Rawls, John

Rat genome, 41 "Rational polytherapy," 233 Rawls, John, 80 Recombinant DNA cloning experiments with, 30 Cohen-Boyer patent on, 73 Recombination events, 57-58 Reeder, C. E., 229... 

Rawls, John. 1972. A Theory of Justice. Oxford Oxford University Press. 

Rawls, John. 1995. "Two Concepts of Rules." In S. M. Cahn J. G. Haber, eds. Twentieth Century Ethical Theory (pp. 273-290). Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall. 

Rawls, John. Justice as Fairness A Restatement (Cambridge, MA Belknap Press, Harvard University Press, 2001). 

Rawls, John. The Law of Peoples (Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press, 1999). 

Liberal theorists who argue for neutrality include Robert Nozick (Nozick, 1974), Richard Dworkin (Dworkin, 1985), John Rawls (Rawls, 1971 and 1988) and Richard Rorty (Rorty, 1989). 

The Free Clinic paralleled a project at the Tavistock Institute, the psychological warfare agency for British Secret Intelligence Service. Tavistock, founded as a clinic in London in the 1920s, had become the Psychiatric Division of the British Army during World War II under its director, Dr. John Rawlings Rees. (16)... 

Though not specifically intended for use in environmental decision-making, the political philosophy of John Rawls, with its focus on benefiting the least well-off and protecting the most vulnerable, has been gaining influence since it emerged in 1971. 

Let me say a bit more about normative impartiality, which is the most important aspect of reason to be discussed below. Impartiality as such is not a conception of justice, but a necessary feature of any view that wants to be taken seriously as a conception of justice. It is a constraint on justice, not itself a conception of justice. Utilitarianism, for instance, is impartial in its insistence that in the calculus of welfare "each is to count for one and nobody for more than one." Rights-based theories are impartial to the extent that rights are assigned universally rather than selectively. Equal-distribution theories are impartial, as are theories advocating distribution according to need, merit, or contribution. John Rawls s theory of justice is impartial by construction, being presented as the theory that rational individuals would choose behind a veil of ignorance. 

Cover design by Chery M. and James B. Rawlings, and John W. Eaton. 

Chemical Reactor Analysis and Design Fundamentals / by James B. Rawlings and John C. Ekerdt. 

The research collaboration of Tomohito Hamazaki, MD, Ph.D., Suched Samuhaseneetoo, MS., Nongpho Dairy Products, Sugoo Company and Noble Corp. are gratefully acknowledged. The author also expresses her thanks and appreciation to Norman Salem, Jr., Ph.D., Joseph R. Hibbeln, MD, John C. Umhau, MD, MPH, and Robert R. Rawlings, MA, for their advice and useful comments. This study was supported by the Thai Government. 

J. E. Goldman, P. T. Rawles, and R Rawles, Applied Data Communications A Business-Oriented Approach, Third ed. Hoboken, New Jersey John Wiley and Sons, 2000. 

Once a common basis has been established, it is here suggested to apply Thomas Franck s Fairness and John Rawls Justice to selected non-binding instmments in the fields of minority rights and self-determination. Thereby, an alternative... 

Possibly apart from the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the Friendly Relations DeclaratiOTi, the introduced instruments are not counted among sources of binding international law. Sources doctrine only leads us to treaties and customary international law. Yet, the instruments introduced here have left their impressions along the way some more some less. Classically non-binding instruments have a role to play in international law. A new approach is needed that includes the actors and instruments introduced in this chapter. It is the ideas of Thomas Franck and John Rawls on Legitimacy and Justice that the further analysis is based upon. Using their approach, the role of the instruments of this chapter is examined. 

The ideas of legitimacy, fairness and justice are closely related and different authors use different and sometimes conflicting and overlapping terminology. It is only clear that there are two dimensions the procedural dimension and the substantive dimension. I will use Thomas Franck s terminology as the procedural dimension is based on his theory of fairness. The substantive dimension is primarily based on some of John Rawls ideas of distributive justice. At first, Franck rejected... 

Thomas Franck s procedural fairness termed legitimacy and aspects of John Rawls distributive justice have been introduced as the tools chosen for the analysis. As has been shown, the basis of the discussion is contractarian in the sense that the different actors are related by contracts. Minorities and their rights are considered with a positive attitude without letting minorities have unlimited rights. Self-determination needs to be divided into internal and external self-determination. Internal self-determination is a positive value for individuals. It is still valuable for the group however, the group s needs have to be balanced with those of the majority. This is the content of the contract the restriction to internal self-determination balanced by the well treatment by the state. 

The catalogue of criteria inspired by John Rawls presents a similar picture. There are gradual differences between the rights and to what degree they support the criteria. None of the rights, though, contradict the criteria. 

Chapter 5 does exactly what Chap. 4 calls for. It offers an account of the approach of legitimacy and justice which are concerned with questions other than sources. Legitimacy is found according to a test based on Thomas Franck s four criteria of legitimacy which are determinacy, pedigree, coherence and adherence. A catalogue of six criteria is developed covering the dimension of justice. This is inspired by the theory of justice of John Rawls. 

Chapter 5 takes up the call for an alternative approach to intemational law. The theories of Thomas Eranck s Legitimacy and John Rawls Justice open the field of analysis. Legitimacy and justice establish the compliance puU of a mle. The compliance pull is the indicator of the chances that a rule will be followed. 

Accordingly, political theorists—John Rawls in particular—recognize some human rights as more basic and propose a minimal set of human rights that should be accepted and enforced universally. They do not include the rights of national groups. The fundamental human rights... 

---