C. James

The coming of new Information CommunicationTechnologies (ICTs) has prompted muchcontroversy in higher education. Scholars andadministrators have been excited by thepotential – perhaps the threat – of the`virtual' university. But whilst much has beenwritten about `virtual higher education', lesshas been said about the actual `work' involved.Drawing upon insights from the sociology oftechnology, this paper reports on the attemptsof one university to reconcile ideas about`virtuality' with the more established networksand infrastructures of traditional universitylife. This research is based upon aparticipant-observation study carried out inthe UK

Henry Johnstone's philosophical development was guided by a persistent need to reform the concept of validity -either by reinterpreting it or by finding a substitute for it. This project lead Johnstone into interesting confrontations with the concept of rhetoric and especiaUy with the work of Chaim Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca. The project culminated in a failed attempt to develop a formal ethics of rhetoric and argumentation, but this attempt was itself not consistent with some of Johnstone's other characterizations ofan ethics of argument ation. A virtue ethics would be truer to the Johnstonian philosophical project than a formal ethics of argument. Resume

It is generally believed that Bohm's version of quantum mechanics is observationally equivalent to standard quantum mechanics. A more careful statement is that the two theories will always make the same predictions for any question or problem that is well posed in both interpretations. The transit time of a “particle” between two points in space is not necessarily well defined in standard quantum mechanics, whereas it is in Bohm's theory since there is always a particle following a definite trajectory. For this reason tunneling times (in a scattering configuration through a potential barrier may be a situation in which Bohm's theory can make a definite prediction when standard quantum mechanics can make none at all. I summarize some of the theoretical and experimental prospects for an unambiguous comparison in the hope that this question will engage the attention of more physicists, especially those experimentalists who now routinely actually do gedanken experiments

Summary This paper argues that The Consolation of Philosophy by Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius and Either/or by Søren Kierkegaard bear certain striking similarities in their content, form, arguments, and in the way key ideas are expressed. It proposes that the explanation for this similarity could be causal dependency: The Consolation impacted Kierkegaard, consciously or unconsciously, in the development of Either/or. Regardless of whether this is correct or not, it further proposes that the correlation between these two works is close enough that an intertextual reading is valuable for the comprehension of both The Consoluation and Either/or. This paper seeks to prove this by executing such a reading.

Peroxisomes are eukaryotic organelles that are the subcellular location of important metabolic reactions. In humans, defects in the organelle's function are often lethal. Yet, relative to other organelles, little is known about how cells maintain and propagate peroxisomes or how they direct specific sets of newly synthesized proteins to these organelles (peroxisome biogenesis/assembly). In recent years, substantial progress has been made in elucidating aspects of peroxisome biogenesis and in identifying PEX genes whose products, peroxins, are essential for one or more of these processes. The most progress has been made in understanding the mechanism by which peroxisome matrix proteins are imported into the organelles. Signal sequences responsible for targeting proteins to the organelle have been defined. Potential signal receptor proteins, a receptor docking protein and other components of the import machinery have been identified, along with insights into how they operate. These studies indicate that multiple peroxisomal protein‐import mechanisms exist and that these mechanisms are novel, not simply variations of those described for other organelles.

The emphasis in human pluripotent stem cell (hPSC) technologies has shifted from cell therapy to in vitro disease modelling and drug screening. This review examines why this shift has occurred, and how current technological limitations might be overcome to fully realise the potential of hPSCs. Details are provided for all disease‐specific human induced pluripotent stem cell lines spanning a dozen dysfunctional organ systems. Phenotype and pharmacology have been examined in only 17 of 63 lines, primarily those that model neurological and cardiac conditions. Drug screening is most advanced in hPSC‐cardiomyocytes. Responses for almost 60 agents include examples of how careful tests in hPSC‐cardiomyocytes have improved on existing in vitro assays, and how these cells have been integrated into high throughput imaging and electrophysiology industrial platforms. Such successes will provide an incentive to overcome bottlenecks in hPSC technology such as improving cell maturity and industrial scalability whilst reducing cost.

ABSTRACT:The notion of stakeholder salience based on attributes (e.g., power, legitimacy, urgency) is applied in the family business setting. We argue that where principal institutions intersect (i.e., family and business); managerial perceptions of stakeholder salience will be different and more complex than where institutions are based on a single dominant logic. We propose that (1) whereas utilitarian power is more likely in the general business case, normative power is more typical in family business stakeholder salience; (2) whereas in a general business context legitimacy is socially constructed; for family stakeholders, legitimacy is based on heredity; and (3) whereas temporality and criticality are somewhat independent in general-business urgency, they are linked in the family business case because of family ties and family-centered non-economic goals. We apply this theoretical framework to position and integrate the contributions to this special section ofBusiness Ethics Quarterlyon “Stakeholder Theory, Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Family Enterprise.”

Most work on fallacies continues to conceptualize fallacious reasoning as involving a breach of a formal or quasi-formal rule. Chaim Perelman's theory of argumentation provides a way to conceptualize fallacies in a completely different way. His approach depends on an understanding of standards of rationality as essentially connected with conceptions of universality. Such an approach allows one to get beyond some of the basic problems of fallacy theory, and turns informal logic toward substantive philosophical questions. I show this by reinterpreting three so-called fallacies - theargumentum ad baculum, equivocation and composition/division - in the light of Perelman's account