which was not above resorting to Continental stereotypes against the “Anglo-Saxon” cultural model. Nor was the negative reception surprising to Judt, who positioned himself explicitly in the text as an outsider, belonging to a different intellectual tradition. It is useful to remember this uproar today as one considers new books by Gisèle Sapiro and François Dosse, as it illustrates three important issues in a lively academic register: the continuity of a French approach to intellectual history, its difference from Anglo-American traditions, and a possible—although mediated—angle for understanding the nature of this French particularism, through the discussion of the historiographic projection of the idea of intellectual status.

The origins of cultural landscape theory in the Anglo-American tradition

The origins of cultural landscape theory in the Anglo-American tradition

The Novel and the New Ethics by Dorothy J. Hale

Reviewed by: The Novel and the New Ethics by Dorothy J. Hale Frederick W. Feldman Hale, Dorothy J. 2020. The Novel and the New Ethics. Post*45. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. $90.00 hc. $30.00 sc. xxii + 330 pp. Ethics has been steadily taking center stage in literary studies, and Dorothy J. Hale’s new monograph pushes it to the fore of the conversation. Perennial concerns about the novel’s commodification, domination, and representations of otherness and subalternity all bespeak ethical consternation. At the same time, defenses of the humanities often appeal to literary reading’s promotion of empathy or justice. This concern with ethics and human rights is not restricted to the academy, as even a brief look at the last few decades of Pulitzer Prize-winning novels shows. Hale has recognized this renewed focus on ethics and argues that it grows directly out of the tradition of Henry James. Thus, The Novel and the New Ethics makes ethics definitional to the Anglo-American novel. In Hale’s theory of the novel, the genre is protean but not formless. Rather, “the novelistic aesthetics of alterity” (xi) is driven by the particular ethical demands posed by a given novel’s program of characterological autonomy. With that said, Hale refuses to endorse a particular ethical theory or argue that the novel qua novel actually has ethical import—this is a formal theory of the novel within a specific (though extensive) Jamesian Anglo-American tradition. As such, the book is first and foremost a literary history. Chapter 1 is where Hale works out the feature claim of the book, focusing on contemporary novels. While Hale identifies novelistic ideas of characterological autonomy in the work and craft-talk of earlier [End Page 790] authors, James is the writer who “most inspires and authorizes” this tradition of novelistic ethics; he is the “fountainhead for the aesthetics of alterity” (25). To draw this Jamesian genealogy, Hale summons a variety of textual support to write a sometimes surprising literary history. Whereas modernism is generally understood as a “break” from the explicit ethical concerns characterizing the periods that both precede and follow it (and recent work on the novel of human rights has reiterated this view), Hale provocatively argues that modernism is where the idea that narrative necessarily implies an ethics solidifies. Particular attention is given to the novelists’ own comments on their work, and Hale excels at this sort of close reading. Taking passages from Gish Jen’s lectures and reading them against Virginia Woolf’s essays, for example, Hale draws out surprising commonalities and material differences between the ethical attitudes expressed and metaphors employed, yet always finds something that points back to James. An impressive amount of contemporary novelists are touched on in a dense and persuasive chapter. The survey in the first chapter also serves to show the degree to which the new ethical turn in novel-writing has made the author’s ethical attitudes part of the conversation. This scrutiny, however, is not all that new. In Chapter 2, Hale turns to the source with a reading of What Maisie Knew. Her project is as much about how the inheritors of James’s tradition have received and responded to his stated goals and how they evaluate whether Maisie lives up to them as it is about how the ethics of otherness are felt in the novel itself. Hale begins the chapter not with James but with Toni Morrison mentioning James, continuing the book’s project of showing his contemporary influence. The dual approach of both examining James’s aesthetics of alterity in Maisie while also tracing its reception among other authors and critics makes this chapter a particularly effective close reading. Chapters 3 and 4 are close readings of novels by Zadie Smith and J. M. Coetzee. In Chapter 3, Hale examines On Beauty in light of Smith’s stated ethical goals and modernist influences—taken from interviews, essays, and allusions to other works—and, importantly, argues for how the novel itself, its aesthetics driven by its particular ethical problems, differs from those other genres. An unexpected but intriguing comparative reading of William Faulkner investigates style’s ethical implications. Hale ends...

