HUMANITARIAN AID SHOULD BE NON-POLITICAL. THAT WAS THE CONCLUSION ADOPTED AT THE SPRING 1995 MEETING IN MADRID OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS (ICRC) AND OTHER HUMANITARIAN NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOS). THIS WAS ENDORSED IN THEIR NEW CODE OF CONDUCT, WHICH INDICATES THAT AID WILL BE GIVEN "REGARDLESS OF THE RACE, CREED OR NATIONALITY OF THE RECIPIENTS." IT FURTHER STATES THAT "WE WILL NOT TIE THE PROMISE, DELIVERY OR DISTRIBUTION OF ASSISTANCE TO THE EMBRACING OR ACCEPTANCE OF A PARTICULAR POLITICAL OR RELIGIOUS CREED." THIS PROVIDES A LAUDABLE STANDARD TO WHICH HUMANITARIAN ACTORS SHOULD ASPIRE. BUT IT IS SEVERELY BOUNDED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH AID ORGANIZATIONS OPERATE.
"This volume offers a new framework for understanding expertise. It proposes a reconceptualization of the traditional notion of expertise and calls for the development of a new contextual and action-oriented notion of expertise, which is attentive to axiological values, intellectual virtues, and moral qualities. Experts are usually called upon, especially during times of emergency, either as decision makers or as advisors in formulating policies that often have a significant impact on society. And yet, for certain types of choices, there is a growing tension between experts' recommendations and alternative views. The chapters in this volume critically assess the idea of whether possessing epistemic authority can automatically make someone's assertions necessarily more grounded than others. They evaluate not only the epistemological implications of this idea, but also reflect on its ethical, socio-cultural, and political consequences. The interdisciplinary framework advanced across the chapters seeks to overcome certain limitations that underlie current models of expertise by adopting more inclusive and representative decisions that can improve the perceived neutrality of experts' decisions. Increasing neutrality means reducing cases in which an unidentified bias-be it a scientific one or not-puts any of the individuals involved in a specific public choice at a systematic disadvantage. Philosophy, Expertise, and the Myth of Neutrality will appeal to scholars and advanced students working in epistemology, philosophy of science, philosophy of the social sciences, public policy, and sociology"--
Abstractis a crucial aspect of lay and expert definitions of standard language and of the standard language ideology. Smakman (2012, The definition of the standard language: a survey in seven countries.
This article aims at theoretically and pragmatically addressing the future roles of Technology Assessment (TA) communities in the challenging context of contemporary politics. Mobilizing Chantal Mouffe's theory of pluralistic agonism, we argue that TA communities should break with the myth of neutrality to render their political identities explicit and to recognize that TA does not only have politics, it also is politics. To do so, the notion of 'constitutive outside' is mobilized as a guiding methodological principle to invent a politics of TA. Three sites of politics where to define such a 'constitutive outside' are suggested: the values, the visions of the future, and the hegemonic and counter-hegemonic practices. We conclude that with a full awareness of its politics, TA communities should be able, on the one hand, to gain the trust and active support of political actors committed to the same ideals of democracy and knowledge-based policy-making. On the other hand, TA communities will also be able to distinguish TA supporters and adversaries and, consequently, reinforce their power of influence on policy-making. In a time of political uncertainty and epistemic ambiguity, TA communities may become a bastion of democratic politics. ; Peer reviewed
Uno de los presupuestos más cuestionados en el campo de la museología es la imaginaria pretensión de considerar a los museos como espacios neutrales, libres de presiones políticas o religiosas. Sin embargo, nada más lejano a la realidad que considerar a los museos como instituciones de absoluta autonomía por fuera de los circuitos de poder y legitimización estatal, o cuando menos, como escenarios absueltos de las batallas de confrontación política e ideológica. Los museos estatales, no solo por su filiación institucional, sino por los objetos que resguardan, representan una carga semántica y simbólica ligada a la tradición pero también a la concepción dominante en variados ámbitos sociales. Adicionalmente, el arte moderno y contemporáneo en particular, tiene su pilote en la autonomía e independencia de su lenguaje, que en contadas ocasiones juega de forma metafórica con dicho contenido simbólico de los objetos y espacios museales, apuntando justamente al ámbito político del museo y sus piezas. A la luz de lo anterior, este trabajo explora las sutiles transferencias de sentido entre los objetos de carácter religioso y sagrado en los museos vinculados al Estado y el carácter polisémico de los espacios y las colecciones. Con ello se pretende discutir sobre la pertinencia o no de la participación del Estado en la exhibición y promoción de un variado tipo de objetos y piezas, en su múltiple dimensión semiótica, dentro de los museos estatales. ; One of the most questioned assumptions in the field of museology is the imaginary claim to consider museums as neutral spaces, free from political or religious concerns. However, nothing is further from reality than considering museums as institutions of absolute autonomy outside the circuits of power and state legitimization, or at least, scenarios free of the battles of political and ideological confrontation. State museums, due to their institutional affiliation as well as the objects that they protect, represent a semantic and symbolic burden linked not only to tradition, but also to the dominant conception in various social spheres. Moreover, modern and contemporary art in particular, considers its strength in the autonomy and independence of its language, which rarely plays metaphorically with symbolic content of museum objects and spaces, precisely targeting the political sphere of the museum and its pieces. This paper aims to explore the subtle transfers of meaning between objects of a religious and sacred nature in museums linked to the State and the polysemic nature of spaces and collections. It discusses the pertinence or not of the State within this type of museums, on the exhibition, and promotion of a varied type of objects and pieces within their multiple semiotic aspects.
As a field, we often relate merit and neutrality to the technical skills needed to be the "best" candidate for a job, but that was not necessarily what civil service reformers had in mind. The civil service system was meant to replace widespread political patronage, but the myth around the origins of the civil service system masked inequalities built into early testing requirements and institutionalized racial inequities in hiring practices. In this article, we argue the founding myth of bureaucratic neutrality was so powerful that it continues to reverberate in our field. We trace the current reverberations of the myth of neutrality through modern hiring practices and the contemporary legal landscape. By doing this, we present a systematic review of this rationalized myth in public employment, using an institutionalism framework. As the myth of bureaucratic neutrality continues to permeate decision-making, policy creation, and implementation, it will continue to institutionalize inequity within the field.
A number of academics, journalists and political elites claim that Irish neutrality is a 'myth', and many also characterise public support for Irish neutrality as 'confused' and 'nonrational'. This 'unneutral' discourse in the academic literature and mainstream Irish media is based on an academic thesis, that of an Unneutral Ireland. The Unneutral thesis constructs a particular concept of neutrality in order to draw its conclusion that Ireland is 'unneutral'. Using a poststructuralist approach--a rarity in the discipline of International Relations (IR)--this paper deconstructs concepts of Irish neutrality using a framework of IR theories. The results show that the concept of neutrality put forward in the Unneutral Ireland thesis and the dominant discourses on Irish neutrality are based on a hegemonic IR theory, the theory of neorealism, rather than on seemingly 'objective' scientific research methods. The paper concludes that non-realist theories and approaches may provide a better understanding of Irish neutrality and of the dynamics of public support for Irish neutrality.
