Authority

The licensing of provincial surgeons and physicians in the post-Restoration period has proved an awkward subject for medical historians. It has divided writers between those who regard the possession of a local licence as a mark of professionalism or proficiency, those who see the existence of diocesan licences as a mark of an essentially unregulated and decentralized trade, and those who discount the distinction of licensing in assessing medical expertise availability in a given region. Such a diversity of interpretations has meant that the very descriptors by which practitioners were known to their contemporaries (and are referred to by historians) have become fragmented and difficult to use without a specific context. As David Harley has pointed out in his study of licensed physicians in the north-west of England, “historians often define eighteenth-century physicians as men with medical degrees, thus ignoring … the many licensed physicians throughout the country”. One could simi...

The article offers a close analysis of the media performances of a particularly successful preacher in Mali, Sheikh Chérif Haidara, to study how authority is generated in the interaction between a leader and his followers, and to examine the role of mass mediation in this process. Informed by Weber’s reflections on the nature of charismatic authority, the article takes charisma as a form of appeal that is mediated through aesthetic forms, and remediated and ‘channeled’ by virtue of particular media strategies and formats. By raising questions about the nature of charismatic attraction and by illustrating under what conditions it becomes effective, the article contributes to recent scholarship that addresses the role of the aesthetic in the validation or ‘authentication’ of religious experience.

A rereading of the story “گربهٔ زاهد” ("Gorbeye Zahed", English: The Ascetic Cat) from “کلیله و دمنه” (Kalīleh o Demneh) chapter “باب البوم و الغراب” (Owl and Crow) written and translated by “نصرالله منشی” (Nasr Allah Munshi) into middle Persian from Indian collection of animal proverbs Panchatantra in the 12th century.

In this article we consider the nature and implications of barriers to collaborative process learning that may occur in regional clusters. Our approach is rooted in research in interorganizational collaboration and focuses on interview-based research in photonics clusters in: Scotland and the West Midlands in the United Kingdom; Berlin-Brandenburg in Germany; and Arizona in the United States of America. From this research we develop characterizations of the barriers to collaborative process learning in clusters at three levels of analysis—the macro, micro and meso levels. We also develop an integrated conceptualization of these barriers, which reveals a difficult tension between ‘authority’ and ‘anomie’. This tension has implications for the management of process learning, but also connects with recent debate about whether learning is most helpfully understood as an individual or collective process.

The intersections between religion, ethics and politics depend quite strictly on the idea of authority. Apart from the classical weberian distinction between legal, traditional and charismatic authority, one can recall the difference between epistemic and practical authority. The article shows that this distinction can be useful in two respects: first, in recalling the attempt, made by the Enlightenment thinkers, to found the authority of practical reason upon itself; second, trying to avoid the opposition between the authority of science and that of religion in fields such as bioehics. The notion of "autonomy of practical reason" can be of help to overcome such shortcomings.

All polities struggle with establishing the correct balance between family autonomy and state intervention.  In a liberal world, the family is often seen as being in some ways analogous to the individual, possessed of a zone of freedom in which it is inappropriate for the State to intervene. However, the family is obviously different from an individual insofar as it comprises several individuals – a parent or parents and a child or children. Deference to family autonomy, therefore, amounts to deference to those who are powerful within the family, allowing parents to make decisions on behalf of their children. Nevertheless, there remain good reasons to allow parents make decisions on behalf of their children. At least in the case of young children, they do not have the capacity to make decisions on their own behalf. Most people would accept that – in general – parents are better placed than the State to make decisions for their children. Conversely, most people would also accept that parents' authority over their children cannot be absolute. The State retains a residual concern for children who are abused, neglected or failed by their parents, whether through misconduct or personal inadequacy. The difficult question lies in establishing the threshold for state intervention.

