J. Martin

Corruption in higher education has raised concern among governments, citizens, and the education community worldwide. However, few papers have sought to explore the students’ willingness to engage in corrupt practices at the university level. The present study aimed to examine the influence of different corrupt behaviours and perceived corruption among peers on the corrupt intention of university students. 120 undergraduate students participated in a quasi-experimental design divided in 3 treatments to rate their willingness to engage in favouritism and embezzlement behaviours. Results pointed out that students were more prone to committing a non-monetary behaviour favouritism– than a monetary behaviour –embezzlement–. Furthermore, there were not significant differences between the groups of control and high-corruption acceptance; while only the group of low-corruption acceptance showed significant lower rates when compared to the control and the high-corruption acceptance’s group. Practical recommendations need to address students’ perceptions of different corrupt practices, focusing on designing ethical training programmes aimed to raise awareness on the negative consequences of non-monetary activities. Future research directions could generate empirical support to prove if students are able to recognize the underlying mechanisms of subtle corrupt practices.

Spatial objects may not only be perceived visually but also by touch. We report recent experiments investigating to what extent prior object knowledge acquired in either the haptic or visual sensory modality transfers to a subsequent visual learning task. Results indicate that even mental object representations learnt in one sensory modality may attain a multi-modal quality. These findings seem incompatible with picture-based reasoning schemas but leave open the possibility of modality-specific reasoning mechanisms.

This article compares two groundings of ethics: the ethical postulates of Immanuel Kant with the existential thinking of S. Kierkegaard. To achieve this goal, first, it proposes highlighting the fundamental ideas of Kantian ethics; then, secondly, highlighting Kierkegaard’s ethical stance; and finally, contrasting both approaches to identify differences and similarities. Conclusively, we can say that the pure Kantian ethical formality of duty for duty’s sake necessarily dispenses with existential and concrete content; it is an ethics that is grounded in itself, that refers to itself, to the rational nature of the human being and its universality. In contrast, Kierkegaardian ethics is a Christian ethics, it is the ethics of love for one’s neighbour and, above all, for God; it is a relational and existential ethics of the single individual.

Når man går i gang med et forskningsprojekt, vil der typisk være nogle forskningsetiske problemstillinger, man skal forholde sig til. Det kan fx være, at man skal have indhentet informeret samtykkeerklæringer fra de deltagere, der skal være med, eller man skal have indhentet forskningsetiske tilladelser og godkendelser fra uafhængige instanser. Det er altså overvejelser, som typisk dukker op ved begyndelsen af et forskningsprojekt. Der kan efterfølgende være en risiko for, at man forsømmer refleksioner over emergerende etiske problemstillinger, og at forskningsetik således reduceres til, at man som forsker har underskrevet og overholdt nogle prædefinerede retningslinjer for god forskningspraksis. Sådanne retningslinjer er naturligvis særdeles vigtige. Men det er pointen i denne artikel, at de ikke kan stå alene. Forskningsetiske dilemmaer er et epistemologisk vilkår gennem hele forskningsprocessen, og de må således overvejes og genovervejes, forhandles og genforhandles gennem hele forskningsprocessen. Den form for forskningsetik, der følger bestemte på forhånd fastlagte retningslinjer, som typisk er formuleret i standardiserede, kontekstuafhængige principper for god etisk adfærd, benævnes i artiklen procedural forskningsetik, mens en forskningsetik, der foretager en konkret og kontekstafhængig vurdering af de specifikke etiske problemstillinger og dilemmaer, som de viser sig i praksis gennem hele forskningsprocessen, benævnes kasuistisk forskningsetik. Distinktionen mellem disse to typer forskningsetik er udtryk for en teoretisk konstruktion, og de skal ikke betragtes som modsatrettede alternativer, men derimod som supplerende sider ved god forskningsetisk praksis. I artiklen diskuteres forholdet mellem dem for ad den vej at fremhæve enhver forskers pågående og kontinuerlige ansvar gennem hele forskningsprocessen. Nøgleord: forskningsetik, procedural, kasuistisk, Leibniz English summary: Dic cur hic – a casuistic research ethic When embarking on a research project, researchers must customarily confront some ethical issues. To begin with, they may need informed consent from the participants, or research ethics permission and approval from an independent Research Ethics Committee. However, there is more involved than these legal requirements alone, for just complying with some pre-defined guidelines for good research practice is by no means enough. In fact, a number of ethical issues demanding thorough reflection may emerge during the research project. Far from being neglected, such questions deserve careful attention. Research ethical dilemmas are an epistemological condition throughout the whole research process, and must therefore be constantly considered and reviewed, negotiated and renegotiated. This article purports to categorize the ethical issues likely to arise during the course of an investigation into two main types, namely procedural and casuistic. The kind of research ethics following certain pre-established guidelines, which are typically expressed in standardized, context-independent principles of good ethical behavior, will be labeled as procedural research ethics, while the type of research ethics ensuing from the analysis and contextual assessment of the specific dilemmas arising in practice in the particular situation studied, will be named casuistic research ethics. A distinction between these two types of research ethics reflects a theoretical construct. Both types should not be regarded as opposing alternatives, but as complementary aspects of good ethical research practices. This article discusses the relationship between the two types in order to highlight the researcher’s ongoing and continuous responsibility throughout the research process.

