| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Record Nr. |
UNINA9910457792703321 |
|
|
Autore |
Allhoff Fritz |
|
|
Titolo |
Terrorism, ticking time-bombs, and torture [[electronic resource] ] : a philosophical analysis / / Fritz Allhoff |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pubbl/distr/stampa |
|
|
Chicago ; ; London, : University of Chicago Press, c2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISBN |
|
1-280-12593-4 |
9786613529794 |
0-226-01482-7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Descrizione fisica |
|
1 online resource (280 p.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disciplina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soggetti |
|
Torture - Moral and ethical aspects |
Terrorism - Prevention - Moral and ethical aspects |
Electronic books. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingua di pubblicazione |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formato |
Materiale a stampa |
|
|
|
|
|
Livello bibliografico |
Monografia |
|
|
|
|
|
Note generali |
|
Description based upon print version of record. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di bibliografia |
|
Includes bibliographical references and index. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di contenuto |
|
pt. 1. Terrorism -- pt. 2. Torture and ticking time-bombs -- pt. 3. Torture and the real world. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sommario/riassunto |
|
The general consensus among philosophers is that the use of torture is never justified. In Terrorism, Ticking Time-Bombs, and Torture, Fritz Allhoff demonstrates the weakness of the case against torture; while allowing that torture constitutes a moral wrong, he nevertheless argues that, in exceptional cases, it represents the lesser of two evils. Allhoff does not take this position lightly. He begins by examining the way terrorism challenges traditional norms, discussing the morality of various practices of torture, and critically exploring the infamous ticking time-bomb scenario. After carefully considering these issues from a purely philosophical perspective, he turns to the empirical ramifications of his arguments, addressing criticisms of torture and analyzing the impact its adoption could have on democracy, institutional structures, and foreign policy. The crucial questions of how to justly authorize torture and how to set limits on its use make up the final section of this timely, provocative, and carefully argued book. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
Record Nr. |
UNINA9910346667303321 |
|
|
Titolo |
The Great Debate: General Ability and Specific Abilities in the Prediction of Important Outcomes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pubbl/distr/stampa |
|
|
MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISBN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Descrizione fisica |
|
1 online resource (108 p.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disciplina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soggetti |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingua di pubblicazione |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formato |
Materiale a stampa |
|
|
|
|
|
Livello bibliografico |
Monografia |
|
|
|
|
|
Sommario/riassunto |
|
There are many different theories of intelligence. Although these theories differ in their nuances, nearly all agree that there are multiple cognitive abilities and that they differ in the breadth of content they are typically associated with. There is much less agreement about the relative importance of cognitive abilities of differing generality for predicting important real-world outcomes, such as educational achievement, career success, job performance, and health. Some investigators believe that narrower abilities hold little predictive power once general abilities have been accounted for. Other investigators contend that specific abilities are often as-or even more-effective in forecasting many practical variables as general abilities. These disagreements often turn on differences of theory and methodology that are both subtle and complex. The five cutting-edge contributions in this volume, both empirical and theoretical, advance the conversation in this vigorous, and highly important, scientific debate. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |