A Discourse-Theoretical Conception of Practical Reason*

Abstract
Contemporary discussions about practical reason or practical rationality invoke four competing views which can be named as follows by reference to their historical models: Aristotelian, Hobbesian, Kantian and Nietzschean. The subject-matter of this article is a defence of the Kantian conception of practical rationality in the interpretation of discourse theory. At the heart, lies the justification and the application of the rules of discourse. An argument consisting of three parts is pre sented to justify the rules of discourse. The three parts are as follows: a transcen dental-pragmatic argument; an argument which takes account of the maximisation of individual utility and an empirical premise about an interest in correctness. Within the framework of the problem of application, the article outlines a justification of human rights and of the basic institutions of the democratic constitutional state on the basis of discourse theory.     

The 'Little Big Bang' in Paris: financial market deregulation in a dirigiste system

Abstract. French dirigisme since World War II has been identified at four levels: economic planning; the dominance of a neo-colbertisre civil service elite; Gaullism and the Fifth Republic; and a state-led, credit-based system for financing industry. The last of these was seen by Zysman (1977, 1983) as the strategic core of dirigisme , as in Japan, through state control of industrial purse strings. Paradoxically, it was the Socialist Governments of 1981–86, in response to deregulation elsewhere, which initiated extensive capital market reforms intended to replace the state-led, credit-based system with an 'arms-length' financial market system. These continued under the right-wing Chirac Government. However, the reform process itself has been state-led rather than market-led; and both rigidities in the markets and shortcomings in the reforms have been highlighted by the October 1987 crash. Much dirigisme of a tactical kind remains, but the state's potential for strategic intervention has been reduced.     

The Concept of Coherence and Its Significance for Discursive Rationality

Abstract. The main idea or the concept of coherence can be expressed in the following way: The more the statements belonging to a given theory approximate a perfect supportive structure, the more coherent the theory. The degree of perfection of a supportive structure depends on the degree to which the following criteria of coherence are fulfilled: (1) the greatest possible number of supported statements belonging to the theory in question; (2) the greatest possible length of chains of reasons belonging to it; (3) the greatest possible number of strongly supported statements belonging to the theory; (4) the greatest possible number of connections between various supportive chains belonging to the theory; (5) the greatest possible number of preference relations between various principles belonging to it; (6) the greatest possible number and complexity of reciprocal supportive relations between various statements belonging to the theory; (7) the greatest possible number of universal statements belonging to the theory; the greatest possible number of general concepts belonging to it; the highest possible degree of generality of concepts implemented within it; the greatest possible number of resemblances between concepts used within it; (8) the greatest possible number of conceptual cross-connections between various theories; (9) the greatest possible number of cases covered by the theory; and (10) the greatest possible number of fields of life covered by the theory.     

THE EFFECT OF LONGITUDINAL ARREST PATTERNS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF ROBBERY TRENDS AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL *

Although the current resurgence of ecological deterrence research has addressed many of the methodological and theoretical problems of earlier studies, the question concerning the appropriate level of aggregation for such models has not been resolved. In this paper, we argue that there is strong evidence in the criminological literature that the neighborhood is the most meaningful level of aggregation for such studies. However, in an analysis of robbery incidents and arrests over 100 weeks in five Oklahoma City neighborhoods we did not find any significant support for the deterrent effect of arrests on subsequent illegal behavior. We propose that the lack of such a relationship reflects periods of short-term equilibrium in the local community, during which the levels of crime and arrests are relatively stabilized.     

Social democratic parties and EC integration

Abstract. This paper presents evidence of initial steps taken since 1989 towards the enhancement of social democratic transnational party co-operation, manifesting itself on both a programmatic and an organizational level. To explain this development, a thesis based on the neo-functionalist logic of political spillover together with a theory of party change is presented. An emerging European-level presence is explained by increased EC policymaking since the adoption of the Single European Act, interacting with the internal preconditions for organizational innovation present in many social democratic parties. Evidence of such trends is then submitted, focusing on the French Socialist, German Social-Democratic and British Labour Parties; the European Parliament Socialist Group; and the Socialist transnational party federation.     

A COMPARISON OF DELINQUENCY TRENDS

Comparative data are presented assessing trends in the juvenile crime rates for Japan and the United States over the past decade. Both court and arrest records show that the rate of juvenile crime has increased substantially in the United States while remaining essentially stable in Japan. The analyses demonstrate that this conclusion holds even when appropriate controls are introduced for the age groups involved. Suggestions are made for future research that might explain the differences reported for the two nations.     

Effects of Reducing Judicial Sentencing Discretion

This article uses a nationwide sample of state criminal cases to show the effects of reducing judicial sentencing discretion on disparities across rural-urban, southern-northern, black-white, and poor-nonpoor defendants. Judicial sentencing discretion is defined as the ratio between (1) the range in years within which a judge is allowed to sentence, and (2) the minimum number of years the judge must give when there is no probation. The data do indicate specific differences in sentencing between states of high judicial discretion and those of low judicial discretion, and the relationship of these disparities to discrimination is discussed.