Philosophy and Eschatology: A Quest for Truth and Meaning

Do philosophy and eschatology have anything in common? In an age when philosophical naturalism is taken as a norm especially among some philosophers of the Anglo-American tradition, does it not seem out of place to put philosophy and eschatology side by side? Is eschatology not merely a utopic thinking? These are some of the questions that might come to mind when the notion of eschatology is raised within philosophical circles? <i>Prima facie</i>, it seems that philosophy and eschatology are two contradictory disciplines or outlooks on reality since philosophy primarily relies on the critical use of human intelligence and reason whereas eschatology has religious overtones and thus is a theological discipline. This would seem so in an age in which philosophical naturalism is on the rise. However, a critical consideration would show that philosophy and eschatology are not as distant from each other as they might seem from a superficial analysis. If philosophy and eschatology are not mutually exclusive, then where does their convergence lie? Ultimately, both philosophy and eschatology search for truth and meaning in human existence because, ultimately, both philosophy and eschatology examine the entire meaning of human existence or, as it is put in popular parlance, they are concerned with the question of human destiny. So it is not out of place to argue that philosophy ultimately is eschatological thinking. In this paper therefore, it is argued that there is a mutual complementarity between philosophy and eschatology and that the primary locus for an adequate understanding of the intrinsic relation between philosophy and eschatology is the question of the existential meaning of the human person. I will contend that it is because the ancients considered philosophy to be eschatological thinking that some ancient thinkers viewed philosophy as a spiritual exercise and preparation for one’s death. In fact, the understanding of philosophy as eschatological thinking is manifest at least implicitly from the ancient through the mediaeval to the modern era. Furthermore, I argue that it is because of the complementarity between philosophy and eschatology that philosophical theology or philosophy of religion is still relevant till today. Finally, whether eschatology is considered from a Christian point of view or from the viewpoint of African religions, it is must be understood as a search for the meaning of human existence by seeking the connection between two fundamental questions, namely, the question concerning the human person and that concerning God.