This article analyses and discusses dilemmas, ambivalences and problematic issues related to research ethics. This is done firstly by making a distinction between procedural research ethics and particularistic research ethics. Such a distinction reflects a theoretical construction and generalization. In practice, there can be a very close correlation between the two types. In the following, the distinction will therefore be used as a starting point for the presentation of a pragmatic-dualist research ethics. The approach is dualist because it draws on the presence of two independent, contrasting understandings, which are essentially different yet equal aspects of good research ethics; it is pragmatic because this dualism is structural and institutional by nature, and designed with an eye to what can realistically and expediently be done in practice. Thus the intention of the article is to both analyze and discuss two different understandings of research ethics and simultaneously qualify a research ethics that draws on both of these understandings. Furthermore, the intention is to visualize a different understanding of research ethics which others can address and elaborate on or qualify. Even at this point, this research ethic can be included in a catalogue of understandings of ethical research practice an can be exploited in ethical research practice.

It may be quite rightly stated that the EFQM Model of the European Foundation for Quality Management is the basic reference model for those organisations whose aim is to achieve excellence. It offers an integral and integrating approach to the most relevant dimensions of the reality of the organisation and permits the establishment of framework that is both objective and rigorous and based on a structured diagnosis.The EFQM Excellence Model is based on a humanist approach that situates the client (in all aspects/senses) as the centre and ultimate reason of the activity of the organisation, emphasizing the role of the latter as a responsible member of the community. An ethical approach is therefore adopted as the best way to serve the long-term interest of the organisation and the people that integrate it (as well as their sustainability in time), exceeding expectations and the policy of society in general.

El trabajo desarrollado en este artículo muestra una experiencia docente basada en la Metodología Activa del Aprendizaje Basado en Proyectos en la asignatura de Instalaciones II de la titulación del Grado en Arquitectura Técnica de la Universidad de Burgos. Para alcanzar la excelencia del proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje, se ha diseñado una metodología de trabajo basada en el desarrollo progresivo de un Proyecto de Ejecución mediante subproyectos, con el objetivo de conseguir mejores resultados en el proceso de aprendizaje mediante el desempeño personal, la retroalimentación de procesos y el trabajo cooperativo, todo ello orientado a la excelencia académica y profesional de los estudiantes. Los resultados obtenidos muestran que el ABP es una excelente metodología para el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje de la asignatura de Instalaciones II y para el futuro desempeño profesional de los estudiantes.

ABSTRACTTwo new books about the Pragmatist tradition, Richard Bernstein's The Pragmatic Turn and Colin Koopman's Pragmatism as Transition, represent respectively a summing up of the past half‐century of the tradition's history and a possible program for its future development. Bernstein ecumenically considers the achievements of a wide range of thinkers from Peirce, Dewey, and James to Brandom, Putnam, and Rorty, drawing valuable lessons from each, while not sparing criticism of their flaws. Koopman also tries to bridge the gap between what he calls “classicopragmatism” and “neopragmatism,” although he finds more to admire in Rorty than in his predecessors. Whereas Bernstein attempts to supplement the pragmatist tradition by turning to Habermas, Koopman finds his inspiration in Foucault. Both authors emphasize the historicist, evolutionary, and transitionalist implications of pragmatism, paying as a result insufficient attention to the historical possibilities of repetition, rupture, discontinuity, and the unexpected event. In terms of the political implications they draw, Koopman advocates a meliorist incrementalism that lacks any real bite, while Bernstein expresses dissatisfaction with the democratic pieties of Rorty's final work, but doesn't really provide a sustained alternative

