Titlebook: ;

Pessimistic

書目名稱Group Responsibility影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱Group Responsibility影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Group Responsibility網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度




書目名稱Group Responsibility網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Group Responsibility被引頻次




書目名稱Group Responsibility被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Group Responsibility年度引用




書目名稱Group Responsibility年度引用學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Group Responsibility讀者反饋




書目名稱Group Responsibility讀者反饋學(xué)科排名

terazosin

Stress-Fracture

Consequence

,Introduction: The Problem of ‘Collective’ or ‘Group’ Responsibility,he question was asked but never settled. As time passed, similar questions arose in relation to the Vietnam War, corporate scandals, and hate crimes. Again arguments were made both for and against group responsibility. But as I show in later chapters, these questions have yet to be settled.

Hippocampus

Defining Identity Groups: The Importance of Narrative,ility. Individualists oppose this idea. Indeed, as I describe at the end of Chapter 2, the metaphysical and superstition objections are varieties of the more general reductive objection that groups are nothing ‘more than’ the aggregation of their members. Although I am not seeking group agency and t

無禮回復(fù)

無禮回復(fù)

Joshua Yindenaba Abor,Daniel Ofori-Sasu; nonetheless, two weeks later Ward got an anonymous letter that read ‘we fire-bombed the lady on Thompson Street, and we’ll firebomb your house, too. We’ll get your daughters, you better keep them inside.’ In early May 1996, Ward moved out of Bridesburg.

Folklore

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5514-4t identity groups are collectively responsible in the strong sense. However, in order to understand member responsibilities, the logical problem that Narveson posed would still need to be overcome, and the connection between individual and group responsibility would need to be established.

并置

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-19598-5quely’ or ‘partly’ intentional as well as for those that are ‘fully’ intentional. I demonstrate that Larry May’s account of shared responsibility adequately justifies widening contribution and weakening intent; however, I ultimately argue that his account is flawed and ought to be amended.

Senescent

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25641-9membership and one’s participation in constructing or maintaining a faulty group norm. On such a view, if one’s personal contributions, be they fully, obliquely, or partly intentional, promote or maintain morally faulty norms (which in turn prompt members to cause harm), then one shares responsibility with others in one’s group for that harm.