Native American Mystery Writing: Indigenous Investigations by Mary Stoecklein

Reviewed by: Native American Mystery Writing: Indigenous Investigations by Mary Stoecklein Tom Peotto Mary Stoecklein. Native American Mystery Writing: Indigenous Investigations. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2019. 141 pp. Hardcover, $90.00. If the infallibility of Enlightenment rationalist materialism when wielded by a tenacious and insightful investigator is the Anglo-American murder-mystery’s major explicit theme, a recurrent and unspoken one is the trans-Atlantic movement of Europeans against a colonial-imperial backdrop. The heroes of the first detective story, Poe’s “Murders in the Rue Morgue” (1841), are a French genius and an American expatriate in Paris; in “A Study in Scarlet” (1887), Holmes and Watson uncover an American frontiersman’s hunt for Mormon polygamists from Utah to London via Russia; Agatha Christie’s Poirot investigates in pre-independence Iraq (1936) and Egypt (1937). The use of a racist nursery rhyme throughout another Christie mystery, 1939’s Ten Little N*****s (later Ten Little Indians) accidentally reveals the mental work imperialism requires: the reduction of colonized peoples to one-dimensional stereotypes. What colonized peoples might do with a genre centered on righting wrongs and exposing the guilty is the subject of Professor Stoecklein’s intriguing and eye-opening first book: a survey of around seventy Indigenous-authored murder-mysteries, whose protagonists battle “the inherent criminality of a settler-colonial society” (2). Stoecklein articulates the purposes of these twentieth-century authors and their Indigenous protagonists (mostly Native American, with the exception of Native Hawaiian/Samoan writer Victoria Nalani Kneubulh) as entertainment, advocacy, and self-representation aimed at a Native and non-Native readership: to refute lingering Vanishing-Indian fantasies, to legitimate precolonial and traditional worldviews, [End Page 196] and to tell thrilling stories where Indigenous characters “are not always the victim” but “can be the hero as well” (27). Per Charles Rzepka’s concept of “alternative detection” (20–21) in which a protagonist’s difference from the mystery’s typical “Western, white, male” (25) detective accordingly changes their crime-solving skills, abilities, and approach, Stoecklein describes how these writers both follow and subvert the genre’s conventions. The investigators are male, female, and two-spirit; professionals including police and government agents, and amateur sleuths including teenagers; enrolled tribal members, mixed-bloods, or (in 2006’s Elsie’s Business) the African-American father of a murder victim. As in noir, the silence of Anglo-American law is conspicuous: the white antagonists who commit acts of theft, rape, kidnapping, and murder exploit white authorities’ indifference and loopholes in local and federal law, with Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe (1978) a horrific real-life precedent. As in mainstream murder-mysteries, protagonists may act as executioner against the guilty; unlike the Anglo-American tradition of vigilantism to express rugged individualism, these characters claim contiguity with traditional codes regulating revenge killings (12, 33–34, 124–27). Unlike the isolated antiheroes of noir, these protagonists are supported by relatives and community members, and bolstered by precolonial belief systems and religious rites. Traditional definitions of justice and morality, crime and punishment, and good and evil, are presented as coeval to Biblical and Christian morality, with stories of such other-than-human beings as windigoes or Deer Woman offered by elders for precedent or insight. Protagonists’ knowledge of the landscape is often a decisive factor in catching the perp or escaping death. The stories are microcosms or metonyms for Euro-American depredations up to and including physical and cultural genocide, and the characters’ attempts to solve these problems “through the application of Indigenous methodologies” (127) is a statement about those worldviews’ ongoing relevance and survival. These authors’ assertions for Indigenous epistemologies’ continuing relevance goes so far as to openly subvert the genre’s bedrock of materialist Enlightenment rationalism. As in real life, some of these crimes are never resolved by the criminals’ arrest and conviction in the American justice system; instead, partial resolution is offered by the intervention of ghosts (67–68) or Deer Woman (46–52). Stoecklein explores this at [End Page 197] greater length in Chapter 4 (73-93), comparing Anglo-American novelist Tony Hillerman’s Navajo-cop novels Skinwalkers (1986) and A Thief of Time (1988) with their PBS adaptations (aired 2002 and 2004) directed...

The origins of academic work on tourism: a European perspective

The purpose of this article is to fill in the gap in knowledge about early academic work on tourism which had developed first of all in Europe. The author has tried to achieve this aim by conducting a retrospective analysis of chronological and institutional-methodological aspects of the evolution of tourism studies. As a result, he has distinguished two aspects (each divided into two): 1) chronological: a period of precursors and a formal academic period; 2) methodological: research within one discipline and interdisciplinary research. The results enabled the author to formulate general conclusions for critical discussion. It primarily concerns the domination of the English language and the Anglo-American tradition in the literature which is the reason why the global picture of achievements in tourism studies is incomplete and thus imperfect. The accomplishments of smaller, yet well-established, “national schools” are often ignored and remain almost unknown internationally. The author hopes that the article will be an encouragement to undertake research on early tourism studies in individual countries and to publish its results internationally as this will broaden knowledge of the origins of academic work in tourism.

