point of no return
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

352
(FIVE YEARS 102)

H-INDEX

26
(FIVE YEARS 4)

2022 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary M. Nelan ◽  
Samantha Penta ◽  
Tricia Wachtendorf ◽  
José Holguín-Veras

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 375-382
Author(s):  
Michał Paździora

The article is divided into two parts. In the first part, I present the main assumptions of foundationalism and, using selected examples from general reflection on law, reconstruct related strategies of justifying claims. Then, I discuss the anti-foundationalist method of justifying the universalism of human rights. Referring to the arguments of Hannah Arendt and Alessandro Ferrara, I give the example of the Holocaust as the so-called point of no return, whose exemplary validity justifies the idea of human rights without the need to refer to substantive human dignity. In the second part of the article, I use the anti-foundationalist argument to build a conception of anti-authoritarian legal education. The proposed concept of education based on a collaborative, democratic, nonhierarchical, and pluralistic discussion of historical examples should complement traditional legal education.


2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 6-10
Author(s):  
Frederic Green

The future prospects for anyone falling into a black hole are bleak. For one thing, there is no chance (according to our present state of knowledge) of ever getting out again. Worse, one is facing certain destruction when one meets the "singularity" (or its inconceivably dense physical manifestation, whatever that may be) inside. However, there is an "event horizon," the point of no return, separating the overly curious infalling astronaut from the doom he or she faces at the singularity. Suppose Alice the Astronaut wants to see what's behind the horizon (never mind the consequences). How much time would Alice have to look around and see what's happening, before reaching the end of her worldline? Conventional wisdom, until relatively recently, was that she would have some amount of time, perhaps hours. Passing the event horizon of a supermassive black hole would not seem like any kind of a milestone to the infalling individual; it is only an outside observer who would notice something out of the ordinary.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Eduard Soler i Lecha ◽  

2022 will be a year for re-evaluating the limits of inequality, restrictive measures, the stimulus plans, geopolitical tensions, or trust in institutions. The economic and emotional recovery will be uneven and will be conditioned to distresses in the rivalry between great powers, price increases and the full overcoming of the pandemic. The world does not have a problem of diagnosis. The necessity and urgency of the ongoing socio-economic, technological and climate transitions are well-known. Where there is debate, it concerns which type of leadership is best equipped or has most legitimacy to pilot this change, how the process should be conducted to ensure the lowest possible social costs and where the point of no return lies. 2022 is a year when international leaderships face re-examination in key elections in places such as France, Brazil, Hungary, the US (midterms) and at the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. Which kinds of ideas, people and models will enjoy most support and legitimacy?


2021 ◽  
pp. 113-148
Author(s):  
Luis Enrique Echarte Alonso

The neuroethics field emerged in the early 2000s in an effort to face important philosophical dilemmas and anticipate disruptive social changes linked to the use of neurotechnology (Safire, 2002). From very early on, this field grew out of two core issues, namely inquiries into the ethics of neuroscience –concerning the moral use of knowledge and technology– and inquiries into the neuroscience of ethics –on how new brain function evidence can change human self-understanding (Roskies 2002). Similarly, neurolaw is now on a parallel path with two main pillars as Chandler (2018) suggested, (1) “self-reflexive inquiry” (the neuroscience of law) and (2) “inquiry into the development and use of brain science and technologies” (the law of neuroscience). In this paper, I suggest that these two lines of research are still excessively disconnected from one another and, to support this claim, I analyze the three potential point-of-no-return risks that Aldous Huxley associated with technological challenges, namely centralization of power, bureaucratic alienation, and scientific idealism. In addition, I show how Huxley shifted analysis of technological problems from a focus on the rights of potential victims to the duties of potential aggressors. Finally, I argue that Aldous Huxley’s view on how to build a bridge that brings pillars 1) and 2) closer together also helps prevent the technological point-of-no-return. According to Huxley, the key is found in paying particular attention to understanding contemplative activity, reinforcing its role in the study of reality, and, eventually, returning the romantic gaze updated to academia.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document