A Contribution to The Study of Global Competition for Talent: the determinants of student mobility and its consequences for the internationalization of the labor market. Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 27/2013

In a globalized economy the skills of the workforce are a key determinant of the competitiveness of a country. One of the goals of Higher Education is precisely to develop the students’ skills in order to allow them to match the increasing demand for highly qualified workers while it is simultaneously the best period of life to acquire multicultural skills. For this reason, the European Union has fostered student mobility through several programs: the Erasmus program and the Bologna process are the best known among them. Although student mobility is a growing phenomenon, publications and research on the subject remain relatively scarce. This paper aims to contribute to that literature through an empirical analysis which exploits a questionnaire submitted to university alumni and focuses on two research questions: what drives studies abroad and what drives expatriation of graduates. Our empirical analysis first shows that exposure to international experiences before entering tertiary education and family background are the main factors influencing student mobility. A second conclusion is that studying abroad increases the international mobility on the labor market. Both confirm previous studies. Moreover, by making a distinction between participating in the Erasmus program and in other exchange programs or internships abroad, we found that the Erasmus program and the other programs or internships have an equivalent influence on the international mobility on the labor market: they increase by 9 to 12.5 percentage points a student’s chance to be mobile on the international labor market. This result shows the legitimacy of the Erasmus program, but it also reveals the important impact of other forms of experience abroad. It provides support for policy makers to encourage mobility programs, in order to foster integration of the European labor market

Retributive theories of punishment

Jedan od najozbiljnijih problema u filozofiji je neobična i krajnje neprijatna činjenica da se termini koriste na višesmislen i nejasan način. Upravo to je slučaj sa terminom 'retribucija' (retribution). Naime, u filozofskoj literaturi o kazni jako često se događa da se mnoge teorije nazivaju 'retributivnim teorijama kazne', kao i to da se vrlo široko i na krajnje višesmislen način upotrebljava termin 'retribucija'. Šta zapravo znači 'retribucija'? Da li sve teorije koje se klasifikuju kao retributivne zaista mogu da se ispravno okarakterišu na taj način? To su ključna pitanja na koja Džon Kotingem nastoji da odgovori u svom tekstu. Glavni cilj ovog rada je da se predstavi klasifikacija retributivnih teorija koju Kotingem izvodi, da se objasni njen značaj, kao i njeni eventualni nedostaci. Pokazaće se da je Kotingemova klasifikacija, uprkos nekim nedostacima i nedoslednostima, još uvek jedna od najtemeljnijih analiza retributivnih teorija kazne koja je napisana u okviru radova koji spadaju u filozofiju kazne.One of the most serious problems facing the analysis of philosophical arguments is the fat that some of the main terms in those arguments are ambiguous and vague. This is exactly the case with the term 'retribution'. Namely, in the philosophical literature about moral justification of punishment many quite dissimilar theories are often characterized as retributive theories of punishment. Also, the term 'retribution' is typically used in a very broad and imprecise way. What exactly is the meaning of the term 'retribution'? Is it the case that all the theories that are classified as retributive can be properly characterized in that way? These are the main questions that John Cottingham attempts to answer in his analysis of retributive theories of punishment. The main goal of this paper is to present Cottingham's classification of retributive theories, as well as to explain its significance and potential defects. I hope that in the course of this paper it will become clear that, despite some minor flaws and shortcomings, Cottingham's classification is still one the most thorough analysis of retributive theories of punishment, and that it is the best introduction to retributivism for anyone who is interested in the philosophy of punishment

Peter Railton's moral realism

Piter Rejlton je moralni realista, naturalistički kognitivista i redukcionista. On je realista u smislu da postoje moralne činjenice. Ove moralne činjenice su konstituisane prirodnim činjenicama. U tom smislu je Rejlton naturalistički realista. Međutim, da bi mogao da zastupa svoju realističku tezu on mora da pokaže da moralne činjenice imaju eksplanatornu funkciju, tj. da mogu da doprinose aposteriornim objašnjenjima nekih važnih odlika našeg iskustva. Ovaj uslov, koji se mora zadovoljiti da bi se s pravom mogao zastupati naturalistički realizam, on naziva generičkom strategijom naturalističkog realizma. U prvom delu ovog rada, pokazuje se na koji način Rejlton dokazuje da ova generička strategija važi u slučaju ne-moralne dobrote (non-moral goodness) i u slučaju moralne ispravnosti (moral rightness). U zaključku rada ću pokušati da pokažem da je jedna od najvećih zamerki koje se mogu uputiti Rejltonu neadekvatno objašnjenje vrednosnih standarda. Pored toga, njegovo stanovište ne pruža jasan odgovor na mnoga važna pitanja.Peter Railton is a moral realist, a naturalistic cognitivist, and a reductivist. He is a moral relist because he believes that moral facts exist. These moral facts are constituted by a complex set of natural facts (this is why Railton is a naturalistic realist). In order to make his naturalism plausible, Railton has to prove that moral facts (which are constituted by natural facts) can satisfy certain important conditions. Namely, he has to show that moral facts can have both explanatory and normative role. In the first part of this paper I shall attempt to demonstrate Railton's arguments with which he proves that these conditions are satisfied in the area of non-moral goodness and in the area of moral rightness. In the conclusion of this paper I shall attempt to show that the most serious argument against Railton's position is that Railton does not and cannot give a plausible answer to some very important questions about moral standards

