scholarly journals Metaphor and Fields: Common Ground, Common Language, and the Future of Psychoanalysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-70
Author(s):  
Shiva Srinivasan
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Common Language ◽  
The Future

Famiglia, sessualitŕ, riproduzione: un puzzle da ricomporre

2009 ◽  
pp. 123-134
Author(s):  
Stefania Bernini
Keyword(s):  
Family History ◽  
Gender Studies ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Gender And Sexuality ◽  
Common Language ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Fruitful Cooperation ◽  
The Relationship

- Family, Sexuality, Reproduction: an Unsolved Puzzle discusses the relationship between family history, gender studies and the studies of sexualities. Its starting point is the consideration that, perhaps surprisingly, disciplines and research interests apparently close have struggled to find a common language and a fruitful cooperation. Moving from a perspective of family history, this article explores causes and consequences of this apparent difficulty in finding a common ground between scholars of family, gender and sexuality and the possibility of overcoming it.Keywords: Family, Sexuality, Reproduction, Gender studies, Historiography, History.Parole chiave: Famiglia, Sessualitŕ, Riproduzione, Studi di genere, Storiografia, Storia.

scholarly journals Eliciting probabilistic expectations: Collaborations between psychologists and economists

2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (13) ◽  
pp. 3297-3304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wändi Bruine de Bruin ◽  
Baruch Fischhoff
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Economic Modeling ◽  
Common Language ◽  
Mutual Benefit ◽  
Purchasing Decisions ◽  
Major Research ◽  
Sense Of Ownership ◽  
Research Goal ◽  
Essential Support

We describe two collaborations in which psychologists and economists provided essential support on foundational projects in major research programs. One project involved eliciting adolescents’ expectations regarding significant future life events affecting their psychological and economic development. The second project involved eliciting consumers’ expectations regarding inflation, a potentially vital input to their investment, saving, and purchasing decisions. In each project, we sought questions with the precision needed for economic modeling and the simplicity needed for lay respondents. We identify four conditions that, we believe, promoted our ability to sustain these transdisciplinary collaborations and coproduce the research: (i) having a shared research goal, which neither discipline could achieve on its own; (ii) finding common ground in shared methodology, which met each discipline’s essential evidentiary conditions, but without insisting on its culturally acquired tastes; (iii) sharing the effort throughout, with common language and sense of ownership; and (iv) gaining mutual benefit from both the research process and its products.

Readdressing Our Moral Relationship to Nonhuman Creatures: Commentary on “A Dialogue on Species-Specific Rights: Humans and Animals in Bioethics”

1997 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 445-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Whitehouse
Keyword(s):  
Moral Status ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
The Future ◽  
Moral Strangers ◽  
Ethical Thinking ◽  
Moral Relationship ◽  
Moral Status Of Animals ◽  
Species Specific ◽  
Negative Tone

Community discourse about the moral status of animals is critical to the future of bioethics and, indeed, to the future of modern society. Thomasma and Loewy are to be commended for sharing thoughts and trying to attain some common ground. I am grateful to them for fostering discussion and allowing me to respond. I cannot endorse the negative tone of the end of their conversation, however. They end with serious concerns about the possibility of any agreement between themselves. Even though I perceive some moral differences between them, I do not believe that they are moral strangers. In this commentary I review the ways in which I agree and disagree with Thomasma and Loewy and conclude with some thoughts about the kind of broad ethical thinking we need to do to address our moral relationship to nonhuman, living creatures.

Relations between the Orthodox and the Anglicans in the Twentieth Century: A Reason to Consider the Present and the Future of the Theological Dialogue

Ecclesiology ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 350-374
Author(s):  
Vassiliki El. Stathokosta
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Trinitarian Theology ◽  
Greek Orthodox ◽  
Ecumenical Movement ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Ordination Of Women

Taking as a starting point the Patriarchal Encyclical of 1902-4, which celebrates one hundred and ten years in 2012 (1902-2012), attention is given to its contribution to Anglican-Orthodox dialogue. A decisive landmark in Anglican-Orthodox relations and in the formation of the Ecumenical Movement was the visit of the Greek Church delegation to the USA and England in 1918 and the discussions with Episcopalians and Anglicans on Christology and Triadology (‘Trinitarian theology’) as well as ecclesiology. The process of this dialogue is examined here through the evaluations of three distinguished Greek Orthodox figures, carefully chosen as representative of their time, and in the light of such innovations as the ordination of women. This study emphasizes that the ecclesiological and theological proximity of Orthodoxy and Anglicanism is a solid basis for the continuation of their theological dialogue. The documents of Moscow (1976), Dublin (1984) and the Cyprus Statement (2006) prove that there is sufficient common ground to continue a fruitful discussion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document