scholarly journals The Concepts of Common Good and Public Interest: From Plato to Biobanking

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 554-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
KADRI SIMM
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Modern Times ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Worthy Goal ◽  
The Common

The expression “common good” usually conjures up benevolent associations: it is something to be desired, a worthy goal, and it would be a brave person who declared he or she was against the common good. Yet modern times have taught us to be critical and even suspicious of such grand rhetoric, leading us to query what lies behind this ambitious notion, who formulates what it stands for, and how such formulations have been reached.

scholarly journals The standing of the public interest

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (49) ◽  
pp. 46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amitai Etzioni
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Good ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
The Common ◽  
Liberal Communitarianism

Liberal communitarianism holds that a good society is based on a carefully crafted balance between individual rights and the common good; that both normative elements have the same fundamental standing and neither a priori trumps the other. Societies can lose the good balance either by becoming excessively committed to the common good (e.g. national security) or to individual rights (e.g. privacy). Even societies that have established a careful balance often need to recalibrate it following changes in historical conditions (such as the 2001 attacks on the American homeland) and technological developments (such as the invention of smart cell phones).

The Common Good and the Public Interest

1980 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce Douglass
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Good ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common

Accounting, the public interest and the common good

2020 ◽  
Vol 67-68 ◽  
pp. 102144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila Killian ◽  
Philip O'Regan
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Good ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common

scholarly journals IMPLICATIONS OF THE CONCEPT OF THE “COMMON GOOD” FOR POLITICAL LEADERSHIP

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Good Life ◽  
The Good Life ◽  
Political Society ◽  
Political Leaders ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The World ◽  
The Common

Political society is established for the provision of the good life for the citizens of the society. But to ensure that the task is carried out, political societies elect or appoint leaders saddled with the responsibility of guiding, directing, leading and organizing the society. Capable and efficient political leaders help their societies to develop economically and help the citizens to have access to the good life. They are concerned about the common good of the society. Inept and inefficient leaders often are concerned about their own selfish interests and bring miseries and suffering to their peoples. In spite of the ideals of good leadership and the positive values of working for the public interest and common good of their societies, there are still many political leaders who are in power for their own sakes. Because of this there are many underdeveloped and poor societies especially in the Global South. This paper uses a critical analytic and hermeneutic method to examine and appraise the concept of the common good and its implications for political leaders. The value of the common good is applicable to every society. Political leaders everywhere are to strive for the common good. The paper finds that bad and corrupt political leaders are still prevalent in many societies in the world. The presented research will also help to designate the feature of the articulation of «common good» in the modern philosophical conceptions. The paper concludes that there is need to highlight the value of the common good that political leaders should strive for and help their societies obtain. This done there will be a higher level of peace and harmonies in political societies.

scholarly journals “Interest of the Individual” versus “Common Good” and “Public Interest” in the Context of Technological Progress in Medicine

2020 ◽  
pp. 41-52
Author(s):  
Anetta Breczko
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Technological Progress ◽  
Human Enhancement ◽  
Cultural Dimensions ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
European Culture ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Individual

The paper discusses issues tied to technological progress in the field of medicine, with respect to the categories of: “interest of the individual”, “common good” and “public interest”. The author attempts to present potential moral and legal threats that can result from the application of the latest medical technologies. The paper points out fundamental problems related to technology, medicine, law, and ethics. The analysis performed by the author shows that the technological methods for “human enhancement” can yield great benefits not only from the standpoint of individual interests of patients, but also in the context of the common good and public interest. On the other hand, the transhumanist dreams of the “bionic man” (the “perfect man”) collide with the current global situation, related to the coronavirus pandemic. The noticeable inefficiency of the healthcare system in that respect breeds doubts whether it will be possible, in the short-term perspective, to push back diseases and postpone the moment of death. It is important for the public interest to be understood properly: as the embodiment of the common good (that is, as a kind of a common denominator for the society), and not as the instrument for the fulfilment of the particular goals of the ruling majority. The development of civilization must be based on the universal, common values developed in the European culture. Technological progress in medicine should be accompanied by rational debate on its social costs and by genuine assessment or risks and threats (in the individual, social, civilizationational and cultural dimensions). Such debate is indispensable for the common good.

The accountability of power: Democracy and governance in modern times

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Hupe ◽  
Arthur Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Dual Problem ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Representative Democracy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Modern Times ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Democratic Control ◽  
The Common

In modern governing, a variety of actors in the public domain daily make decisions with consequences for the common good, but how these actors are held accountable to political representatives is not always clear. While representative democracy in most societies still functions as the traditional standard, deficits in democratic control are perceived. There is an exercise of power-without-corresponding-representation. At the same time modern citizens appear hard to engage in politics. Representation-without-corresponding-participation also appears. We address this dual problem, one of accountability and one of legitimacy, in terms of political theory. Various strategies are explored, indicating that some of them contribute to bringing democracy up to date more than others. In particular, it seems fundamental to rethink contemporary democracy by connecting it with the multi-dimensional character of governance. Functional participation by modern citizens can enhance the legitimacy of the exercise of power by making the latter accountable in a multi-local way.

Engaging Sensibilities and the Common Good

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph Henham
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Social Values ◽  
Practical Relevance ◽  
Positive Role ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Sharing Values ◽  
The Common ◽  
Shared Social Values

This chapter discusses two interrelated concerns. It begins by explaining why sentencing should engage more directly and effectively with the emotions and sensibilities of its relevant audiences before considering the broader question of how it might better serve the ‘public interest’ by contributing more effectively to the ‘common good’. The discussion then explains why an ideological commitment to shared social values is considered pivotal in encouraging adherence to penal norms and influencing conduct. It suggests that embedding and sharing values within and between communities is more likely where the state takes a positive role in encouraging the development of reciprocal notions of awareness, mutual respect, and responsibility, both individual and collective. Such policies should have moral credibility and practical relevance. Important parallels between religious and secular notions of the common good are drawn, providing insights that bear directly on sentencing policy’s role in promoting social justice.

Social impact reporting in the public interest: the case of accounting standardisation

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Adams ◽  
Dale Tweedie ◽  
Kristy Muir
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Stakeholder Views ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
The Common

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the extent to which accounting standards for social impact reporting are in the public interest. This study aims to explore what the public interest means for social impact reporting by charities; and assess the extent to which the accounting standardisation of social impact reporting supports the public interest so defined. Design/methodology/approach This study conducts a case study of how stakeholders in Australian charities conceptualise the public interest when discussing accounting standardisation. This paper distinguishes three concepts of the public interest from prior research, namely, aggregative, processual and common good. For each, this paper analyses the implications for accounting and how accountants serve the public interest, and how they align with stakeholder views. Findings Stakeholder views align with the aggregative and processual concepts of public interest, however this was contested and partial. Accounting standards for social impact reporting will only serve the public interest if they also capture and implement the common good approach. Practical implications Clarifying how key stakeholders interpret the public interest can help standard-setters and governments design (or withhold) accounting standards on social impact reporting. This paper also distinguishes different practical roles for accountants in this domain – information merchants, umpires or advocates, which each public interest concept implies. Originality/value This paper extends prior research on accounting for the public interest to social impact reporting. The paper empirically demonstrates the salience of the common good concept of public interest and demonstrates the diversity of views on the standardisation of social impact reporting by charities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document