Louise Richardson - Böcker

Contemporary philosophy of perception is dominated by highly polarized debates. The polarization is particularly acute in the debate between naïve realist disjunctivists and their opponents, but divisions seem almost as stark in other areas of dispute, for example, the debate over whether we experience so-called 'high-level' properties, and the debate concerning individuation of the senses. The guiding hypothesis underlying this volume is that such polarization stems from insufficient attention to how we should go about settling these debates. In general, there is widespread, largely implicit disagreement concerning what philosophical theories of perception are supposed to explain, the claims that we should hold fixed in the course of theorizing, and the methods that such theorizing should employ. The goal of this volume is to move such methodological questions from the background to the front of the debate, in the hope of facilitating progress. The contributions constitute an initial effort to spur more explicit, systematic discussion of methodology in philosophy of perception, covering a wide range of relevant topics, from the relation between scientific and philosophical theorizing about perception, to lessons we can learn from the history of philosophy of perception.

Few topics can be of greater importance to political scientists or practising politicians than international alliances. The political science literature contains many successful studies on the subject of alliances, including those that deal with the idea that an external threat provides cohesion to an alliance while the removal of such a threat causes its disintegration. A strong ally, such as the US, cannot rely on the proponderance of its power to have its views prevail, because the structure of the international system affords options to the weaker ally. When Allies Differ concentrates on the specifics of two cases, the Suez crisis of 1956 and the Falklands war of 1982, in which the interests of two of the closest allies, namely Britain and the US, clashed. In both cases the elements of a peaceful resolution existed. Nevertheless the two countries singularly failed to manage these crises to their mutual advantage. This book explains why. In each case, Britain took military action against a country with which the US was developing ties, and in both cases these ties were jeopardized by the British action. Richardson's analysis of these two cases reveals the importance to policy outcomes of the domestic bureaucratic politics within countries and the effect of those internal politics on global diplomacy. When Allies Differ is a well-reasoned, in-depth study that will be of interest to anyone interested in international relations.

The Roots of Terrorism is the first volume in the new Democracy and Terrorism series, a three volume project intended to explore one of the most pressing issues of our time: how to reconcile the need to fight terrorism with our desire to protect and enhance democratic values.

The Roots of Terrorism is the first volume in the new Democracy and Terrorism series, a three volume project intended to explore one of the most pressing issues of our time: how to reconcile the need to fight terrorism with our desire to protect and enhance democratic values.

What role should religion play in shaping and implementing U.S. foreign policy?The dominant attitude over the last half century on the subject of religion and international relations was expressed well by Dean Acheson, Harry Truman's secretary of state: ""Moral Talk was fine preaching for the Final Day of Judgment, but it was not a view I would entertain as a public servant."" Was Acheson right? How a nation ""commits itself to freedom"" has long been at the heart of debates about foreign aid, economic sanctions, and military intervention. Moral and faith traditions have much to say about what is required to achieve this end. And after September 11, no one can doubt the importance of religious beliefs in influencing relations among peoples and nations. The contributors to this volume come at the issue from very different perspectives and offer exceptional and unexpected insights on a question now at the forefront of American foreign policy.