Nei mercati liberalizzati, in cui la distribuzione di particolari beni e servizi assume rilievo pubblicistico, gli scambi sono conformati ai regolamenti delle Autorità indipendenti.
Lʼistituzione di tali enti risponde alla necessità di rimediare a situazioni
di insuccesso o di fallimento del mercato che, non potendo essere corrette solo
ed esclusivamente dalle regole di diritto privato, richiedono interventi e misure
correttive di tipo autoritativo.
Pertanto, nei singoli mercati regolati, si registrano fenomeni di «conformazione»
e «funzionalizzazione» del contratto a fini e obiettivi ulteriori, e finanche estranei,
a quelli naturalmente “egoistici” dei contraenti.
Nellʼottica delle reciproche tensioni tra autonomia privata e ordinamento giuridico, il presente volume affronta il tema della regolazione dei mercati affidata alle Autorità indipendenti e si sofferma, nello specifico, sul problema dellʼ integrazione dei contratti di impresa.

Popular textbook treatments of the fallacies approach to argument evaluation employ the Adversary Method identified by Janice Moulton (1983) that takes the goal of argumentation to be the defeat of other arguments and that narrows the terms of discourse in order to facilitate such defeat. My analysis of the textbooks shows that the Adversary Method operates as a Kuhnian paradigm in philosophy, and demonstrates that the popular fallacies pedagogy is authoritarian in being unresponsive to the scholarly developments in informal logic and argumentation theory. A progressive evolution for the fallacies approach is offered as an authoritative alternative.

La cuestión de la autoridad en la educación es en principio un tema más bien estructural y de muy amplio calado y repercusión, por su extensión en el tiempo y en el espacio. Pero también es cierto que tiene una tremenda actualidad en los medios de comunicación y en el debate político y social. Por ello nos parece pertinente intentar un acercamiento desde la moderación y el análisis imparcial. Lógicamente este artículo no pretende observar este aspecto de la realidad educativa,  omnipresente en la sociedad de hoy, desde todos los puntos de vista, pues sería de todo punto inviable. Nos centraremos en exponer su condición problemática, recoger las dos grandes opciones que se barajan como soluciones al mismo, y algunas de las medidas que se proponen desde ambos extremos; teniendo en cuenta, lo anticipamos ya, que nuestra opinión es más bien ecléctica, ante la imposibilidad tanto de simplificar, como de ‘ningunear’ las diversas posturas al respecto. Lejos de buscar con ello la corrección política, pensamos que las relaciones entre autoridad y proceso educativo son amplias, múltiples y complejas, lo que invalida posicionamientos ‘de parte’. Si tanto parecen enconarse las posturas quizá se deba a que hay demasiada ideología en la educación; no en vano es cauce, querámoslo o no, de construcción de la sociedad futura. Como ya advirtiera en su momento Durkheim, con quien estamos de acuerdo en este punto, la educación posee una función básica de socialización (Durkheim, 1974, 17-23), al margen de colaterales determinaciones como factor de cierta movilidad social, progreso y desarrollo (funcionalismo y teorías del capital humano), o de mantenimiento y legitimación de algunas desigualdades (teorías crítica y de la reproducción social y cultural). Precisamente por ello, el tema de la articulación de autoridad y educación recoge también las dificultades que la misma sociedad ofrece al mostrarse desde la postmodernidad en profundo cambio y fluctuación (Giddens, 2004, 18).

Аналізуються теоретико-методологічні концепції державного володарювання крізь призму категорії суверенітету. Визначено основні підходи до трактування суверенітету, а також порівнюється влада та її реалізація в державі та імперії на основі розроблених структурно-функціональних параметрів. Розглядається вплив глобалізаційних процесів на трансформацію системи володарювання в сучасності.

In this paper I examine how Hobbes’ philosophy can be read from an Arendtian perspective. I argue that Arendt provided two different interpretations of Hobbes: one set down in The Origins of Totalitarianism, where Hobbes is depicted as the spokesman of the emerging bourgeoisie; and another that she developed later, scattered among various texts such as The Human Condition and Between Past and Future. I focus on this second interpretation and on her analysis of concepts such as common sense, authority and sovereignty. Firstly, I examine how she changes the meaning of common sense, and how this shift is linked to what Arendt understands by the expression “estrangement from the world.” Secondly, I explain how Hobbes redefined the concept of authority and how his notion of sovereignty deliberately conflated the dual concepts of authority and power.

