Permissive View Research Articles

Latent class analysis of attitudes towards drug use and well-being among South Korean young adults

Abstract Background The surge in drug use and lack of awareness about drug-related dangers among young adults have become major public health concerns in South Korea. According to the Theory of Planned Behavior, understanding attitudes towards drugs is crucial, as permissive attitudes may lead to drug use. Thus, the study aims to identify latent classes of drug use attitudes among Korean young adults and evaluate how their well-being influences each class. Methods A total of 301 college students in Seoul, South Korea, participated in the study. Latent class analysis (LCA) was employed to identify unique patterns of attitudes towards drug use. Subsequently, we examined the relationships between auxiliary variables (i.e., well-being, including life satisfaction, self-control, quality of life, depression, generalized anxiety disorder, childhood trauma, self-esteem, stress, family strengths, perceived social support, and stigmatization) and latent classes (i.e., attitudes towards drug use subgroups) by conducting multivariate logistic regression analyses. Results LCA categorized attitudes towards drug use into three groups: Class 1 (Permissive Drug Attitude Group), Class 2 (Moderate Drug Attitude Group), and Class 3 (Critical Drug Attitude Group). Class 2 showed a particularly permissive view on marijuana legalization. In multivariate logistic regression, higher stigmatization (β = .900, p < .05) was associated with membership in Class 1 compared to Class 3. Furthermore, being male (β = 2.272, p < .001) and having higher self-esteem (β = .989, p < .05) were linked to membership in Class 2 compared to Class 3. Conclusions The study enhances understanding of the complex relationship between Korean young adults’ well-being and their drug use attitudes. Effective interventions by frontline social workers aimed at preventing drug use should continuously monitor and address social stigmatization and self-esteem while providing accurate information and education regarding drug use. Key messages • Latent Class Analysis sorted drug attitudes into three groups: ‘Permissive,’ ‘Moderate,’ and ‘Critical’ Attitude Groups. • Individuals experiencing social stigmatization had a higher risk of permissive attitudes, while higher self-esteem increased the likelihood of being in the moderate group over the critical group.

Do we have a duty not to discriminate when we date?

AbstractMany believe that we have a duty not to discriminate when we act in certain ‘public’ capacities, for example when it is our job to select among various candidates for a job. In contrast, they deny that we have duties of a similar kind in our private lives, for example in our romantic lives. In this paper, we challenge this well‐entrenched asymmetry. We do so primarily by canvassing and rebutting central arguments to the effect that acting discriminatorily, for example when we date, is something we have a right to, including arguments from: (1) freedom of association, (2) legitimate self‐interest, (3) power and (4) love versus duties. In this way, we challenge a common permissive view regarding private discrimination.

Proportionality in cyberwar and just war theory

ABSTRACT Which harms and benefits should be viewed as relevant when considering whether to launch cyber-measures? In this article, we consider this question, which matters because it is central to determining whether cyber-measures should be launched. Several just war theorists hold a version of what we call the ‘Restrictive View’, according to which there are restrictions on the sorts of harms and benefits that should be included in proportionality assessments about the justifiability of going to war (whether cyber or kinetic). We discuss two such views – the Just Cause Restrictive View and Rights-based Restrictive View – and find both wanting. By contrast, we defend what we call the ‘Permissive View’. This holds that all potential goods and bads should be included in proportionality decisions about cyber-measures, even those that appear to be trivial, and where the various harms and benefits are given different weights, according to their agent-relative and agent-neutral features. We argue further that accepting the Permissive View has broader implications for the ethical frameworks governing cyberwar, both in terms of whether cyberattack provide just cause for coercive responses, including kinetic warfare and cyber-responses, and whether cyber-measures should be governed by just war theory or a new theory for cyber-operations.

Manifestation of Moderation in the Context of Islamic Law: Maqasid Study

The study discusses an optimal method for building moderate society through the higher objective of Shariah, by employing the five essentials of goals of Islamic law based on the God Almighty command to His servants on righteousness, moderation and forbade them from excesses and corruptions. Islamic law prohibits extremism, intolerance, and extremism while it promotes respect among different cultural, religious, and civilization pluralism, and on the other hand, it renounces racism. The permissive people describe adherents of religion and moderation as hardliners, fanatics, and extremists against modern developments because of the permissive view that pornography contents should be permissible in religion as means of moral and civilization progress. They also claim that strict adherence to religious obligations leads to a lack of freedoms and compliance with global civilization. To this effect, Shariah law presents the ideal and best model for social organization and best human behavior practices, so that they may live a good and contented life, in harmony with the nature that God created people with. The study employs analytical induction methods with a basis for addressing contemporary issues and Islamic thought. It also discusses the higher objectives of Shariah from several angles and at the forefront explicates the criterion and judgment. Despite the setbacks and challenges confronting the Islamic nation, Allah has destined goodness and empowerment for its sustainability and never seizes to exist. The study concluded that achieving this requires: First: adherence to the highest revelation and most trusted bond of religion and strengthening loyalty to the Islamic faith and law. Second: The necessity of gathering the efforts of the Muslim community members and mobilizing the scholarly, intellectual, youth, and women forces. Third: Knowing the deficiency and resolving to address them through the higher objectives of Shariah, then hopefully Allah destines triumph after refraction, and victory after defeat.

