On Justification, Idealization, and Discursive Purchase

Conceptions of acceptability-based moral or political justification take it that authoritative acceptability, widely conceived, constitutes, or contributes to, validity, or justification. There is no agreement as to what bar for authoritativeness such justification may employ. The paper engages the issue in relation to (i) the level of idealization that a bar for authoritativeness, ψ, imparts to a standard of acceptability-based justification, S, and (ii) the degree of discursive purchase of the discursive standing that S accords to people when it builds ψ. I argue that (i) and (ii) are interdependent: high idealization values entail low discursive purchase, while high degrees of purchase require low idealization values. I then distinguish between alethic conceptions of justification that prioritize ends that commit to high idealization values, and recognitive conceptions that favor high discursive purchase. On this basis, I argue for a moderately recognitivist constraint on idealization. To render the recognitive discursive minimum available to relevant people at the site of justification, S should set ψ low enough so that it is a genuine option for actual people to reject relevant views in ways that S recognizes as authoritative. (The Appendix applies this to a Forst-type view of reciprocity of reasons to draw out some limitations of this view.) [Draft available from author on request.

Toleration, Reasonableness, and Power

This chapter explores Rainer Forst’s justification-centric view of nondomination toleration. This view places an idea of equal respect and a corresponding requirement of reciprocal and general justification at the core of non-domination toleration. After reconstructing this view, this chapter addresses two issues. First, even if this idea of equal respect requires the limits of non-domination toleration to be drawn in a manner that is equally justifiable to all affected people, equal justifiability should not be understood in terms of Forst’s requirement of reciprocal and general acceptability. Second, for the equal justifiability of relevant constraints to ensure non-domination outcomes, discursive equality must be understood in substantive, purchase-sensitive terms. This means that a justification-centric view of non-domination toleration stands or falls with the participation value of what it regards as the standards of justification. This places reasonably contested matters of value at the heart of such views

Critical reflection on toleration in social work

The concept of toleration does not play a prominent role in current social work discourse. However, it is important for social workers to understand what toleration is and to critically reflect on its potential for positive or negative effects in social work. Toleration in social work is inseparable from power relations and its effects are context-dependent. While some forms of toleration are expressions of respect and recognition, power asymmetries in social work can implicate even these positive forms of toleration in systems of control and oppression. Social workers should hence critically reflect on how power affects the meaning and effects of toleration in social work. The objection and acceptance components of toleration involve assessments of people, beliefs, practices, etc., against standards. Hence, tolerant social workers have reasons to critically reflect on whether such assessments are ill-based, reflect systemic misrecognition, or fail to duly respect clients. At the same time, social workers have reasons to use the term ‘toleration’ in social work practice in a context-sensitive, effects-aware manner

A new conservative-dynamic treatment for the acute ruptured Achilles tendon.

INTRODUCTION: There is a trend towards surgical treatment of acute ruptured Achilles tendon. While classical open surgical procedures have been shown to restore good functional capacity, they are potentially associated with significant complications like wound infection and paresthesia. Modern mini-invasive surgical techniques significantly reduce these complications and are also associated with good functional results so that they can be considered as the surgical treatment of choice. Nevertheless, there is still a need for conservative alternative and recent studies report good results with conservative treatment in rigid casts or braces. PATIENTS/METHOD: We report the use of a dynamic ankle brace in the conservative treatment of Achilles tendon rupture in a prospective non-randomised study of 57 consecutive patients. Patients were evaluated at an average follow-up time of 5 years using the modified Leppilahti Ankle Score, and the first 30 patients additionally underwent a clinical examination and muscular testing with a Cybex isokinetic dynamometer at 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: We found good and excellent results in most cases. We observed five complete re-ruptures, almost exclusively in case of poor patient's compliance, two partial re-ruptures and one deep venous thrombosis complicated by pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSION: Although prospective comparison with other modern treatment options is still required, the functional outcome after early ankle mobilisation in a dynamic cast is good enough to ethically propose this method as an alternative to surgical treatment