Gordon Tullock’s The Organization of Inquiry: A critical appraisal

The major themes of Gordon Tullock’s 1996 book The Organization of Inquiry are identified. Tullock’s treatment of the philosophy of science is criticized, as is his explanation for the backwardness of the social sciences relative to the natural sciences. The paper closes with a listing of some of Tullock’s proposals for the reform of science.     

Twenty-First-Century Challenges for Environmental Management

Books reviewed:
Richard N.L. Andrews, Managing the Environment—Managing Ourselves: A History of American Environmental Policy
Rosemary O'Leary, Robert F. Durant, Daniel J. Fiorino, and Paul Weiland, Managing for the Environment: Understanding Legal, Organizational, and Policy Changes     

New identification criteria for the Chilean population: Estimation of sex and stature

In the analysis of human skeletal or otherwise unidentifiable remains the assessment of sex is an initial vital element when rendering a biological profile. As such other aspects of the biological profile are sex-specific (e.g. stature and age) and cannot be successfully determined without this preliminary assessment. In addition, the estimation of stature is an essential parameter of the biological profile, which is often used to confirm or exclude presumptive identifications.The purpose of this study is to present newly developed local identification criteria for the estimation of sex from the postcrania and stature for Chileans. Linear discriminant functions were derived for the humerus and femur. Sexing accuracies of 87%, 86%, and 82% were achieved. Furthermore, new univariate predictive stature equations are presented using a Bayesian approach for the humerus, femur and tibia.     

Politics and enlightenment: Kant and Derrida on cosmopolitan responsibility

Walter Benjamin once remarked of the enterprise of translation ‘that it is nowhere’: that the labour of transcribing the sense, inflection and difference of any particular language and text must always situate the translator in a space which is neither ‘of the original, nor ‘of the language into which it is to be transcribed. This ‘non‐position’ of the translator—between the original and its analogue, between the ‘spirit’ and the ‘letter’, the difference and the acceptability of the text—marks the labour of translation as an ethical responsibility: that of communicating the significance of something—a gesture, a story, a custom, a tradition—which has appeared to this/our socio‐linguistic culture as strange and unfathomably alien; and to achieve this communication without annulling its strangeness, its alterity. The purpose of my comparison of Kant and Derrida's remarks on cosmopolitical responsibility therefore, is fourfold. First, I want to suggest that it is this ‘stricture’ of translation—this difficult responsibility of both judging and respecting the difference of foreign’ cultures—which marks the (non‐Kantian, non‐situated) ‘territory’ of cosmopolitical responsibility. Second, by using Kant's remarks on the relationship between the political evolution of European Enlightenment culture and a possible world confederation of sovereign states, I want to point up the hierarchies and secondarizations involved in the determination of universal standards of moral, ethical and political conduct (even if these standards are originally prosecuted as the legislative conditions of a ‘radical democracy'). Third, I want to look at the ways in which the stricture of translation has been articulated as a theory of ‘global’ responsibility—particularly in the divergent ethical and political approaches of Jurgen Habermas and Jean‐Francois Lyotard. Fourth, I want to suggest that it is Derrida's idea of a ‘dual responsibility’ of critical thought to the political and philosophical resources of European Enlightenment and to the difference of non‐European nations and cultures, that marks the difficulty (the stricture) of acting responsibly within the global economics of power, identity and legislation. I want, in other words, to show that the ‘nowhere’ of Benjamin's translator, is a ‘place’ whose possibility demands a certain ‘Kantian’ right of reflection; that is, the right to pursue the ‘transcendent’ principle of respect for the other.     

Empire and Exception

Imperial power, and the policies of the Bush administration, are widely perceived as a distinct break with the modern world and the American past. In fact, elements of imperial power have been present since early modernity. The distinct nature of imperial sovereignty remains unclear. Negri and Hardt insist that imperial sovereignty constitutes a sharp break from modern nation-state sovereignty. However, if modern sovereignty is read from the standpoint of the exception, not liberalism, its ground and operation are the same as those of empire. What is new in empire is that global restraints still present in the nation-state order have disappeared. As a result, the state of exception today has become the rule. Only by recognizing that this relation is a product of imperial power, and not an external factor it seeks to counter, can we challenge the legitimating discourse of empire.