This article explores the issue of the elimination of state leaders, in particular in the context of armed conflict, with reference to the work of international lawyer Emer de Vattel (1714-1767). The article highlights the value of the Vattelian concepts of proportionality, necessity and state survival as tools for assessing targeted attacks on heads of state and government. It points out that the elimination of state leaders may produce unintended and indeterminate consequences, thereby increasing the complexity of proportionality and necessity (...) calculations. The impact of the targeting may be less unpredictable if the targeting entity carries out a fullfledged regime change, yet this practice is legally controversial on its own. (shrink)

On the moderate view, an objecting pharmacist may refuse to fill a prescription, provided that the pharmacist then refers the client to a non-objecting pharmacist who will fill the prescription in a timely manner (see, e.g., Cantor and Baum, 2004, or Brock, 2008). This view seeks to balance the interests of the pharmacist and the interests of the client. The complicity objection holds that the moderate view fails to balance these interests, because the referral itself makes the objecting pharmacist complicit (...) in the act she sought to stop or at least avoid (see, e.g., Brock, 2008, Card, 2007, Charo, 2005, Nelson 2005, Snyder, 2010, Wicclair, 2006). Some claim that this objection shows that an objecting pharmacist should not be required to refer the client to another pharmacist. But what are the limits of the complicity objection? For example, does the complicity objection imply that an objecting pharmacist should also refuse to return the prescription to the client? I argue that the complicity objection has this implication. This does not mean that pharmacists should confiscate prescriptions. My goal is just to examine the moral reach of the complicity objection to the moderate position. What we should do, once we recognize the reach of this objection, is a separate question that I do not take up here. (shrink)

Some argue that at least some non-liberal, non-democratic societies deserve fiill and good standing in the international community. These arguments imply that some divergence in understanding the role of the press is also justified and should be tolerated. But what are the limits of diversity here? I begin to find these limits by considering John Rawls's "decent" societies in the context of Amartya Sen's work on famine. Sen claims that a free press plays an important role in famine prevention. After (...) giving an account of press rights, I argue that a partially free press can play the role Sen attributes to the free press. I then argue that decent societies could and should accommodate such partially free presses. (shrink)

Kant urteilt: 'Wolffii Logic ist die beste, die man antrifft'. Und in der Kritik schreibt er: 'Im zukünftigen System der Metaphysik müssen wir dereinst der strengen Methode des berühmten Wolff, des grössten unter allen dogmatischen Philosophen, folgen'. Logik und Metaphysik bedingen einander. Ausgewählte, begriffslogische Wegmarken zur Kritik können den Lektüreweg folglich erleichtern. Texte der damaligen Schullogik (Gottsched, Marquardt etc.) verdeutlichen Kants Terminologie und erleichtern den Zugang zu seinen Gedanken. Kontrastierend wird eine Abgrenzung zur Logik der Idealisten vorgenommen.

Wie frei sind wir? Ist der freie Wille eine Illusion? Mit dem Disput zwischen Philosophie und empirischen Wissenschaften um unsere Freiheit greift dieser Band eine Debatte auf, die in jüngster Zeit nicht nur akademisch mit Vehemenz geführt wurde, sondern auch auf breite öffentliche Resonanz gestoßen ist. Der Autor kritisiert den empirischen Angriff auf unseren freien Willen, stellt aber zugleich die abstrakte philosophische Freiheitsdebatte auf eine solide empirische Basis und deckt so nicht nur die Grenzen, sondern auch die Perspektiven einer empirischen (...) Annäherung an die philosophische Frage Wie frei sind wir? auf. (shrink)

This letter corrects errors of fact contained in a review by Yves Gingras of a biopic about Henri Poincaré.

The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 11, Issue 12, Page 13-16, December 2011.

The studies in this 1996 volume consider Hegel's mature views on ethics and politics and relate them to the classical tradition of Western political thought. Manfred Tiedel brings to the analysis of Hegel's views a high level of scholarship and a thorough knowledge of earlier thinkers. Concentrating on the Philosophy of Right, he reveals connections which clarify Hegel's understanding of his relationship with his predecessors and of the transformation of political philosophy which Hegel wanted to effect. In doing so, he (...) throws much needed light on the structure of Hegel's work and on many of its more obscure doctrines concerning natural law, political economy, civil society and the state. Professor Riedel's work is highly regarded in Germany. The translation of these essays will provide a valuable counterpart to the approach of most English-speaking scholars and will help significantly to extend the understanding and appreciation of Hegel's political philosophy. (shrink)

This original and accessible text is more than an introduction to comparative philosophy in the East and West. It is also a guide to 'philosophizing' as a thinking process. In addition to outlining the presuppositions of different traditions, it discusses their methods and techniques for reasoning in what the author calls four dimensions of 'philosophical space': object, subject, the situational and the aspective/perspective dimension.

Recent discoveries have revealed that there is intellectual bias in the field of climate science; the present paper makes the case that this moral and intellectual rot has also affected the field of economics.