Manifestation of Moderation in the Context of Islamic Law: Maqas-id Study

Abstract
 The study discusses an optimal method for building moderate society through the higher objective of Shariah, by employing the five essentials of goals of Islamic law based on the God Almighty command to His servants on righteousness, moderation and forbade them from excesses and corruptions. Islamic law prohibits extremism, intolerance, and extremism while it promotes respect among different cultural, religious, and civilization pluralism, and on the other hand, it renounces racism. The permissive people describe adherents of religion and moderation as hardliners, fanatics, and extremists against modern developments because of the permissive view that pornography contents should be permissible in religion as means of moral and civilization progress. They also claim that strict adherence to religious obligations leads to a lack of freedoms and compliance with global civilization. To this effect, Shariah law presents the ideal and best model for social organization and best human behavior practices, so that they may live a good and contented life, in harmony with the nature that God created people with. The study employs analytical induction methods with a basis for addressing contemporary issues and Islamic thought. It also discusses the higher objectives of Shariah from several angles and at the forefront explicates the criterion and judgment. Despite the setbacks and challenges confronting the Islamic nation, Allah has destined goodness and empowerment for its sustainability and never seizes to exist. The study concluded that achieving this requires: First: adherence to the highest revelation and most trusted bond of religion and strengthening loyalty to the Islamic faith and law. Second: The necessity of gathering the efforts of the Muslim community members and mobilizing the scholarly, intellectual, youth, and women forces. Third: Knowing the deficiency and resolving to address them through the higher objectives of Shariah, then hopefully Allah destines triumph after refraction, and victory after defeat.

Workers against the City: The Fight for Free Speech in Hague v. CIO

Workers against the City: The Fight for Free Speech in <i>Hague v. CIO</i>

Conciliatory metaontology, permissive ontology, and nature’s joints

According to the conciliatory view in metaontology, there are multiple possible languages corresponding to the popular positions in ontology. In each of these languages, the term ‘exists’ expresses a distinct “existence-like” property, and consequently the claims associated with each of the rival ontological positions come out true in some such language. Species of the conciliatory view can be distinguished based on claims about how the various existence-like properties are related vis-a-vis metaphysical naturalness. On some versions, all of the existence-like properties are held to be equally natural, such that there is no “metaphysically privileged” language. However on others, there is held to be a most natural existence-like property and hence a most fundamental ontological language. In this paper I defend two views, one metaontological and one ontological. I first defend a version of the conciliatory view according to which there is exactly one perfectly natural existence-like property, but the rest are still “reasonably” natural. I then argue that, assuming this metaontological view, we should accept a permissive ontological view in the fundamental language (i.e. one with a very expansive domain).

Social sexual behaviour and co-worker trust in start-up enterprises

Workplace behaviours and norms are gaining increased prominence in the literature on start-up enterprises. Research attention has focused on the critical role that these behaviours and norms play in influencing start-up effectiveness but our understanding of their role in influencing trust in a start-up environment is underdeveloped. The present article investigates the role that workplace social sexual behaviours play in shaping co-worker trust within start-ups. Using data from the GUESSS (2018) international study of entrepreneurial attitudes and experiences, we find that certain social sexual behaviours undermine trust, and related outcomes such as the willingness to delegate and the sense that co-workers are honest. In particular, experiencing inappropriate looks, flirtation, or sexual gossip predict lower levels of co-worker trust. Our findings also indicate that characteristics of the source of the behaviour are important in terms of gender and hierarchical relationship. In our discussion section, we consider the mechanisms underlying these relationships and in particular how social sexual behaviour may influence trustworthiness. Taken together, our results point to a significant efficiency cost to new enterprises that take a permissive view of social sexual behaviour in the workplace.