“Point of View” in Literary Criticism, History and History of Philosophy: Perspective of Dialogue

The problem of the point of view is considered, taking into account the vector of continuity from literary studies through history to the history of philosophy. The traditional approaches of the Anglo-American (G. James, P. Lubbock) and French (G. Genette) literary traditions are analyzed. The main terminology and methodological strategies that can be used in historical and historical-philosophical science are highlighted. It is demonstrated that within the framework of history, the terminology of focalization contributes to the accentuation of the figure of the researcher, who sets the conditions for the perception of historical material. Based on a critical analysis of the models of focalization proposed by A. Munslow in history, the main directions of rethinking the problem of focalization in historical and historical-philosophical practice are determined. The specificity of posing the problem of point of view and focalization in the history of philosophy is characterized. It is emphasized that turning to it allows us to pose the problem of the relationship between history and modernity, history and philosophy. Such problematization of historical and philosophical practice is much more successful than traditional terminology, contributing to the comprehension of modern development trends. The study of the problem of point of view demonstrates the commonality of the methodological problems of the humanities (literary criticism, history, history of philosophy) and the need for a general humanitarian dialogue.

El precedente judicial en México. Fundamento constitucional y problemas básicos

Aunque el precedente judicial ha sido una figura con creciente importancia en México durante las últimas décadas —sobre todo en materia constitucional—, persiste una concepción tradicional a su respecto. Pero en años recientes, una posición más apegada a la tradición angloamericana se ha introducido en la jurisprudencia mexicana. Trayendo al sistema jurídico mexicano elementos de la teoría del precedente de aquella cultura jurídica, este estudio se pregunta por las bases constitucionales del precedente judicial en México, y echa nueva luz sobre sus dos problemas fundamentales: el uso de “tesis” y el efecto vinculante de los criterios judiciales. Contribuye así a una reanimada apreciación del papel jurídico y político de la judicatura en México, que daría nuevo valor al derecho que elaboran los jueces en este país.

Does Nietzsche havea“Nachlass”?

AbstractBased on a review of the literature and historical evidence, I argue that the use of the methodological principle known as the priority principle in Anglo-American Nietzsche scholarship is inconsistent and irreconcilable with historical evidence. It attempts to demarcate between the published works and theNachlass. However, there are no agreed upon necessary and sufficient conditions of a particular textual object being considered “Nachlass.” This absence leads to implicit and often tacit value demarcation criteria that can be broadly grouped into four types of consideration: publication, authorization, publicness, and audience. Each of these criteria pick out a different set of texts as “Nachlass.” Thus, despite the veneer of agreement, the most broadly accepted methodological approach in the Anglo-American tradition of Nietzsche scholarship is applied inconsistently. I argue that we must either offer necessary and sufficient conditions for a piece of text beingNachlass, or we ought to abandon such abstract criteria altogether and embrace a contextual and historical approach. I then argue that the first option is impossible given historical evidence. I conclude this article by explicating several recent German approaches to theNachlasswhich I think can offer a new possible approach.

Transatlantic Divisions in Methods of Inquiry About Law: What it Means for International Law

This is a chapter for the Handbook on Research Methods in International Law edited by Rossana Deplano & Nicholas Tsagourias and to be published by Edward Elgar in 2021. It is based on a presentation at a workshop at the University of Leicester on “The Neglected Methodologies of International Law: Empirical, Socio-Legal and Comparative,” on January 31, 2018. The chapter explores a question that many have voiced but which is difficult to answer: why do differences persist in approaches to research and scholarship about international law, as between the United States and Europe, and even within the Anglo-American tradition as between British and American traditions? There are likely many reasons and this is not a study of “causes.” It is an exercise in interpretation. It locates the differences in traditions of inquiry about the law in general and international law more particularly in two frames, one based in the rise of the analytical and empirical sciences in the United States and the other in the rise of the critical tradition in the wake of American Legal Realism. The chapter proceeds on an assumption that to understand how international legal scholars perceive their methods is to be explored from the perspective of the history of the social sciences and the humanities generally. It places the current work of international legal scholars in the context in which they operate within the broader university and community of scientists and humanists.

