Thanx to Stalin, Anon. Nietzsche, Hank Purcell Jr. Chicago May Day '
References and Further Reading 1. The philosophical and political notion of recognition predominantly refers to 3and is often taken to mean that not only is recognition an important means of valuing or respecting another person, it is also fundamental to understanding ourselves.
Here A and B indicate two individual persons, specifically A is the recogniser and B the recognisee. For example, I may recognise you as a person possessing certain rights and responsibilities in light of your being an autonomous, rational human being for more on defining the structure of recognition, see Laitinen, This means that we must place sufficient value in the recogniser in order for their attitude towards us to count as recognitive.
Brandom approaches this idea through the idea of authority, arguing that a genuine instance of recognition requires that we authorise someone to confer recognition. Similarly, one can gain authority and responsibility by petitioning others for recognition. Consequently, one has authority only insofar as one is recognised as authoritative.
We may not consider being valued by a wilful criminal as any sort of recognition in the sense being defined here. We do not judge them capable of conferring value on us, as we do not accord any value or respect to them.
Similarly, someone who is coerced into recognising us may also fail to count as a relevant judge. A king who demands recognition of his superiority from all his subjects, simply in virtue of his being king, and threatens to punish them if they disobey, does not receive any meaningful kind of recognition for the subjects do not genuinely choose to confer value on him.
Thus, in recognising another, we must also be recognised as a subject capable of giving recognition. This indicates that reciprocity or mutuality is likely to be a necessary condition of appropriate recognition for a discussion of this point, see Laden, A further issue in defining recognition is whether it is generative or responsive Laitinen, ; Markell, A generation-model of recognition focuses on the ways in which recognition produces or generates reasons for actions or self-understandings.
This is to say that someone ought to act in a certain way in virtue of being recognised as, for example, recognising someone as a rational being will generate certain duties and responsibilities for both the person being recognised and those who interact with him.
A response-model of recognition focuses on the ways in which recognition acknowledges pre-existing features of a person.
Here, to recognise someone is to acknowledge them as they already really are Appiah, This means that there are reasons why one ought to give recognition to someone prior to the act of recognition itself.
The demand for recognition in a response-model is produced and justified through pre-existing characteristics of a person, whilst in the generation-model it is the act of recognition itself which confers those characteristics onto a person through their being recognised as such.
A third issue is whether groups or collectives can count as recognisers and recognisees. For example, when speaking of recognising a particular cultural group, do we mean we recognise that group qua a group, or as a collection of individuals?
Similarly, does the granting of certain rights or respect apply to the group itself or the individual members belonging to that group? For a detailed discussion and defence of group-differentiated minority rights, see Kymlicka, These questions revolve, at least in part, around the ontological status afforded to groups or collectives.
Advocates of a politics of recognition are not always clear regarding whether or not groups can be granted recognition. Debates over the legitimacy or sovereignty of a state may depend upon the extent to which we recognise it as legitimate or sovereign. Important discussions of groups as entities include TuomelaJones and List and Pettit However, as yet there has been little analysis of the connection between recognition and the ontology of groups.
Charles Taylor argues for the importance of collective rights, but gives little consideration to whether collectives are genuine subjects over-and-above the individuals that constitute them.Influence of health personnel's attitudes and knowledge in the detection and reporting of elder abuse: An exploratory systematic review La influencia de las actitudes y de los conocimientos de los profesionales de la salud en la detección y notificación de los malos tratos a las personas mayores.
Una revisión sistemática exploratoria. The Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service of the Writing Lab at Purdue.
Perhaps a close cousin to documentary, the essay film is at its core a personal mode of filmmaking. Structured in a breadth of forms, a partial definition could be said to be part fact, part fiction with an intense intimacy (but none of these are necessarily paramount).
An expository essay requires you to build an argument based on facts instead of your own opinion. Of course, you can start with your own ideas, but you need to have sound research to back them up. Your instructor may give you a topic or she may give you the opportunity to choose your own. Whatever you write about, you.
(This essay is from the introduction to On Lisp. The red text explains the origins of Arc's name.) It's a long-standing principle of programming style that the functional elements of a .
The exploratory essay is allowing the mind to explore a subject without any end in mind for the essay. This type of essay allows the writer to learn rather than prove what the person wants to know. The purpose of this type of essay builds on an inquiry as the person looks and contributes to one argument one step at a time.
The focus on the.