Web Credibility Measurment

2007 ◽  
pp. 296-298
Author(s):  
R. Reynolds
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Web Site ◽  
Practical Wisdom ◽  
Moral Character ◽  
Response Format ◽  
Online Environment ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Web Credibility ◽  
The Web

Several researchers (e.g., Carter & Greenberg, 1965; Flanagin, & Metzger, 2000; Fogg, 2002; Johnson & Kaye, 2004; Newhagen & Nass, 1989) discuss or mention the concept of media or web credibility. The classic concept of credibility (typically attributed to Aristotle’s Rhetoric) identifies credibility as a multidimensional perception on the part of the receiver that the source of a message has a moral character, practical wisdom, and a concern for the common good. Warnick (2004) points out that the “authorless” nature of the online environment complicates the use of traditional analyses of credibility. The most common set of web credibility scales cited in the research are the Flanagin and Metzger (2000) items. The five Flanagin and Metzger scale items address the believability, accuracy, trustworthiness, bias, and completeness of the information on the web site. Other researchers have added other items such as fairness or depth of information. Flanagin and Metzger used a 7-point response format with anchors for each term (e.g., “Not At All Believable” to “Extremely Believable”). Other researchers have used a 5-point response format.

Ethics and Politics: A Response to Terchek and Moore

2000 ◽  
Vol 94 (4) ◽  
pp. 913-918 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas W. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Practical Wisdom ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Ethics And Politics

I respond to Terchek and Moore by investigating the interrelationship of ethics to politics in Aristotle's thought. To this end I defend two claims. First, doing ethics requires understanding politics. Second, politics requires practical wisdom and ethics. Since even the politics wanted by Terchek and Moore requires these virtues, they are wrong to claim that my account of the common good, resting as it does on similar virtues, is impractical and dangerous.

Speaking for Islam

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 110-127
Author(s):  
Abdoulaye Sounaye
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
The State ◽  
Institutional Transformation ◽  
The Political ◽  
Religious Authority ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Religion And State ◽  
Islamic Values ◽  
French Model

Unexpectedly, one of the marking features of democratization in Niger has been the rise of a variety of Islamic discourses. They focus on the separation between religion and the state and, more precisely, the way it is manifested through the French model of laïcité, which democratization has adopted in Niger. For many Muslim actors, laïcité amounts to a marginalization of Islamic values and a negation of Islam. This article present three voices: the Collaborators, the Moderates, and the Despisers. Each represents a trend that seeks to influence the state’s political and ideological makeup. Although the ulama in general remain critical vis-à-vis the state’s political and institutional transformation, not all of them reject the principle of the separation between religion and state. The Collaborators suggest cooperation between the religious authority and the political one, the Moderates insist on the necessity for governance to accommodate the people’s will and visions, and the Despisers reject the underpinning liberalism that voids religious authority and demand a total re-Islamization. I argue that what is at stake here is less the separation between state and religion than the modality of this separation and its impact on religious authority. The targets, tones, and justifications of the discourses I explore are evidence of the limitations of a democratization project grounded in laïcité. Thus in place of a secular democratization, they propose a conservative democracy based on Islam and its demands for the realization of the common good.

What Theology Should and Should Not Learn from the Social Sciences About the Common Good

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary L. Hirschfeld
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Social Thought ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Human Flourishing ◽  
Catholic Social Thought ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Common

There are two ways to answer the question, What can Catholic social thought learn from the social sciences about the common good? A more modern form of Catholic social thought, which primarily thinks of the common good in terms of the equitable distribution of goods like health, education, and opportunity, could benefit from the extensive literature in public policy, economics, and political science, which study the role of institutions and policies in generating desirable social outcomes. A second approach, rooted in pre-Machiavellian Catholic thought, would expand on this modern notion to include concerns about the way the culture shapes our understanding of what genuine human flourishing entails. On that account, the social sciences offer a valuable description of human life; but because they underestimate how human behavior is shaped by institutions, policies, and the discourse of social science itself, their insights need to be treated with caution.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document