Suppression of Permissive Norms in the Medieval Jewish Family

Suppression of Permissive Norms in the Medieval Jewish Family Shalem Yahalom The article surveys the development of the approaches towards nonfertile marital life in Ashkenazic and Sephardic communities. It appears that twelfth-century Ashkenazic Halakhah eroded the duty of procreation, leading to its permissive view of unnatural relations. In that view, aspiring to actualize sexual desires is legitimate, and satisfaction within married life prevents infidelity and sin. It should be recalled that in the Middle Ages pregnancy posed an extremely high risk to a woman's life, and unnatural relations served as an effective contraceptive method. In the thirteenth century, the trend of religious extremism in the Jewish community in France and the struggle against Cathar promiscuity in the general society led to the setting of moral and legal restrictions regarding this conduct. The new norm viewed the prevention of potential life as an act of murder, so that one who wasted semen in this manner was deserving of death as if he had committed bloodshed. [End Page 183] Shalem Yahalom Ariel University Copyright © 2020 Association for Jewish Studies

Vocal learning: Beyond the continuum.

Vocal learning is the ability to modify vocal output on the basis of experience. Traditionally, species have been classified as either displaying or lacking this ability. A recent proposal, the vocal learning continuum, recognizes the need to have a more nuanced view of this phenotype and abandon the yes–no dichotomy. However, it also limits vocal learning to production of novel calls through imitation, moreover subserved by a forebrain-to-phonatory-muscles circuit. We discuss its limitations regarding the characterization of vocal learning across species and argue for a more permissive view.

Contract Variation and Changed Expectations

The much-maligned rule in Stilk v. Myrick, in which fresh consideration is required for a contract variation to be enforceable, is giving way across many common law jurisdictions. The purpose of this article is not to defend the doctrine of consideration from its critics, but rather to suggest that its replacement, the doctrine of economic duress, is a cure that is worse than the disease. The consideration requirement has been displaced without sufficient attention to the complementary role of promissory estoppel. By consequence, the flexibility advantages offered by equity may be circumscribed by an overly permissive view of contract variation. When both contract variations and suspensions are considered, the model of economic duress is found to be morally unpersuasive and economically inefficient. This article proposes that the modernization of the law of contract variation should be based on a model of changed expectations, wherein the parties’ expectation of performance can be varied by gratuitous promises, but these gratuitous promises are revocable with reasonable notice.

Antitrust Standing after Apple v. Pepper: Application to the Sports Betting Data Market

In Apple v. Pepper, the U.S. Supreme Court expressed a largely permissive view about whether certain potential plaintiffs have legal standing to pursue antitrust lawsuits in federal court. The Apple v. Pepper ruling provided important clarity about the scope of the so-called indirect purchaser rule set forth forty-plus years earlier in Illinois Brick. This paper first summarizes the key takeaways from the Apple v. Pepper decision released on May 13, 2019, positioning the ruling vis-à-vis other standing-related cases that have sometimes closed the courtroom doors to plaintiffs alleging anticompetitive conduct under the Sherman Act and Clayton Act. This paper then applies the lessons from Apple v. Pepper to sports betting data, an emerging tech-focused market. This paper concludes by outlining how—and why—this market will likely be subject to antitrust scrutiny soon.

Managing Cartels Through Patent Pools

This article addresses one aspect of patent pools that has not received much attention—a patent pool’s role in stabilizing a cartel of downstream producers. This article first reviews the problem of cartel cheating. Any potential mechanisms that a cartel can use to increase its stability face three main challenges: (1) the cost of management, (2) agency costs, and (3) the requirement of secrecy. This article argues that the vertical licensor–licensee relationship inherent to a patent pool would contribute to more effective monitoring of compliance with cartel agreements by licensees. It also argues that the aggregation of patents in a patent pool would better effectuate the punishment of cartel cheating. The article’s main finding that a patent pool is uniquely suited to manage a cartel is a reminder that an overly permissive view of patent pools can invite anticompetitive hazards.

Public Reason and Abortion: Was Rawls Right After All?

In ‘Public Reason and Prenatal Moral Status’ (2015), Jeremy Williams argues that the ideal of Rawlsian public reason commits its devotees to the radically permissive view that abortion ought to be available with little or no qualification throughout pregnancy. This is because the only (allegedly) political value that favours protection of the foetus for its own sake—the value of ‘respect for human life’—turns out not to be a political value at all, and so its invocation in support of considerations bearing upon the permissibility of abortion is beyond public reason’s remit. Thus, it will scarcely if ever be legitimate to restrict women’s equality and bodily autonomy for the sake of the foetus, even at full term. In this paper, I argue that Williams fails to establish that Rawlsian reasonable citizens must endorse the radically permissive stance vis-a-vis abortion. Citizens can, I claim, reasonably accord the value of respect for human life weight, and indeed converge on the claim that it outweighs other salient political values, during later stages of gestation. Nevertheless, Williams’s argument gets something right in that it reveals why the value of respect for human life is inadmissible at the bar of public reason in early stages of pregnancy. But then, far from throwing Rawlsian public reason into disrepute, Williams’s argument actually (albeit inadvertently) provides arguably more compelling grounds than any hitherto rallied for endorsing Rawls’s much maligned claim that opposition to the duly qualified right to abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy is ‘unreasonable’.