Institutional Change and the Continuity of Law

This essay will be part of a forthcoming special issue of the Connecticut Law Review dedicated to the work of my UConn colleague Richard Kay. This contribution offers reflections on Rick’s theoretical and historical scholarship on processes of institutional (and, by extension, constitutional) change. Despite the intense focus on law in this work, Rick's approach suggests a surprising ambivalence about law’s role in these processes. Part I of this essay discusses this ambivalence in relation to Rick's 2014 legal-historical monograph, The Glorious Revolution and the Continuity of Law. Rick’s analysis draws theoretical inspiration primarily (though hardly exclusively) from Anglo-American tradition, based particularly on the work of H.L.A. Hart. I argue that Rick’s Hartian approach ultimately depends on a somewhat strained distinction between law and non-law in processes of change that does not map well onto the historical record that Rick otherwise cogently analyzes. Thus, as a supplement to his Hartian framework, Rick introduces the distinction between the “axiological” underpinnings of a revolution (be they social, political, or cultural) and its “legal” manifestation, i.e., the replacement of old rule of recognition with a new one. In doing so, Rick’s analysis begins to point us toward more complex dynamics in processes of change that I would argue are more robustly captured by alternative framework, one drawn from a more French tradition. I am referring to the institutional theory of Maurice Hauriou, who was among the greatest administrative law scholars of the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries. Hauriou's theory emphasized how law is in fact intimately bound up with processes of institutional foundation and change rather than being external to them. Part II of this essay explores how Hauriou’s approach could reinforce Rick’s work in this area, using the example of Rick’s seminal 2011 article, Constituent Authority, to demonstrate the potential connections. The key point of contact between Rick's position and that of Hauriou, I argue, is a shared rejection of a position, ultimately championed by Carl Schmitt, which viewed law primarily as a question of existential power (or, as Hauriou put it, as an attack that has succeeded). Part III of this essay then returns to Rick’s analysis of the Glorious Revolution, arguing that the effort of its protagonists to retain the language of law and to operate within its forms was a key factor in differentiating their ultimately successful and durable process of revolutionary change from other historical examples that proved more fragile. This, I would suggest, is a vindication of Hauriou’s central insight about the crucial role of law in allowing such change to achieve legitimacy and durable institutionalization over time.

Estoppel in Russia: to the problem statement

In view of the continuing interest of the legal community in the problem of the prohibition of contradictory behavior or in the Anglo-American tradition of law – estoppel, the subject of this study is an attempt to determine the legal nature of the so-called norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on estoppel. The topic chosen for the study becomes particularly relevant, since there is no consensus among representatives of legal science regarding the nature of estoppel; it is considered as an intersectoral principle, doctrine, institution of law, sanctions for violation of the principle of good faith, one of the manifestations of the principle of good faith, legal mechanism, etc. The author has attempted to consider estoppel from different angles: through the prism of English contract law (promissory estoppel), from the standpoint of the continental maxim "venire contra factum proprium", in relation to the principle of good faith. The research uses general scientific methods of analysis and synthesis, a systematic approach; special legal methods (comparative legal, formal legal). As a result of the conducted research, we came to the following conclusions. The so-called norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on estoppel are a special case of the doctrine of consistent behavior, known to the continental legal order by the maxim "venire contra factum proprium", which acts as a manifestation of the principle of good faith. Proceeding from this, it is incorrect to designate the above norms as estoppel, because, firstly, even in the Anglo–American tradition, the diversity of types of estoppel does not allow it to be considered as a universal principle, and, secondly, what is understood by estoppel in this system of law does not correspond to its Russian interpretation. In addition, being part of the Romano-Germanic legal family, the domestic legal order does not need to borrow alien legal phenomena, especially when similar legal constructions can not only be found in the depths of centuries, but also trace their evolution in the bosom of the continental legal system, to which Russia belongs.

Legislated Rights in the Anglo-American Tradition

This article is a reply to critics and readers published in a symposium issue of the Faulkner Law Review (volume 10) devoted to Legislated Rights: Security Human Rights through Legislation (Cambridge University Press 2018; paperback, 2019). Richard Ekins and Gregoire Webber, two of the six authors of Legislated Rights, respond to essays by Victoria Nourse, Robert Lowry Clinton, Andy G. Olree, and Adam J. MacLeod. The article is organised around the following themes: central case method; rights protection in the United States in comparative perspective; legislated rights and constitutional structure; scepticism about judicial review; oppressive ‘rights’ legislation; and legislated rights and common law.

