Correctness and Cognitivism. Remarks on Robert Alexy's Argument from the Claim to Correctness*

The argument from the claim to correctness has been put forward by Robert Alexy to defend the view that normative utterances admit of objective answers. My purpose in this paper is to preserve this initial aspiration even at the cost of diverting from some of the original ideas in support of the argument. I begin by spelling out a full‐blooded version of normative cognitivism, against which I propose to reconstruct the argument from the claim to correctness. I argue that the context of uttering normative propositions points to the possibility of normative cognition, but does not constitute it. What constitutes the possibility of cognition is, as of necessity, the propositional structure of norms. I conclude that the argument from the claim to correctness ought to safeguard a distinction between the context of uttering a normative sentence and the proposition that individuates the content of the utterance.     

GOVERNMENT: A SUITABLE CASE FOR TREATMENT?

Government – its institutions, its working, its constitutional controls – is hugely important, not just as a subject of gossip or history in the making but as a discipline. Rod Rhodes' achievement in pioneering new ways of mapping and analysing developments inside government from the inside, and in coordinating so many different academic studies, was a remarkable model of the sort of research into government that can be, and needs to be, done by universities, not least as a basis for training future practitioners. The Whitehall Programme showed what can be done.     

EFFECT OF SUSPECT RACE ON OFFICERS’ ARREST DECISIONS*

Many respondents to opinion surveys say that the citizen's race influences how police officers treat the public, yet recent expert social‐science panels have declared that research findings are too contradictory to form a conclusion on whether American police are biased against racial minorities. We perform a meta‐analysis of quantitative research that estimates the effect of race on the police decision to arrest. Screening nearly 4,500 potential sources, we analyze the results based on 27 independent data sets that generated 40 research reports (both published and unpublished) that permitted an estimate of the effect size of the suspect's race on the probability of arrest. The meta‐analysis shows with strong consistency that minority suspects are more likely to be arrested than White suspects. Depending on the method of estimation, the effect size of race varied between 1.32 and 1.52. Converting the race effect size to probabilities shows that compared with the average probability in these studies of a White being arrested (.20), the average probability for a non‐White was calculated at .26. The significant race effect persists when taking into account the studies’ variations in research methods and the nature of explanatory models used in the studies. Implications for future research are presented.     

'I'm Making a TV Programme Here!': Reality TV'S Banged Up and Public Criminology

Abstract: This article examines the TV series Banged Up and media reactions to it. In doing so it seeks to argue that it served a wider public service purpose, or public criminology, than simply entertainment. A number of other 'experiments' and the crossover between those and reality TV are also explored. The series was not universally admired and no attempt is made to hide this. In addition to engaging with theoretical matters the experience of one of the authors of being part of the programme is set out.