Im "Labyrinth der Legitimitäten" und Ethosanalyse. Carl Schmitt und Herfried Münkler über die neuen Kriege und Krieger

In the "Labyrinth of Legitimacy" and Ethos Analysis. Carl Schmitt and Herfried Münkler on the New Wars and New Warriors The article analyzes Münkler's continuation of Carl Schmitt's late work on international law in the book Kriegssplitter and emphasizes its divergent ethical approach.

Artificial Intelligence, ethics, and the catholic church

The article focused on problems of Artificial Intelligence, questions of ethics and role and position of the Catholic Church. Pontifical Academy for Life, Microsoft, IBM, FAO, the Italia Government, signed on February 2020 the “Call for an AI Ethics”, a document developed to support an ethical approach to Artificial Intelligence and promote a sense of responsibility among organizations, governments, and institutions with the aim to create a future in which digital innovation and technological progress serve human genius and creativity and not their gradual replacement. The objective of the Pontifical Academy for Life is the defence and promotion of the value of human life and of the dignity of the person. Let us pray that the progress of robotics and artificial intelligence may always serve humankind, said pope Francis in November 2020.

Jewish Ethics Regarding Refugees: Ideology and Realization

This article addresses the Jewish ethical approach to refugees. According to Jewish ethics, help must be offered to refugees of a foreign people, and sometimes, for the sake of peace, even to those of an enemy state. Reviewing the Jewish sources, I conclude that from an ethical point of view, preference should be given to refugees who are near the border over those from farther away. Priority must be given to those in acute distress who lack the basic items of sustenance. Sometimes there is a special value in finding a way to assist even one's enemies in the hope that such help will break down the barriers of hatred. Similarly, it is ethically preferable to offer help to blameless children over adults, whose intentions might be suspect.

Strategy as Ethical Persuasion - How Aristotle Can Make Strategy Ethical

<p>In this thesis it is argued, that managers with strategic responsibilities are unlikely to commit to contemporary business ethics, because its deontological nature is limited for strategic work's teleological focus. This is a problem because when managers do not commit to business ethics, they can damage the ethical culture in their companies. Unethical cultures are nests for scandals and malpractices that can hurt companies' reputation and, in turn, their profits. However, if managers were to commit to ethical behaviour the ethical culture would strengthen. For that reason, I have proposed an Aristotelian approach to ethics that could be useful for managers, when making strategic decisions. This could help strengthen the ethical culture in their companies. Three managers with knowledge and experience of strategic decision making have been interviewed to test the usefulness and ethicality of the Aristotelian approach. The findings indicate that the Aristotelian approach could be useful for guiding strategic decision making. One respondent even said that the Aristotelian approach's rhetorical considerations could improve strategic decision making in his company. Despite finding the Aristotelian approach beneficial for strategic decision making, two of the respondents did not think that the approach would be used for strategic decision making in their companies. The approach was said to be too abstract for managers to use in relation to all the practical issues they have to deal with. All the respondents agreed, that the Aristotelian approach highlighted some ethical considerations, but they were reluctant to call it an ethical approach. However, it did not really matter to them whether the approach was ethical or not, because to them, strategic decisions where ethically neutral. This final statement supports that the deontological nature of contemporary business ethics is not useful for strategic work.</p>

Strategy as Ethical Persuasion - How Aristotle Can Make Strategy Ethical

<p>In this thesis it is argued, that managers with strategic responsibilities are unlikely to commit to contemporary business ethics, because its deontological nature is limited for strategic work's teleological focus. This is a problem because when managers do not commit to business ethics, they can damage the ethical culture in their companies. Unethical cultures are nests for scandals and malpractices that can hurt companies' reputation and, in turn, their profits. However, if managers were to commit to ethical behaviour the ethical culture would strengthen. For that reason, I have proposed an Aristotelian approach to ethics that could be useful for managers, when making strategic decisions. This could help strengthen the ethical culture in their companies. Three managers with knowledge and experience of strategic decision making have been interviewed to test the usefulness and ethicality of the Aristotelian approach. The findings indicate that the Aristotelian approach could be useful for guiding strategic decision making. One respondent even said that the Aristotelian approach's rhetorical considerations could improve strategic decision making in his company. Despite finding the Aristotelian approach beneficial for strategic decision making, two of the respondents did not think that the approach would be used for strategic decision making in their companies. The approach was said to be too abstract for managers to use in relation to all the practical issues they have to deal with. All the respondents agreed, that the Aristotelian approach highlighted some ethical considerations, but they were reluctant to call it an ethical approach. However, it did not really matter to them whether the approach was ethical or not, because to them, strategic decisions where ethically neutral. This final statement supports that the deontological nature of contemporary business ethics is not useful for strategic work.</p>