Link: https://brill.com/abstract/journals/hobs/32/1/article-p71_71.xml

Further research on this topic can be read here:
https://www.academia.edu/30502447/Ph._D._Hannah_Arendt_on_the_question_of_authority_Concluding_Remarks_

Or here: https://www.academia.edu/31488906/Hannah_Arendt._Una_lectura_desde_la_autoridad_Tesis_doctoral_

La questione dell’autorità, tema classico delle filosofie dell’educazione, del diritto e della politica, non pare aver trovato altrettanta attenzione da parte della filosofia morale. Tale difetto di interesse potrebbe avere a che fare con un certo sospetto che la nozione tradizionalmente suscita, sospetto riconducibile a una presunta alternativa tra l’autorità e la libertà: quanto più è forte e solida la prima, tanto meno lo sarebbe la seconda. Si tratta di un’alternativa legata a un appiattimento dei due termini sulla loro configurazione formale e politica, per cui la libertà si presenta come un dato, e dunque un diritto, originario e immediato. Dal punto di vista sostanziale, sostiene Stefano Biancu in La genealogia dell'umano, la libertà ha una sua genealogia: si sviluppa e matura nel tempo, grazie anche a mediazioni esteriori, simbolicamente istituite, le quali assumono per il soggetto e per la collettività la figura dell’autorità. Autorità è ciò che genera libertà e umanità: questa è la conclusione a cui giunge un secolo di studi sul tema, ma è anche l’intuizione fondamentale di una peculiare filosofia italiana dell’autorità che, iniziata da Vico nel XVIII secolo, conosce significative riprese nel XX secolo e apre prospettive future in vista di un’antropologia e di un’etica dell’autorità.

‘Gifted and talented’ has become the official way of referring to high-achieving, able school pupils. The author questions the validity and appropriateness of this label and calls for a more sophisticated and inclusive framework.

Author profile: http://www.wlv.ac.uk/default.aspx?page=13209

이 논문은 프레드 크래독(Fred Craddock) 이후 북미 현대설교학자들의 설교자의 권위 에 관한 논의를 살펴보고 포스트모던적 탈권위사회로 진입한 한국 사회와 교회를 위한 대안적 설교 모델을 모색하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 설교자의 권위에 대한 이해는 설교자와 청중의 관계에 대한 교회론적 모델의 근거가 될 뿐만 아니라, 설교자와 청중의 관계에 관한 이해를 반영하는 설교 형태 계발에 영향을 끼쳐 왔다는 점에서 중요한 설교학적 주제로 다뤄져 왔다. 전통적 설교학이 전령으로서의 설교자 이해에 근거하여 설교자의 권위를 강조한 데 반하여, 신설교학의 대표적 학자인 프레드 크래독을 필두로 한 북미 현대 설교학자들은 수평적이며 민주적 설교자 모델을 주장해왔다. 본고에서는 전통적인 권위주의적 설교자 모델을 교정한 크래독의 민주적 설교자 모델에 관한 논의로부터 시작 하여, 북미 현대 설교학자들이 이 주제에 대해 어떠한 논의를 전개해왔는지 살펴보고자 한다. 특별히 크래독 모델의 약점을 지적하고 대화적 설교(Conversational Preaching)와 협력적 설교(Collaborative Preaching)를 대안으로 제시한 포스트모던 설교학자들인 루 스 로즈(Lucy A. Rose)와 존 맥클루어(John McClure)의 논의를 살펴보고, 이들의 주장에 대한 비평적 평가를 시도한다. 크래독 이후 포스트모던 설교학자들의 논의를 숙고하면서, 필자는 이들이 크래독의 논의 를 진전시켜 더욱 민주적 수평적 설교자 모델을 추구한 것은 의미가 있으나 현실적으로 모든 인간관계 속에, 특별히 발화 행위 중 발화자와 화자 사이에는 불평등한 관계는 불가피 하게 존재할 수밖에 없다는 것을 간과했음을 발견한다. 오히려 이러한 현실적인 인식을 바탕으로 설교자의 권위의 근거를 재평가하고 이를 지혜롭게 활용하는 것이 더욱 필요하다 는 점을 주장한다. 토머스 롱(Thomas Long)이 증언으로서의 설교에서 지적하듯이 설교자 와 청중은 이분법적인 관계가 아니라 변증법적인 관계임을 인식하고, 대립적인 이분법적 모델에 기반을 둔 설교자의 권위에 대한 인식을 재고하고, 진정한 말씀 경험에 근거하여 자신의 경험을 고백하는 증인으로서 설교자로서 회중과 변증법적인 연합을 지향하도록 방향전환을 할 것을 제안한다. 필자는 이러한 모델이 한국교회의 권위주의로 인해 병든 설교자의 권위에 대한 의식을 치료하고, 권위 있는 말씀을 탈권위적으로 전하는 증인으로 서 설교자들을 세워 나가는 데 도움을 주리라 기대한다.


