Mediatized judiciary: norm (fundamental rights) versus social experimentation

Human experimentation and human rights.

ion of the research question tends to objectify the person-patient.27 It does so to a significantly greater extent than in therapeutic interactions, even though similar problems of objectification arise in therapeutic settings when doctors attend too much to the disease of the body in the bed and not to the person before them. The readiness with which clinical research continues to be viewed as...

Reasoning with fundamental rights

People often withdraw previously drawn conclusions in light of new information. This defeasible reasoning is also important for law, where judges often have to change their verdicts in light of new evidence. Here we investigate defeasibility in the context of conflicting fundamental rights. When, for instance, law to property conflicts with law to information, can one of these rights be “defeat...

Human embryo experimentation: regulation and relative rights.

The rights of man and animal experimentation.

Since emotions give contradictory signals about animal experimentation in medical science, man's relationship to animals must be based upon reason. Thomas Aquinas argues that man is essentially different from animals because man's intellectual processes show evidence of an abstract mechanism not possessed by animals. Man's rights arise in association with this essential difference. The conseque...

Game Forms versus Social Choice Rules as Models of Rights

The paper begins by defining multi-valued game forms which generalize social choice rules. It also defines the effectiveness relations that represent the rights induced by such game forms. When one-way instead of two-way rights are allowed, it also demonstrates yet further difficulties in finding a social choice rule to respect all rights. Finally, to deal with the problem that game forms typic...