226 research outputs found
Jacob Weisberg, 32nd Annual ODU Literary Festival
No full textJacob Weisberg is chairman and editor-in-chief of the Slate Group, a unit of the Washington Post Co. devoted to developing Web-based publications. Weisberg joined Slate as chief political correspondent shortly after its founding in 1996. He succeeded Michael Kinsley to become Slate\u27s second editor from 2002-08, when he handed the job over to David Plotz. Before joining Slate, Weisberg wrote about politics for magazines including the New Republic, Newsweek, New York Magazine, Vanity Fair, and the New York Times Magazine. His most recent book, The Bush Tragedy, was a New York Times best-seller in 2008. He is co-author, with Robert E. Rubin, of In an Uncertain World (2003)
Residuals and Influence in Regression
No full textAuthor affiliations: University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, School of Statistics.Cook, R. Dennis; Weisberg, Sanford. (1982). Residuals and Influence in Regression. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/37076
Corporate Ownership, Leadership and Job Charateristics in Russian Enterprises
No full textThis study tests the application of the Western theory of organization's ownership in Russia, suggesting that ownership types – such as state-owned and private – influence leadership style and employees' jobs characteristics. A sample of 724 Russian employees in 15 service and manufacturing companies was surveyed. The results indicate that, contrary to Western theories, the leadership in Russian state-owned enterprises tends to be perceived as being more effective than the leadership in private enterprises. Similarly, jobs in state-owned enterprises are more enriched than in private companies. Explanations and implications are provided.leadership, job characteristics, state-owned enterprises, private organizations, Russia
Defending HOT Theory and The Wide Intrinsicality View: A Reply to Weisberg, Van Gulick, and Seager
No full textThis is my reply to Josh Weisberg, Robert Van Gulick, and William Seager, published in JCS vol 20, 2013. This symposium grew out of an author-meets-critics session at the Central APA conference in 2013 on my 2012 book THE CONSCIOUSNESS PARADOX (MIT Press). Topics covered include higher-order thought (HOT) theory, my own "wide intrinsicality view," the problem of misrepresentation, targetless HOTs, conceptualism, introspection, and the transitivity principle
Defending HOT Theory and The Wide Intrinsicality View: A Reply to Weisberg, Van Gulick, and Seager
No full textThis is my reply to Josh Weisberg, Robert Van Gulick, and William Seager, published in JCS vol 20, 2013. This symposium grew out of an author-meets-critics session at the Central APA conference in 2013 on my 2012 book THE CONSCIOUSNESS PARADOX (MIT Press). Topics covered include higher-order thought (HOT) theory, my own "wide intrinsicality view," the problem of misrepresentation, targetless HOTs, conceptualism, introspection, and the transitivity principle
Recommended from our members
Law, literature, and history ::a fateful rendezvous with the Shoah /
No full text"The author claims in this book that close readings of stories, from Bernhard Schlink's The Reader and Guenther Grass's The Tin Drum through Bernard Malamud The Fixer and Mary Ann Shaffer and Annie Barrows' The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, uniquely situates us to understand the clash of religious values that led to genocide in World War II Europe (including Great Britain). Most of the stories respond directly to this enormity, but some involve writers such as Shakespeare and Herman Melville, who, avant la lettre, pointed to seismic conflicts in law and religion. "Law and Literature" methods uniquely permit the author to justify this assertion. Just as his work of history, Vichy Law and the Holocaust in France, grew out of a deep interest in Albert Camus (who also plays an important role in this manuscript), and just as it proceeded to analyze as texts various authoritative statements that contradicted each other and lied about Jews, but that found their way into French law books and theological discourse during Vichy, so throughout this book series, once closely examined, open the door to fathoming the violence caused by religious differences. Inspired in particular by James Carroll's Constantine's Sword and Harold Bloom's Jesus and Yahweh, the book provokes its reader to seek answers to millennia of atrocities disguised as "Judeo-Christian" affinity and at the same time to re-engage with a series of superb stories. The author is already seen as a pioneer of the modern "Law and Literature movement" and is associated with connecting stories to fraught questions about history. The book continues to impart actual data from the wartime period, innovated in Vichy Law and the Holocaust in France (NYU), but it is a work of law, literary criticism, and comparative religion. Weisberg has a PhD in French and comparative literature from Cornell, taught those subjects on the graduate faculty of the University of Chicago, practiced and taught law at Cardozo Law School in NYC and in many venues around the world. He was awarded the French Legion of Honor for his work "on behalf of victims of the Vichy regime". His previous books have been translated and reviewed widely. "Richard Weisberg's standing as a sage of the Law and Literature Movement is augmented in this masterful book." Anthony Julius, Deputy Chairman Mishcon de Reya LLP, Professor, Faculty of Laws, University College London. "In this masterful book, Richard Weisberg brings his extraordinary learning to bear on a group of stories, written both before and after the Holocaust, to explore some of its deepest, and most hidden causes. The Holocaust, Weisberg argues, was fueled by Christianity-infused interpretations of religious and legal texts, which have been deployed for centuries against Jewish traditions, intellectual histories, customs, Jewish Law, and legalist ideals. Weisberg builds his case through literary and legal analyses of (among others) Malamud's The Fixer, Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, Melville's Billy Budd Sailor, Gunter Grass's The Tin Drum, The Old Testament, Nietzsche's meditations on morals, and holocaust-era legal texts from Germany, Britain and Vichy France. We are ill-served by attempts to paper over and distort this history with bromides about "Judeo-Christian" values and shared aspirations. Weisberg's elegant and straightforward scholarship takes us on a path toward a truer accounting." Professor Robin West, Georgetown Law"-- Provided by publisher