Reasons, rationality, and motivation

Prema jednoj od najuticajnijih i najpopularnijih teorija u savremenoj teoriji postupaka, subjekt S je motivisan da uradi određeni postupak P ako i samo ako S prihvata skup razloga R na osnovu kojeg proizlazi da treba da uradi P i ukoliko S ne pati od nekog oblika praktične iracionalnosti (npr. depresije, slabosti volje, psihopatije, mentalne ili fizičke iscrpljenosti i sl.). Bar na prvi pogled, ova teorija - koja je u filozofskoj literaturi poznata kao racionalistički motivacioni internalizam - deluje nekontroverzno i neproblematično. Ipak, u poslednjih desetak godina ova popularna pozicija je suočena sa nizom veoma ozbiljnih prigovora. U toku ovog rada nameravam da izložim neke od tih prigovora, kako bih otvorio prostor za tvrdnju da pojam praktične iracionalnosti - koji igra centralnu ulogu u formulaciji ove varijante internalizma - treba izostaviti iz objašnjenja prirode naše motivacije. Na osnovu ove tvrdnje, pokušaću da odbranim zaključak da racionalistički motivacioni internalizam predstavlja sasvim neadekvatnu teoriju motivacije.According to one of the most influential and popular theories in the contemporary theory of action, an agent S is motivated to perform a certain act A if and only if she endorses some set of reasons R on the basis of which it follows that she should perform A, and given that she does not suffer from some sort of practical irrationality (e.g. depression, weakness of will, psychopathy, mental or physical exhaustion etc.). At least at first glance, this theory - which is known as the rationalist motivational internalism - appears to be uncontroversial and unproblematic. Yet, over the past ten years, this popular position has faced numerous very serious objections. In the course of this work, I intend to present some of these objections, in order to justify the claim that the concept of practical irrationality - i.e. the concept that plays the central role in this particular version of internalism - should be left out from the philosophical explanation of motivation. I will then attempt to defend the conclusion that the rationalist motivational internalism represents a completely inadequate theory of motivation

Weakness of will and motivational internalism

The unconditional version of motivational internalism says that if an agent sincerely judges that to phi in circumstances C is the best option available to her, then, as a matter of conceptual necessity, she will be motivated to phi in C. This position faces a powerful counterargument according to which it is possible for various cases of practical irrationality to completely defeat an agent's moral motivation while, at the same time, leaving her appreciation of her moral reasons intact. In this paper, I will argue that weakness of will, as the paradigmatic case of practical irrationality, and all other cases of practical irrationality that feature in standard formulations of this argument do not represent genuine counterexamples to this version of motivational internalism. In this sense, the main aim of this paper is to show that proponents of this internalist position are well justified in their denial of the claim that there are people who are completely unmotivated by their judgments about what is the best option available to them

Relationship of the Median and Radial Nerves at the Elbow: Application to Avoiding Injury During Venipuncture or Other Invasive Procedures of the Cubital Fossa.

INTRODUCTION: The median and radial nerves are two important neural structures found in the cubital fossa. The trajectory and landmarks used to identify their location are important when procedures are done in this area. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten fresh-frozen cadavers were dissected (20 upper limbs) and measurements were taken from the medial epicondyle to the median and radial nerves as well as to the lateral epicondyle of each limb. RESULTS: The distance between the medial epicondyle and the median nerve was found to be three centimeters with a range of 2.1 to four centimeters and the distance from the medial epicondyle to the radial nerve had a mean distance of 5.5 cm and a range of 3.8 to seven centimeters. DISCUSSION: Damage to the median or radial nerves can lead to major complications including loss of extension, flexion, and sensation in the forearm and hand. Other studies have tried to identify the course of these nerves in order to prevent their injury during procedures. CONCLUSION: After identifying the medial epicondyle, using the results we obtained, physicians may have a better understanding of where the median and radial nerves lie within the cubital fossa when performing procedures in this area

Pineal Gland Agenesis: Review and Case Illustration.

Agenesis of the pineal gland has rarely been reported in the medical literature. Herein, we report a cadaveric specimen found to have agenesis of the pineal gland. The remaining gross examination of the brain was normal. A review of the literature was performed on this unusual finding

Aberrant innervation of the lateral abdominal muscles by direct branch of L4 nerve

Surgical approache through the posterior abdominal wall used for nephrectomy or other access to contents of the retroperitoneal space requires to be cognizant of the regional nerve supply to the posterolateral abdominal wall muscles. We herein report a, to our knowledge, previously undescribed direct branch from the L4 spinal nerve that formed a plexus with regional nerves to then innervate the lateral abdominal wall musculature. Such a nerve variant should be considered by the surgeon who operates this region