Managing Cartels through Patent Pools

Patent pools can serve many purposes. Some of them are procompetitive while others anticompetitive. This article addresses one aspect of patent pools that has not received much attention—a patent pool’s role in stabilizing a cartel of downstream producers. The article first reviews the problem of cartel cheating, which threatens the stability of cartels. Any potential mechanisms that cartels can use to increase stability face three main challenges: (1) the cost of management, (2) agency costs, and (3) the requirement of secrecy. Our analysis shows that a vertically-related firm is an ideal candidate to manage a cartel. Our analysis has important implications for our understanding of patent pools. Because downstream producers were in a vertical relationship with a patent pool, they can create a patent pool to facilitate collusion. The article argues that the vertical licensor-licensee relationship gives a patent pool greater chances to evade antitrust scrutiny and more latitude in monitoring downstream producers’ performances. It also argues that the aggregation of patents in a patent pool would make it more effective in punishing cartel cheating. The article’s main finding that a patent pool is uniquely suited to manage a downstream cartel is a reminder that an overly permissive view of patent pools can invite anticompetitive hazards.

What Do Object Files Pick Out?

Many authors have posited an “object file” system, which underlies perceptual selection and tracking of objects. Several have proposed that this system internalizes principles specifying what counts as an object and relies on them during tracking. Here I consider a popular view on which the object file system is tuned to entities that satisfy principles of three-dimensionality, cohesion, and boundedness. I argue that the evidence gathered in support of this view is consistent with a more permissive view on which object files select and track according to well-known perceptual organization criteria. Further evidence supplies positive support for the permissive view.

CAN THE LOTTERY PARADOX BE SOLVED BY IDENTIFYING EPISTEMIC JUSTIFICATION WITH EPISTEMIC PERMISSIBILITY?

AbstractThomas Kroedel argues that the lottery paradox can be solved by identifying epistemic justification with epistemic permissibility rather than epistemic obligation. According to hispermissibility solution, we are permitted to believe of each lottery ticket that it will lose, but since permissions do not agglomerate, it does not follow that we are permitted to have all of these beliefs together, and therefore it also does not follow that we are permitted to believe that all tickets will lose. I present two objections to this solution. First, even if justification itself amounts to no more than epistemic permissibility, the lottery paradox recurs at the level of doxastic obligations unless one adopts an extremely permissive view about suspension of belief that is in tension with our practice of doxastic criticism. Second, even if there are no obligations to believe lottery propositions, the permissibility solution fails because epistemic permissions typically agglomerate, and the lottery case provides no exception to this rule.

Combining off-the-shelf components to clean a translation memory

We present a system to identify erroneous entries in a translation memory. It is a machine learning system that learns to classify entries according to either a strict or a permissive view on correctness. It is trained on features relating to segment length, translation quality checks, spelling and grammar errors, and additionally uses external data for detecting problems with fluency and lexical choice.

Economic crisis and residents’ perception of the impacts of tourism in mass tourism destinations

Abstract In times of economic uncertainty and crisis, residents' perceptions of the impacts of tourism and their support for tourism development may be different to those noted in times of prosperity. This study tests the influence of an economic crisis on such perceptions and residents' willingness to support the development of tourism. The research compares data gathered in 2006, in a booming economic environment, with data from 2014, in the middle of a long-lasting economic recession. The data are from two major international mass tourism resorts in Spain: Mallorca and Tenerife. Results indicate that an economic recession causes a significant growth of the residents' support towards tourism, particularly due to a significant decrease in the residents' perception of costs related to such development. These findings highlight how economic crises influence residents' perceptions of the impacts of tourism and lead to an underestimation of costs. Hence, it evidences the crucial role that resort managers have to play to ensure the sustainability of the destination at times when a more permissive view is taken by residents.

Justification as faultlessness

According to deontological approaches to justification, we can analyze justification in deontic terms. In this paper, I try to advance the discussion of deontological approaches by applying recent insights in the semantics of deontic modals. Specifically, I use the distinction between weak necessity modals (should, ought to) and strong necessity modals (must, have to) to make progress on a question that has received surprisingly little discussion in the literature, namely: ‘What’s the best version of a deontological approach?’ The two most obvious hypotheses are the Permissive View, according to which justified expresses permission, and the Obligatory View, according to which justified expresses some species of obligation. I raise difficulties for both of these hypotheses. In light of these difficulties, I propose a new position, according to which justified expresses a property I call faultlessness, defined as the dual of weak necessity modals. According to this view, an agent is justified in $$\phi$$ -ing iff it’s not the case that she should [/ought] not $$\phi$$ . I argue that this ‘Faultlessness View’ gives us precisely what’s needed to avoid the problems facing the Permissive and Obligatory Views.