This paper aims to reassess the North American contemporary homileticians’ discussions about the authority of the preacher since Fred Craddock. The issue of the preacher’s authority is a pivotal point to establish the ecclesiological perspective on the relationship between the preacher and the congregation as well as to develop homiletical forms which reflect such a relationship. While traditional preaching that proceeds in a form of deductive propositional didactic sermon assumes the preacher of authority, who serves as a herald of God, Craddock's inductive preaching purposes a preacher without authority, in which cultivates the horizontal democratic relationship between the preacher and the listener. However, a group of postmodern homileticians, like Lucy Rose and John McClure, do not consider Craddock's inductive sermon a fully non-authoritarian model, because they think the preacher in Craddock's model still exercise a superior authority to the listeners in another way, neglecting the limits of language and experience. Instead, they suggest conversational preaching or collaborative preaching as alternative ways of preaching which foster communal horizontal relationship between the pulpit and the pew. In reassessment of those scholars' discussions, I elucidate that their models also have limits to fulfill the communal democratic non-authoritarian role of preacher, because the asymmetrical power relationship cannot be fully resolved in reality. Rather, drawing on Thomas Long's preaching as witness model, I attempt to seek to reconfigure the authority of preacher, which is not based on their personal divine calling or gifts or institutional endowment but on the congregation's commission, and encourage to witness the Word with a sincere intention that pursues an authentic experience of the Word in their reading the Bible. Thus, I claim that the relationship between the preacher and the congregation should be understood not as a confrontational bipolarized separation but as a dialectical paradoxical union. I expect that this attempt would be helpful to cure the sick consciousness of authority among Korean preachers which is distorted by the wrong understanding of the authority and to transform them to become a non-authoritarian servant of the authoritative Word.

From citizens paying taxes to employees following their bosses’ orders and kids obeying their parents, we take it for granted that a whole range of authorities have the power to impose duties on others. However, although authority is often accepted in practice, it looks philosophically problematic if we conceive persons as free and as equals. In this short and accessible book, Fabian Wendt examines the basis of authority, discussing five prominent theories that try to explain how claims to authority can be vindicated. Focusing in particular on the issue of how states can rightfully claim authority, he rigorously analyses the theories’ arguments and evaluates their strengths and weaknesses. He also debates anarchism as an alternative that should be taken seriously if no theory ultimately succeeds in explaining state authority. This clear and engaging book will be essential reading for anyone grappling with the most fundamental questions of authority and obligation in political theory and political philosophy.

1 Varieties of Authority
2 Consent and Authority
3 The Service Conception of Authority
4 Community and Authority
5 Natural Duties and Authority
6 Fair Cooperation and Authority
7 States without Authority
Bibliography
Index

This study investigates how the members of four different role-playing communities on the online platform Second Life perform social as well as dramatic roles within their community. The trajectories of power influencing these roles are my main focus. Theoretically I am relying primarily on performance scholar Richard Schechner, sociologist, Erving Goffman, and post-structuralists Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. My methodological stance has its origin primarily within literature studies using text analysis as my preferred method, but I also draw on the (cyber)ethnographical works of T.L. Taylor, Celia Pearce, and Mikael Jakobsson. In this dissertation my focus is on the relationship of the role-player to their chosen role especially in terms of the boundary between being in character, and as such removed from "reality," and the popping out of character, which instead highlights the negotiations of the social, sometimes make-belief, roles. Destabilising ...

