In Memoriam: Daniel BELL (1919-2011)

2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-9
Author(s):  
Nathan Glazer
Keyword(s):  
Common Sense ◽  
Harvard University ◽  
Academic Life ◽  
American Business ◽  
Columbia University ◽  
The Public ◽  
Social Theorist ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Henry Ford ◽  
In Memoriam

Daniel Bell, the distinguished and influential American sociologist and social theorist, died at the age of 91 years in January, 2011. Bell had an amazingly wide range of interests and knowledge. While he could be called a sociologist—he had served as a professor of sociology at Columbia University, and then as Henry Ford II Professor of Sociology at Harvard University—his academic life came after a long and varied career in serious journalism, as managing editor of the socialist weekly The New Leader, as editor of Common Sense, and as an editor and writer on the American business magazine Fortune. He also founded, with Irving Kristol, and edited for some years, the influential American quarterly The Public Interest.

The Death of Gilles Deleuze as Composition of a Concept

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-138
Author(s):  
Alain Beaulieu ◽  
Douglas Ord
Keyword(s):  
Gilles Deleuze ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
In Memoriam ◽  
Looking Glass

There was a wide range of in memoriam and homages published in the years following Deleuze's suicide. However, none of them succeeded in grasping ‘the evential’ aspect of his death. This paper identifies a series of errors in the literature on Deleuze's death. It also suggests a way to overcome them by considering a singular encounter between Alice's passage through the looking glass and Deleuze's defenestration, which both took place on 4 November. We will show how a new conception of death as event comes out of this unseen connection.

Book Reviews

Theoria ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (162) ◽  
pp. 117-126
Author(s):  
David James ◽  
Bahareh Ebne Alian ◽  
Jean Terrier
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Harvard University ◽  
Columbia University ◽  
University Of Chicago ◽  
Ernst Bloch ◽  
Forms Of Life ◽  
University Of Chicago Press

The Actual and the Rational: Hegel and Objective Spirit, by Jean-François Kervégan. Translated by Daniela Ginsburg and Martin Shuster. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018. xxiii + 384 pp.Avicenna and the Aristotelian Left, by Ernst Bloch. Translated by Loren Goldman and Peter Thompson. New York: Columbia University Press, 2019. xxvi +109 pp.Critique of Forms of Life, by Rahel Jaeggi. Translated by Ciaran Cronin. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2018. xx + 395 pp.

Unified approach to spatial description of objects terrain departmental registries / cadastres as a perspective basis of the state system territory mapping

2019 ◽  
Vol 942 (12) ◽  
pp. 41-49
Author(s):  
A.M. Portnov
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Data ◽  
Spatial Description ◽  
Unified Approach ◽  
Technological Basis ◽  
The Public ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Map Data ◽  
Consistency Verification ◽  
Thematic Data

Using unified principles of formation and maintenance of register/cadaster with information about spatial data of landscape objects as the informational and technological basis for updating the public topographic maps and modernization of state cartographic system is proposed. The problems of informational relevancy of unified electronical cartographic basis and capacity of its renovation in case of public cadaster map data. The need to modernize the system of classification and coding of cartographic information, the use of unified standards for the coordinate description of register objects for their topological consistency, verification and updating is emphasized. Implementing such solutions is determined by economical expediency as well as necessity of providing a variety of real thematic data for wide range of consumers in the field of urban planning, territories development and completing the tasks of Governmental program “Digital economy of the Russian Federation”.

scholarly journals Citizen views on genome editing: effects of species and purpose

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gesa Busch ◽  
Erin Ryan ◽  
Marina A. G. von Keyserlingk ◽  
Daniel M. Weary
Keyword(s):  
Disease Resistance ◽  
Product Quality ◽  
Genome Editing ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Perceived Risks ◽  
Public Response ◽  
The Public ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Us

AbstractPublic opinion can affect the adoption of genome editing technologies. In food production, genome editing can be applied to a wide range of applications, in different species and with different purposes. This study analyzed how the public responds to five different applications of genome editing, varying the species involved and the proposed purpose of the modification. Three of the applications described the introduction of disease resistance within different species (human, plant, animal), and two targeted product quality and quantity in cattle. Online surveys in Canada, the US, Austria, Germany and Italy were carried out with a total sample size of 3698 participants. Using a between-subject design, participants were confronted with one of the five applications and asked to decide whether they considered it right or wrong. Perceived risks, benefits, and the perception of the technology as tampering with nature were surveyed and were complemented with socio-demographics and a measure of the participants’ moral foundations. In all countries, participants evaluated the application of disease resistance in humans as most right to do, followed by disease resistance in plants, and then in animals, and considered changes in product quality and quantity in cattle as least right to do. However, US and Italian participants were generally more positive toward all scenarios, and German and Austrian participants more negative. Cluster analyses identified four groups of participants: ‘strong supporters’ who saw only benefits and little risks, ‘slight supporters’ who perceived risks and valued benefits, ‘neutrals’ who showed no pronounced opinion, and ‘opponents’ who perceived higher risks and lower benefits. This research contributes to understanding public response to applications of genome editing, revealing differences that can help guide decisions related to adoption of these technologies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document