En este artículo se presenta una nueva traducción al español del breve opúsculo De mystica theologia junto con una introducción al texto. La introducción se concentra en el análisis de algunos puntos que son especialmente útiles para entender el texto en cuestión: su historia y su significado para el neoplatonismo y, aun más importante, su relevancia en términos de una exposición sumamente original de la doctrina cristiana desde la perspectiva de un neoplatónico; la importancia de este texto en la filosofía contemporánea también se hace notar; y, finalmente, su crucial importancia para la así llamada “teología negativa”.

Both the metaphorology of Hans Blumenberg and negative dialectics of Theodor W. Adorno recognized the value of the “nonconceptual” as an antidote to the tyranny of rational concepts imposed on a reality that was too diverse, contingent, and qualitatively unique to be subsumed under them. But whereas Blumenberg focused on metaphor and myth as rhetorical alternatives to concepts designed to deal with the incomprehensibility of “absolute reality,” Adorno understood nonconceptuality in terms of the material and corporeal limits to cultural constructivism of any kind. He held out hope for a balance between the power of constitutive subjectivity and the resistance of the material world to its sway.

This article presents the feasibility of teaching generic competences through Sciencelessons at university level. The authors have implemented a new instrumentcalled “Moral Cross Dilemma” which involves the use of argumentationand moral reasoning within the students of Primary EducationDegree. This tool seems to be an effectivepedagogical resource in Higher Education Levels. It is a step forward fromthe well-known dilemma, a consolidated strategy for the development ofethical competences based on argumentative and discursive methodologies.This paper is focused on the description of this technique and applies itfor the first time on experimental data.Moral Cross Dilemma is applicable to environmental conflicts andcan be used as a discursive technique for improving the personal ethiclevel. This work shows empirical evidences from the preliminary implementationwithin university students. experience was carried out on a 47-student sample. They wereprospective teachers learning Natural Sciences. The main results revealedno difference and were observed between self-perceived and peer evaluationof the moral status, although the environmental-friendly argumentationposition clearly set out higher scoring in the moral reasoning level.

El objetivo de este ensayo es primero honrar la memoria de Vicent Martínez Guzmán, destacando sus importantes contribuciones a la filosofía. Dada su relación con el autor, ha parecido lo más oportuno centrarse en la relación de su filosofía con la fenomenología puesto que otros colegas desentrañarán otras facetas. Para cumplir ese cometido el ensayo tiene cuatro partes. En la primera se hace una presentación de las etapas de la filosofía de nuestro autor. En la segunda se expone, con bastante amplitud, por la importancia que tiene, la primera concepción de la fenomenología de Vicent Martínez Guzmán. El apartado tercero expone, aunque sea brevemente, por ser más conocido, el sentido fenomenológico de la filosofía para hacer las paces. Por fin, la cuarta comenta la posición de Vicent Martínez Guzmán respecto al ordoliberalismo de la Escuela de Friburgo, considerando la relación de este con la fenomenología husserliana.The aim of this essay is first of all to honor the memory of Vicent Martínez Guzmán, highlighting his important contributions to philosophy. Given its relationship with the author, it has seemed most appropriate to focus on the relationship of his philosophy with phenomenology since other colleagues will unravel other facets. To fulfill this task, the essay has four parts. In the first one, a presentation is made of the stages of our author's philosophy. In the second, the first conception of the phenomenology of Vicent Martínez Guzmán is exposed, quite widely, because of its importance. The third section exposes, even if briefly, for being better known, the phenomenological sense of “philosophy to make peace”. Finally, the fourth section comments on Vicent Martínez Guzmán’s position regarding the ordoliberalism of the Fribourg School, considering its relation to Husserlian phenomenology.