The Trouble with Anthropocentric Hubris, with Examples from Conservation

Anthropocentrism in Western (modern industrial) society is dominant, goes back hundreds of years, and can rightly be called ‘hubris’. It removes almost all moral standing from the nonhuman world, seeing it purely as a resource. Here, we discuss the troubling components of anthropocentrism: worldview and ethics; dualisms, valuation and values; a psychology of fear and denial; and the idea of philosophical ‘ownership’. We also question whether it is a truly practical (or ethical) approach. We then discuss three troubling examples of anthropocentrism in conservation: ‘new’ conservation; ecosystem services; and the IPBES values assessment. We conclude that anthropocentrism is fuelling the environmental crisis and accelerating extinction, and urge academia to speak out instead for ecocentrism.

Ethics, Subjectivity, and Alterity in King Lear

Cordelia’s defiance during the first scene of King Lear is among the thorniest issues in Lear criticism. There are also questions about her defiance in the first act and her sacrificial return in the fourth. Generally, critics either interpret her defiance negatively and condemn her (the question of her sacrifice remains equivocal), or they lay the blame on Lear’s absurdity and justify Cordelia’s silence (thus somehow explaining her sacrificial return). I will turn to the recent ethical approach to Lear in which critics usually treat Cordelia as an excess that both foregrounds the ethical themes of the play and resists our understanding. She is said to be like a trace, an evasive Other who can hardly be grasped or explicated. Her defiance and sacrifice thus mark her incomprehensibility and divinity. There are, however, problems and shortcomings with this view that I will enumerate and try to resolve here. I will mainly study Cordelia’s role and discuss her subjectivity with a closer attention. Drawing upon Emmanuel Levinas’s philosophy, I suggest that Cordelia’s defiance/sacrifice is not simply a choice; she (dis)embodies a logic of heteronomy and absolute openness to and receptivity of the other, a passivity which is beyond any onto-political sense of passivity and activity. Her silence and sacrifice can be discussed as pre-voluntary, nonintentional sensibility. We can connect the dots to explain her defiant behavior in the first act and her sacrificial return in the last acts. Her uncanny ethicality will finally bridge the current gap and explain her alterity as the other as well. Hence she is both a responsive self and an uncanny other in a peculiar combination of qualities.

Faith Embodied in Attitudes: Ethics of Dialogue and Brotherhood of All People in the ‘Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together’ in Abu Dhabi and the Encyclical Fratelli Tutti

This text is concerned with the ethical approach of inter-faith relations and the dialogue of culture in two documents of Pope Francis: ‘On Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together’ and the encyclical Fratelli Tutti. This ethical approach refers to God the Creator of all and the call to brotherhood of all human beings and refers to faith as a response to Revelation. Faith also forms ethical approaches for interreligious dialogue. Pope Francis’ approach in the documents is that the theological truth and values of religious traditions are embodied in attitudes of social friendship. Francis challenges us to build a specific environment that he calls a ‘new culture of dialogue’, having frequently called for the growth of a culture of encounter that is capable of transcending political and social barriers and encourages creating a specific culture of social and ‘political love’.

A virtue ethical approach to Public Policy: Promoting wellbeing through human capabilities.

<p><b>The best way to achieve wellbeing in a society is to tailor our policy settings to human capabilities. To do this, we need to adopt a form of virtue theory and apply a framework to policy problems which targets people’s capabilities, bringing them up to a minimum standard of wellbeing.</b></p> <p>Public policy should use distributive justice to deploy public goods to bring people up to a threshold of each capability. This is the bare minimum people need to live well. Justice should be balanced between what a government can realistically influence, with limitations to ensure that people’s freedoms are maintained without telling them how to live. </p> <p>The purpose of this is to reduce obstacles to wellbeing, particularly luck around wellbeing. This means that people can focus on their own functionings and moral actions without fear they will get so unlucky in life that they will never live well.</p>