The Norton Introduction to Philosophy, Second Edition, edited by Gideon Rosen, Alex Byrne, Joshua Cohen, Elizabeth Harman, and Seana Shiffrin

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-60
Author(s):  
Frank Boardman ◽  
Keyword(s):  

2004 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
William E. Scheuerman

Contemporary “flexible capitalism” requires novel forms of legal regulation. In this vein, Joshua Cohen, Michael Dorf, Archon Fung, and Charles Sabel have developed a provocative set of proposals for a new mode of regulatory law, what they describe as “democratic experimentalism” or, alternately, “directly deliberative polyarchy.” Their proposal are criticized: they not only fail to take traditional liberal democratic rule of law virtues seriously enough, but it remains unclear whether they can effectively tame and humanize capitalism. Instead, some evidence suggests that their proposals simply amount to a normatively problematic synchronization of the legal system with contemporary high-speed capitalism.


Author(s):  
Yvonne Mørck ◽  
Janne Westerdahl ◽  
Mette Liv Mertz ◽  
Jo Krøjer

I dette nummer er følgende blevet anmeldt: "Joshua Cohen, Matthew Howard & Martha C. Nussbaum: Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?" (Susan Moller Okin (eds.)), "Kroppe over grænser. Når kvinder handles til Danmark" (Ulrikke Moustgaard og Henrik Brun), "Det umenneskelige. Analyser af seksualitet, køn og identitet hos Karen Blixen" (Dag Heede), "(in)scibing body/landscape relations" (Bronwyn Davies).


Author(s):  
Jane Mansbridge ◽  
Joshua Cohen ◽  
Daniela Cammack ◽  
Peter Stone ◽  
Christopher H. Achen ◽  
...  

Hélene Landemore’s Open Democracy challenges today’s democracies to meet their legitimacy deficits by opening up a wide array of participatory opportunities, from enhanced forms of direct democracy, to internet crowdsourcing, to representation through random selection to a citizens’ assembly: “representing and being represented in turn” (p. xvii).  Her aim: to replace citizen consent with citizen power.  The critics advance both praise and misgivings.  Joshua Cohen would prefer Landemore’s proffered innovations as supplements, not alternatives, to the current system. Daniela Cammack would prefer more emphasis on the many forms of mass gathering, not representation.  Peter Stone considers citizens’ assemblies inadequate for popular sovereignty.  Christopher Achen warns of problems inaccurate representation, through both self-selection into the lottery and domination in the discussion. Ethan Lieb argues that particular innovations are useful only in some contexts, and that in each citizens should learn their appropriate role responsibilities. Landemore responds by agreeing, clarifying and rebutting.


2013 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Walton ◽  
Valeria Camia

AbstractThis paper discusses what type of sociological context is appropriate for Rawls’ ‘property-owning democracy’. Following certain suggestions offered by Rawls and in the work of Joshua Cohen, it explores, in particular, the kind of fraternity and social interaction suitable for citizens in Rawlsian society and the role of the state in engineering these bonds. Utilising a normative framework based on Rawls’ discussion of a property-owning democracy and various data sets, the paper argues that bonds of social trust, active participation in trade unions and enrolment in public schools, and the use of state policy to organise a mixture of public, cooperative, and private economic institutions would be suitable for a Rawlsian society to adopt because it appears that these structures are favourably connected to the ends of Rawlsian justice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 90-107
Author(s):  
Hana Wirth-Nesher

Abstract Most Jewish immigrants to America during the early 20th century arrived speaking Yiddish or Ladino and using Hebrew and Aramaic for liturgical purposes. When subsequent generations abandoned the first two languages, Hebrew and Aramaic were retained, used primarily for liturgy and rites of passage. Jewish American writers have often inserted Hebrew into their English texts by either reproducing the original alphabet or transliterating into Latin letters. This essay focuses on diverse strategies for representing liturgical Hebrew with an emphasis on the poetic, thematic, and sociolinguistic aspects of these expressions of both home and the foreign. Hebrew transliteration is discussed for its literary (rather than phonetic) rendering, for its multilingual creative contact with the other languages and cultures of each narrative. Among the authors whose works are discussed are Philip Roth, Michael Chabon, Nathan Englander, Joshua Cohen, Achy Obejas, and Gary Shteyngart.


Analysis ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 202-204
Author(s):  
D. Miller
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document