Sympathetic Selection: Eugenics

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob Boddice
Keyword(s):  
Social Policy ◽  
Social Cohesion ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Moral Progress ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Policy Interventions ◽  
Central Tenet ◽  
The Common ◽  
Francis Galton ◽  
Highly Evolved

Chapter 5 returns to the blueprint for the evolution of sympathy in Darwin’s Descent, picking up at the point where Darwin introduces a paradoxical prediction of degeneration, caused by the same force that inspired social cohesion and moral progress. This chapter analyses the birth of the eugenics movement as a department of statistics, arising directly from a concern for the common good of civilised society – the central tenet of highly evolved sympathy. Unlike most studies of eugenics, this chapter focuses largely on the period before 1900, when the parameters of eugenic thought were being hashed out. It particularly focuses on the problem of degeneration as seen through the eyes of Francis Galton and Karl Pearson, who pointed to the need for social-policy interventions in breeding.

scholarly journals Social cohesion and social capital: Possible implications for the common good

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anita Cloete
Keyword(s):  
Social Capital ◽  
South African ◽  
Social Cohesion ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Specific Reference ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Bridging Social Capital ◽  
African Context ◽  
The Common

The main objective of the article is to identify the possible implications of social cohesion and social capital for the common good. In order to reach this overarching aim the following structure will be utilised. The first part explores the conceptual understanding of socialcohesion and social capital in order to establish how these concepts are related and how they could possibly inform each other. The contextual nature of social cohesion and social capital is briefly reflected upon, with specific reference to the South African context. The contribution of religious capital in the formation of social capital is explored in the last section of the article. The article could be viewed as mainly conceptual and explorative in nature in order to draw some conclusions about the common good of social capital and social cohesion.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: This article contributes to the interdisciplinary discourse on social cohesion with specific reference to the role of congregations. It provides a critical reflection on the role of congregations with regard to bonding and bridging social capital. The contextual nature of social cohesion is also addressed with specific reference to South Africa.

scholarly journals New Urbanism and Contextual Relativity: Insights from Sweden

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 404-416
Author(s):  
Crystal Filep ◽  
Michelle Thompson-Fawcett
Keyword(s):  
Urban Design ◽  
Social Cohesion ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Belief Systems ◽  
New Urbanism ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Urban Neighbourhoods ◽  
Beliefs And Values ◽  
The Common ◽  
The City

Contextual relativities in the diversifying expression of New Urbanism are increasingly important. In this article, we explore the significance of context using a Scandinavian setting as example. We examine two embodiments of the Swedish realisation of New Urban neighbourhoods. Important in our exploration are the relationalities with contemporary contexts and belief systems, since every effort to create space becomes “an elaboration of the beliefs and values of some collection of people, expressed and fostered in their promotion of a preferred reality” (Stokowski, 2002, p. 374). The findings from the study demonstrate that the Swedish New Urban neighbourhood—no matter how meaningful as a communicative form mediating between agents and structures—cannot effect social cohesion or isolation. Rather, form communicates or evokes meaning in a variety of complex ways, suggesting the importance of “look[ing] to multiply…our readings of the city” (Leach, 1997, p. 158), particularly high<em>-</em>level readings that echo notions of the common good. Those concerned with New Urbanism’s embodiments should deliberate on relational fluidities and thereby strike a balance between conceptualising such urban design as either deterministically exceeding its power (Lawhon, 2009) or as side-lined to the whimsical relativity of particular consumers (Latham, 2003; Smith, 2002).

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph Henham
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Social Cohesion ◽  
Moral Obligation ◽  
Common Good ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Social Divisions ◽  
Sentencing Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
Normative Dimension

The Introduction outlines the work’s rationale and scope. Two main propositions are advanced. First, it is argued that the values underpinning sentencing policy should promote social cohesion rather than neo-liberal retributive values, which tend to reinforce social divisions through the disproportionate use of incarceration. Thus, sentencing policy should reflect shared values that justify punishment for the common good. Crucially, the identification of such values is regarded as a moral obligation that falls to the state. Secondly, and fundamental to social justice and credible governance, is the normative dimension. Hence, values must be realized through practice so that outcomes have moral credibility at the community level. It is suggested how value-related information could be accommodated in individual cases, whilst maintaining the system’s overall consistency. Numerous changes to practice and guidance are advocated, the most important being that sentencers should be given more discretion, not less, to facilitate the changes proposed.

Cooperation and social policy: integrating evidence into practice – Introduction to the Issue

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Lazarus
Keyword(s):  
Social Policy ◽  
Real World ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Group Identification ◽  
Collective Good ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Motivational Influences ◽  
The Individual

How can research evidence on cooperation best be exploited to the advantage of social policy? In this issue we bring together behavioural researchers with expertise in cooperation and social policy practitioners to work together on a series of issues in social policy for which the major challenge is for the players involved to cooperate for the common good. In this introductory paper I first explain the nature of cooperation, its potential for the collective good and the obstacles to achieving that potential. After a brief review of behavioural research applications to social policy, I summarise evidence for the many factors that promote cooperation in experimental and real world settings and that might be employed in the policy arena. These factors represent the influence of a small number of motivational influences including reciprocity, fairness, reputation, group identification and social norms. Analysis of the research findings reveals ways in which the real world difficulties in promoting action for the common good might be overcome. Evolutionary behavioural analysis adds additional insights useful for policy development. Beyond the value of the individual contributions the issue as a whole has the potential to uncover new understanding of the relationships between policy problems and their solutions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document