OPSOMMING Wet op Vervreemding van Grond 68 van 1981: Die haakplekke bestaan steeds Litigasie rondom die formaliteitsvoorskrifte kragtens die bepalings van artikel 2(1) van die Wet op Vervreemding van Grond 68 van 1981 blyk epidemies te wees. Gedurende die afgelope vier jaar is daar nie minder nie as negentien sake hieroor gerapporteer. Hierdie artikel is daarop gemik om die haakplekke, soos byvoorbeeld die omskrywing van die koopsaak en koopprys, skrifstelling en skriftelike volmaggewing te identifiseer en konsepoplossings aan die hand te doen oor hoe die aangeleentheid moontlik aangespreek kan word. Hiermee saam word daar ook kursories gekyk na die invloed van die Wet op Verbruikersbeskerming 68 van 2008 en die nuwe Maatskappywet 71 van 2008 op die bestaande formaliteitsvoorskrifte. Die werkswyse wat gevolg word, is om die betrokke sake waarop die probleem betrekking het, te ontleed en vandaar die voorgestelde submissies in perspektief te plaas.

Augusto Del Noce (1910-1989) is widely regarded in his home country of Italy as one of the most important political philosophers of the second half of the 20th Century. Renowned for his ability to demonstrate the impact of ideological movements on the history of the 20th Century, Del Noce's work covers a range of topics including modernity, technology, contemporary Catholicism, secularism, eroticism, communism, fascism, and progressivism among other topics. Perhaps controversially, Del Noce is best known for his claim that the failure of Marxism in the 20th Century has not led to its complete dissolution, but rather its incorporation (minus it's revolutionary aspect) into a new ideological totalitarianism that now appears in the form of secular progressivism. Although Del Noce holds a distinguished place within Italian philosophical and intellectual circles, his work has largely remained unknown in most parts of Europe and the English-speaking world. Recently however, as Del Noce's writings have begun to be translated into English, a new and expanded engagement with his work has taken place. While new analyses of Del Noce's thought have slowly appeared in a variety of academic disciplines, no work has yet examined Del Noce's significance for the field of education. As a result, in this essay Matthew Carlin rectifies this oversight by examining a wide range of Del Noce's writing, paying particular attention to how his historico-political analysis of the emergence of modern progressivism necessitates the creation of a new education of limits for the 21st Century.

V prispevku raziskujemo stične točke med učiteljevo avtoriteto in retori- ko kot posebno obliko jezikovne rabe v pedagoškem procesu. Izhajajoč iz odnosnega pojmovanja avtoritete izpostavljamo njeno retorično naravo in opozarjamo na nujnost zavedanja o tesni povezanosti med retoriko kot veš- čino javnega prepričevanja in uspešnostjo vzpostavljanja in ohranjanja av- toritetnega odnosa v pedagoškem procesu. Na podlagi splošne konceptu- alizacije retorike, ki proces prepričevanja opredeljuje kot vzajemen odnos med govorcem in poslušalci, predstavljamo predlog sheme retorične kon- strukcije pedagoške avtoritete, ki temelji na razumevanju avtoritete kot kompleksnega procesa, ki se vzpostavlja v interakciji učitelja z učenci in ga sestavljajo trije elementi: kako učinkovito zna v govoru in z govorom učitelj prikazati lastno verodostojno podobo (ethos), kako uspešno se odziva na čustvena stanja svojih učencev (pathos) ter kako jasno ter trdno utemeljuje svoja stališča in kako utemeljeno presoja stališča drugih (logos).
In the article, we explore the points of contact between pedagogical author- ity and rhetoric as a special form of language use in the pedagogical pro- cess. Drawing on the relational conceptions of authority, we emphasize its rhetorical nature and point out the need to be aware of the close connection between rhetoric as a skill of public persuasion and the successful enacting of the authority relationship in the pedagogical process. On the basis of the general conceptualization of rhetoric, which defines the process of persua- sion as a reciprocal relationship between the speaker and the listeners, we present a scheme of rhetorical construction of pedagogical authority based on the understanding of authority as a complex process that is established in the teacher – student interaction and consists of three elements: an ef- fective demonstration of a speaker's trustworthy image, (ethos), a succesful (discursive) response to the emotional states of the audience (pathos), and use of sound and valid argumentation (logos) in speech.