Examining Alternate Histories

499 BOOKS IN REVIEW Examining Alternate Histories. Glyn Morgan and C. Palmer-Patel, eds. Sideways in Time: Critical Essays on Alternate History Fiction. Liverpool: Liverpool UP, 2019. 203 pp. $120 hc. Glyn Morgan and C. Palmer-Patel’s new anthology Sideways in Time, which was nominated for a 2019 British Science Fiction Association Award in the nonfiction category (although it did not win), brings together an array of wellrespected scholars in their examination of alternate-history fiction. The editors rightly highlight the pioneering quality of their work, following as it does several scholarly monographs on the topic; they may be the first to present a collection of different perspectives in an anthology form. While such books as Karen Hellekson’s The Alternate History: Refiguring Historical Time (2001), Kathleen Singles’s Alternate History: Playing with Contingency and Necessity (2013), Derek J. Thiess’s Relativism, Alternate History, and the Forgetful Reader: Reading Science Fiction and Historiography (2014), and Catherine Gallagher’s Telling It Like It Wasn’t: The Counterfactual Imagination in History and Fiction (2018) are in-depth studies of alternate history narratives focused on specific issues, the present anthology addresses a wide range of topics and authors in this genre, providing the reader with a broader variety of subjects and perspectives. Consequently, this book nicely complements such previous scholarship. Sideways in Time is organized into two parts of five chapters each, with an introduction, a foreword, and an afterword as well. The foreword by Stephen Baxter, an award-winning author of alternate history and science fiction and a judge of the Sidewise Award for alternate-history fiction, provides a general idea of the genre. Baxter traces the genre’s antiquity to 35 BCE in Roman historian Livy’s writing, but then mostly discusses examples from the twentieth century Anglo-American tradition (including his own novels). This laid-back foreword gives way to a more rigorous introduction by the editors. Morgan and Palmer-Patel explore the history of the genre in a more consistent manner from ancient Rome to nineteenth-century France; they see Louis Napoléon GeoffroyCh âteau’s Napoléon et la conquête du monde [Napoleon’s Conquest of the World, 1836] as the first modern instance of alternate history fiction. Their introduction further provides an interesting discussion about the relationship between non-fictional speculations regarding history and alternative-history fiction, and that between alternative history and science fiction. In addition, the editors conveniently lay out the basic characteristics of the genre and important terminologies to guide readers in the rest of the book. The two main parts of the book are organized under the categories of “Points of Divergence” and “Manipulating the Genre.” The first category explores works of alternative fiction that utilize the major tropes of the genre, such as specific points of divergence that create alternative historical developments, the “great man” theory, and the Tolstoian vision of history; in part this establishes a discourse of an emerging canon. The second part questions the basic tenets of alternate-history fiction. Sideways in Time nicely balances its attention on conformity and subversion with dominant genre expectations and consequently 500 SCIENCE FICTION STUDIES, VOLUME 47 (2020) exposes the developments of such genre qualities as functions of an oscillating historical process. The first chapter by Adam Roberts, “Napoleon as Dynamite: Geoffroy’s Napoléon Apocryphe and Science Fiction as Alternate History,” foregrounds the two major trends of the genre’s points of departure—alternative historical outcomes as determined by the actions of a great person (or a few persons) and the dispersed collectivity of small actions creating parallel historical streams—and shows that the historical divergences in this type of fiction are an ideological representation of the author’s own sense of historicity. His examination of early works in this vein establishes the prominence of the “great man” approach. Roberts’s chapter, coming after the introduction, creates a comprehensive idea of the genre’s early development, which, in addition to providing a thorough analysis of the text in question, establishes the groundwork for approaching the later chapters. Although the remainder of the chapters deal with much later works, similar historiographical concerns dominate the discussion. Chris Pak’s chapter, “‘It Is...

