41 - 50 of 53 results for: ETHICSOC

Religion has traditionally been banished from politics in some places in Latin America. Religious symbols may not be displayed in public buildings, political discourse is expected to be free from all religious content, and religious ministers are not allowed to run for public office, among other measures. This course examines the political motivation for this kind of policies towards religion taking a comparative perspective with American and French variants of secularism.

How should human beings relate to the natural world? Do we have moral obligations toward non-human animals and other parts of nature? And what do we owe to other human beings, including future generations, with respect to the environment? The first part of this course will examine such questions in light of some of our current ethical theories: considering what those theories suggest regarding the extent and nature of our environmental obligations; and also whether reflection on such obligations can prove informative about the adequacy of our ethical theories. In the second part of the course, we will use the tools that we have acquired to tackle various ethical questions that confront us in our dealings with the natural world, looking at subjects such as: animal rights; conservation; economic approaches to the environment; access to and control over natural resources; environmental justice and pollution; climate change; technology and the environment; and environmental activism.

Historical backdrop of the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals. The creation and operation of the Yugoslav and Rwanda Tribunals (ICTY and ICTR). The development of hybrid tribunals in East Timor, Sierra Leone, and Cambodia, including evaluation of their success in addressing perceived shortcomings of the ICTY and ICTR. Examination of the role of the International Criminal Court and the extent to which it will succeed in supplanting all other ad hoc international justice mechanisms and fulfill its goals. Analysis focuses on the politics of creating such courts, their interaction with the states in which the conflicts took place, the process of establishing prosecutorial priorities, the body of law they have produced, and their effectiveness in addressing the needs of victims in post-conflict societies.

(Same as LAW 684) This course looks at conflicts of interest and ethical issues as they arise within academic work. The participants will be drawn from schools and departments across the University so that the discussion will prompt different examples of, and perspectives on, the issues we discuss. Topics will include the conflicts that arise from sponsored research, including choices of topics, shaping of conclusions, and nondisclosure agreements; issues of informed consent with respect to human subjects research, and the special issues raised by research conducted outside the United States; peer review, co-authorship, and other policies connected to scholarly publication; and the ethics of the classroom and conflicts of interest implicating professor-student relationships. Representative readings will include Marcia Angell's work, Drug Companies and Doctors: A Story of Corruption, N.Y. Rev. Books, Jan. 15, 2009, and Is Academic Medicine for Sale? 342 N. Engl. J. Med. 1516 (2000) (and responses); William R. Freudenburg, Seeding Science, Courting Conclusions: Reexamining the Intersection of Science, Corporate Cash, and the Law, 20 Sociological Forum 3 (2005); Max Weber, Science as a Vocation; legal cases; and conflict-of-interest policies adopted by various universities and professional organizations. The course will include an informal dinner at the end of each session. The goal of the course is to have students across disciplines think about the ethical issues they will confront in an academic or research career. Non-law students should enroll in ETHICSOC 301.

If emotions are the stuff of life, some emotions are the stuff of our moral and legal life. Emotions such as: guilt, shame, revenge, indignation, resentment, disgust, envy, jealousy and humiliation, along with forgiveness, compassion, pity, mercy and patriotism, play a central role in our moral and legal life. The course is about these emotions, their meaning and role in morality and law. Issues such as the relationship between punishment and revenge, or between envy and equality, or St. Paul¿s contrast between law and love, or Nietzsche¿s idea that resentment is what feeds morality, will be discussed alongside other intriguing topics.

Economic analysis inevitably raises moral questions. Getting clear on those moral questions, and the competing answers to them, can help improve both economic analysis and our understanding of the values involved in alternative social policies. This course focuses on a central economic institution: the market. How have the benefits and costs of using markets been understood? For example, it is often claimed that markets are good for welfare, but how is welfare to be understood? What is the connection between markets and different values such as equality and autonomy? What, if anything is wrong with markets in everything? Are there moral considerations that allow us to, distinguish different markets? This course examines competing answers to these questions, drawing on historical and contemporary literature. Readings include Adam Smith, JS Mill, Karl Marx, Michael Walzer, Dan Hausman and Michael McPherson and Debra Satz among others. For graduate students only.

SAME AS LAW744. Recent psychological advances in our understanding of the cognitive and social origins of morality cast a new light on age-old questions about ethics, such as: How did our moral sense evolve in our species? How does it develop over our lifetime? How much does our culture, religion, or politics determine our moral values? What is the role of intuition and emotion in moral judgment? How "logical" is moral judgment? How do other people's moral choices affect us? Does character matter or is behavior entirely dictated by the situations we find ourselves in? If it is purely situational, are we morally responsible for anything? How far will we go to convince ourselves that we are good and moral? Barbara Fried and Benoit Monin will review empirical answers to these questions suggested by behavioral research, and lead discussions on their implications for ethics. Students enrolled in the course will be selected through an application process. The application can be found at http://web.stanford.edu/~arnewman/MoralMinds.fb, and is due at 11:59 p.m. on November 14, 2014.

War is violent, but also a means by which political communities pursue collective interests. When, in light of these features, is the recourse to armed force justified? Pacifists argue that because war is so violent it is never justified, and that there is no such thing as a just war. Realists, in contrast, argue that war is simply a fact of life and not a proper subject for moral judgment, any more than we would judge an attack by a pack of wolves in moral terms. In between is just war theory, which claims that some wars, but not all, are morally justified. We will explore these theories, and will consider how just war theory comports with international law rules governing recourse to force. We will also explore justice in war, that is, the moral and legal rules governing the conduct of war, such as the requirement to avoid targeting non-combatants. Finally, we will consider how war should be terminated; what should be the nature of justified peace? We will critically evaluate the application of just war theory in the context of contemporary security problems, including: (1) transnational conflicts between states and nonstate groups and the so-called "war on terrorism"; (2) civil wars; (3) demands for military intervention to halt humanitarian atrocities taking place in another state. Same as LAW 751.