In the article, the social structure of mountain-plant serf population of fief and seasonal plants in the Southern Urals in the first half of the 19th century is studied. It is noted that due to the kind of their activity, all mountain-plant population was in this or that way connected with plant work; according to their social structure they were peasants, bought for the plants, or were the owners’ private serfs. It is shown that because of the variety of industrial (...) work at a plant, the serfs of the plant-owners were categorized and differed according to the working conditions and possibilities of their own management. The Southern Urals is noted to have become the arena of private mining industry activity as compared to other areas of the country. The fact predetermining the social composition of factory population. The sources of formation and growth of the group of factory peasants of the Southern Urals are shown. In the article, the social structure is analyzed and social groups of factory peasants are described for three different mining areas of the region. (shrink)

The author studies with the problems of formation of the tenancy institution, the social composition and land tenure by the tenants. The obligations, share and territorial location of the peasants - tenants in the Southern Urals are analyzed. Complicated land relations between the tenants and Bashkir’s are revealed. The results of the undertakings by the government in land relations rights regulation of Bashkir’s and their tenants are analyzed. The purposes, the main content of the decrees of 1830-1850s on land arrangement (...) of the tenants are distinguished. It is emphasized that the activity of Russian authorities on land tenure had not liquidated the uncertainty of land relations between Bashkir’s and their tenants. (shrink)

Many social scientists and philosophers have counted themselves moral relativists in some sense or other. We cannot deal with all the various views which are properly called forms of “moral relativism”; so I propose to explain a form of moral relativism which seems to me an interesting, and somewhat plausible theory. This theory comprises the following three affirmations: The basic moral principles of different individuals or groups sometimes are, or can be, in some important sense conflicting. When there is such (...) fundamental conflict of basic principles or standards, there is either always, or at least sometimes, no way to show that one view is better justified even in the presence of ideally complete factual information; in that sense the principles are equally justified or “valid.” But there is a sense in which a particular moral belief may be mistaken or unjustified, if it is a misapplication of the basic principles of the individual or group, e.g., if the basic principles plus statements of known or knowable facts entail a moral proposition incompatible with it. As stated, moral relativism could be true even though in fact, accidentally, all individuals agree in their basic moral principles. (shrink)

Researchers in all management specialties have discussed and investigated the important role values play in personal and organizational phenomena. However, because research on values has been performed in a wide range of social science disciplines and at different levels of analysis, much of thiswork has been uninformed by other work and is neither well integrated nor systematized, resulting in a great deal of confusion concerning the topic. This article attempts to add order and clarity to this area of research by (...) proposing a framework of values research based on level of analysis and by cataloguing and reviewing the vast theoretical and empirical research in light of this framework. It concludes with a critique of the extant literature and recommendations for further research. (shrink)

Anyone, today, with even a slight interest in the methodology of science will be aware of the heated debate which has raged in regard to the thesis of the logical symmetry between explanation and prediction, which is entailed by the hypotheticodeductive account of scientific theory. The symmetry thesis, which received its classical exposition in a well-known article by Hempel and Oppenheim [2], has been subject to a steadily growing criticism by several eminent thinkers. My intention, in this article, is to (...) argue that the current reaction to the Hempel-Oppenheim position, as exemplified by Professors Hanson, Scriven, et al., represents a retrograde movement in the philosophy of science, which, as the number of its converts grows, could undermine the progress, which has been accomplished in the broad tradition that extends from Mach and Poincaré through the Vienna Circle to the present day. Specifically, it is my contention that the aforementioned reaction is symptomatic of a contemporary trend in the direction of irrationalism which, of all branches of philosophy, the philosophy of science should seek to dispel rather than to foster. For the sake of brevity, I propose to focus my remarks wholly on the original widely read article of Hanson on this subject [1]. That I single out this particular source should not be taken to belie the admiration I hold for the masterful scholarship of its author. (shrink)

Changes being introduced to deregulate the Dutch health care system after decades of extensive state control are to be welcomed, and will in future require consumers to be ‘well‐informed, cost‐conscious and assertive patients, who are aware of their responsibility for their own health.’ R.B. Kool MD, PhD and E.J.J.M. Kimman PhD are attached to the Department of Business Ethics in the Faculty of Economics and Econometrics at The Free University, P.O. Box 7161, 10107 MC Amsterdam.