Why is equal treatment important for the ethical conduct of research?
Equal treatment of human subjects is essential for the ethical conduct of research for the same reason that it is important in other areas of life: to promote consistency.
What is the difference between just and equitable treatment?
Aristotle clearly established that just and equitable treatment is not necessarily equal treatment, as differing circumstances call for differing treatments. Accordingly justice and equity are considerably more difficult to agree upon and to achieve, in part because a common understanding of merit – what a person deserves – has been elusive.
What is the difference between allegedly unequal treatment and patently unequal treatment?
Allegedly unequal treatment occurs when subjects are treated differently and there is a serious dispute about whether subjects are the same in relevant respects. Patently unequal treatment occurs when there is no significant dispute about whether subjects are the same in relevant respects and they are treated unequally.
What are the measures taken to correct past wrongs?
Punishment, reparation, restitution, and redistribution are some of the measures that may be taken to correct or right past wrongs. Finally, it is worth emphasizing that different claims of justice may be relevant in different contexts.
What is the project of equal treatment?
The project examines the relationship between equal treatment and religion in relation to discrimination and restrictions on freedom of religion or belief on the basis of the principle of equal treatment.
What is the Danish Institute for Human Rights?
The Danish Institute for Human Rights has an especially important role to play regarding equal treatment, where the Institute receives earmarked funds. A research effort will represent an addition to the comprehensive analytical work which is already being carried out in the field of equal treatment by the Institute.
What is the nature of scientific method?
The nature of the scientific method is the permanent questioning of existing proofs and practices. For example, in medicine, it results in a continuing revision of therapeutic practices and rehabilitative techniques. Naturally, a continuing tension and conflict develops between the ever-changing medical-therapeutic approach and the desire of the CJS to retain humanistic principles of equity, rights, and equal treatment before the law. This situation threatens its coherence and creates an increasing vulnerability for the CJS, especially to its claims of legitimacy.
What does "protection must extend to all people" mean?
Protection must extend to all people. This means fair and equal treatment of all. Observe a position of neutrality—act with firmness—this is not belligerence or unreasonable force. After an order is given, it must be enforced for the preservation of the public peace and the carrying out of the traditional mission of protecting life and property of citizens to assure the basic rights of all people.
Abstract
This paper proposes that the question “What should I believe?” is to be answered in the same way as the question “What should I do?,” a view I call Equal Treatment.
Introduction
Many people, both inside and outside philosophy, agonize over what to believe. Should I believe in God? Should I trust that my accused friend is innocent? Should I think that acupuncture will help my aching shoulder? How confident should I be that the female professor I just met is in English rather than Math?
Equal treatment
As a rough first pass, we can think of Equal Treatment (ET) as saying that the question “What should I believe?” is to be answered in the same way as the question “What should I do?” For example, suppose the answer to the latter is that you should perform whichever act, of your options, has highest expected value.
Evidentialism as an alternative to equal treatment
One alternative to Equal Treatment is a view I’ll call “evidentialism,” which says that one should believe P just in case one’s evidence adequately supports P, and that only evidence for P is a reason for believing it.
The epistemic should
We saw in the previous section that evidentialism about the guidance-giving should is incompatible with Equal Treatment.
Can non-evidential considerations be reasons for which one believes?
As we have seen, according to Equal Treatment, sometimes non-evidential considerations—such as moral or prudential considerations—can be reasons for belief. Some object that such considerations can’t be reasons for belief because they cannot be reasons for which one believes. Footnote 17 In this section I respond to that objection.
Equal treatment and rationality, justification, knowledge, and reasoning
In this section, I clarify how, in my view, the guidance-giving should is related to other important concepts. It is not my aim here to defend these claims, but rather to illustrate how Equal Treatment could fit into a broader theoretical framework.
Summary
Summary Equality is a concept open to many interpretations in the legal domain, with equality as equal treatment dominating the scene in the bureaucratic nation-state.
Introduction
The concept of equality can be interpreted as a reformulation of the principle of non-discrimination in employment matters (Berg, 1964 ).
A Typology of Equality Legislation
Inherited from the Enlightenment, equality is a general and overarching constitutional principle found in most legal systems, while earlier sources can be traced to the scriptures. France and the United States are the first countries that enshrined equality in their foundational legal bases. As mentioned in the Preamble to the U.S.
Moving Along the Typology
In many countries, for a given category (i.e., gender, Blacks, ethnic groups, immigrants of certain national or ethnic origins, or their descendants), states often had to repeal discriminatory legislation before they introduced anti-discrimination legislation (Klarsfeld et al., 2012 ). For instance, after World War II successive U.S.
Coverage of Laws in Terms of Criteria and Sectors
In most countries equal treatment laws, when they exist, apply across all sectors (i.e., public and private). They also apply to a generally large and growing number of criteria.
Enforcement and Sanctions
Regardless of whether a law is based on equal treatment or a mandate to report, act, progress, or achieve an outcome, it will meet with little success if there are no enforcement mechanisms in place (Lu, 2019 ).
Practical Implications for Organizations
As the workplace becomes more global, an increasing number of employers are employed by multinational corporations. With organizations spanning a variety of countries, they face different work cultures and national discrimination laws. Thus, the companies must deal with significant complexity which increases risks of non-compliance.