THE EXTENSION OF THE APPLIED DIRECTION OF IMPLEMENTING FORENSIC RECOMMENDATIONS

The relevance of the use of forensic potential in various branches of legal activity is steadily increasing. It is facilitated by the multidimensional nature of law enforcement and interconnection of its various processes, and by increasing integration at the intersectoral level based on qualitative relationships. On the basis of national theory and foreign experience the author shows the areas of possible application of the forensic approach that have not yet been fully implemented in reality, despite the current needs of law enforcement practice. At the same time, the proposed concept allows us not to intrude into the traditional ideas of the subject and object of forensics, but allows us to develop at the applied level. Over time, the empirical component will change the theory itself. The author critically analyzes both the national approach and the foreign Anglo-American tradition, offering a balanced version.

News as “Content”: Instances and Implications

Will Slauter’s recent Who Owns the News? traces questions of what news is via questions of what copyright is for. Focusing on the Anglo-American tradition from before 1710 and into the twentieth century, Slauter explores the interplay of publishing and law that helped to produce facts as distinct from copyrightable expressions. By implication this is a history of journalistic objectivity as an orienting ideal. By extension it aims at ways of knowing that crucially remain the epistemic conditions of modern life.

Do Social Values and Institutional Context Shape the Use of Economic Evaluation in Reimbursement Decisions? An Empirical Analysis

ObjectivesTo investigate whether the use of economic evaluation (EE) in healthcare decision making is influenced by the social values and institutional context in a given country. MethodsWe developed and tested a conceptual framework for the 36 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. The countries were divided into two groups based on the extent of their use of EE in drug reimbursement. The key social values were efficiency, equity, and personal responsibility, measured in an international survey. Countries were classified based on their institutional context in terms of their general welfare paradigm/type of healthcare system and the administrative tradition to which they belong. We performed correlation tests and ran path analysis regression models to test our hypotheses. ResultsEE high users included significantly more Beveridge-type systems (50% vs 31%) and fewer Bismarck-type (15% vs 56%). Napoleonic tradition countries seemed to reject personal responsibility in health (r = -0.511, P = .009), whereas Germanic tradition countries embraced it (r = 0.572, P = .003); Anglo-American tradition countries exhibited a significant association with efficiency (r = 0.444, P = .026), whereas Scandinavian tradition countries appeared to reject it as a criterion for rationing in healthcare (r = -0.454, P = .023). No significant direct association was found between social values and use of EE. ConclusionOur exploratory analysis suggests that institutional context and, indirectly, social values may play a role in shaping the use of EE in healthcare decision making. Because of the differences among countries in terms of institutional context, which may in part be influenced by social values, it is unlikely that there will ever be a single, harmonious approach to the use of EE.

‘THE AFTERMATH EXPERIENCED BEFORE’: AESCHYLEAN UNTIMELINESS AND IRIS MURDOCH'S DEFENCE OF ART

This year marks the centenary of the birth of Iris Murdoch (1919–99). She has been celebrated as one of Britain's most important postwar writers with twenty-six prose fiction novels to her name. Murdoch was also an ancient philosopher who was primarily interested in issues of moral philosophy. Pinning down her place in the Anglo-American analytic tradition of philosophy, however, is not a straightforward task. On the one hand she cut a conventional figure, holding a tutorial fellowship at St Anne's College, Oxford, from 1948 to 1963. On the other hand, her philosophical writing increasingly departed from the coordinates of analytical philosophy. As Martha Nussbaum notes in her deeply ambivalent review of Murdoch'sThe Fire and the Sun: Why Plato Banished the Artists, Murdoch is ‘a novelist whose best work is deeply philosophical, a philosopher who has stressed…the special role that beauty can play in motivating us to know the good, …a Platonist believer in human perfectability, and an artist.’ Nussbaum points us towards understanding two key elements in Murdoch's thought: her commitment to Plato and the manner in which Murdoch's activity as philosopher and novelist should be considered as interdependent.