Explicit and Tacit Knowledge
No full textThe question of whether or not it is “worthwhile” for employees to share their knowledge has received a great deal of attention in the literature, which focuses on the technological factors that motivate knowledge sharing (Duffy, 2000). However, the ethical aspect regarding the question of knowledge ownership is discussed in only a partial way in Wang’s (2004) model, where he examines employees’ desire to share (or not to share) the knowledge they possess. This internal conflict is based on employees’ having to choose between their own personal interests and their ethical understanding about organizational ownership of all employee-based knowledge. This article will elaborate on and examine the implications of knowledge sharing at the individual level. Employees, who manage to find the balance between their own personal interests and their ethical understanding about organizational ownership of employee-based knowledge, will engage in a high rate of knowledge sharing activities in the organization. Goals of Managing Organizational Knowledge Sharing. An organization’s desire to manage its knowledge sharing activities is based on the need to capture, catalog and store the organization’s knowledge and transform it into knowledge that is both easily and immediately accessible to the organization and its members (Gupta & Govindarajan, 2000). The goal of knowledge sharing is to support and encourage the creation, transference, application and use of knowledge within the organization (Reychav & Weisberg, 2005). Scholars, researchers and practitioners alike express an increasing interest in the subject of organizational knowledge sharing between the individual employee and the organization, and among employees themselves (Almashari, Zairi, & Alathari, 2002). Types of Knowledge. One of the classifications of organizational knowledge differentiates between two types of knowledge: explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge (Polanyi, 1958); explicit knowledge represents the knowledge that is accessible to all organization employees, while tacit knowledge represents the personal knowledge possessed by individual employees. Organizations seek to obtain employees’ tacit knowledge and convert it into explicit knowledge, which can then be easily transferred to the organization’s technological systems and networks. In this manner, the knowledge is distributed throughout the entire organization (Inkpen & Dinur, 1998; Ruppel & Harrington, 2001), thereby increasing the organization’s human capital (its employees). Conflicts of Interest. Organizations invest in developing their human capital (Nahpiet & Ghoshal, 1998). As a result, employees expand their knowledge and expertise in order to create a personal competitive advantage within the organization and the market (Carlile, 2002). Knowledge is a resource and individuals who possess knowledge use it to acquire positions of power and control both within the organization and outside of the organization. Therefore, organizations that attempt to gain their employees’ knowledge (mainly of the tacit type) and make it accessible may, in the process, create a conflict of interests between the individual who possesses the knowledge and the organization that is interested in acquiring this knowledge (Storey & Barnett, 2000). Hence, the main question is: Why would employees be motivated to share their personal knowledge with the organization at the risk of losing their relative power and advantage over the organization and the market? This question is even more complicated in light of the employee’s other conflicting considerations: the understanding that the organization has ownership rights over the personal knowledge the employee acquires while employed by the organization, conflicting with employees’ desire to realize their own personal interests by achieving a position of power/status. </jats:p
Law, Literature, and History: A Fateful Rendezvous with the Shoah
No full textThe author claims in this book that close readings of stories, from Bernhard Schlink\u27s The Reader and Guenther Grass\u27s The Tin Drum through Bernard Malamud The Fixer and Mary Ann Shaffer and Annie Barrows\u27 The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, uniquely situates us to understand the clash of religious values that led to genocide in World War II Europe (including Great Britain). Most of the stories respond directly to this enormity, but some involve writers such as Shakespeare and Herman Melville, who, avant la lettre, pointed to seismic conflicts in law and religion.
Law and Literature methods uniquely permit the author to justify this assertion. Just as his work of history, Vichy Law and the Holocaust in France, grew out of a deep interest in Albert Camus (who also plays an important role in this manuscript), and just as it proceeded to analyze as texts various authoritative statements that contradicted each other and lied about Jews, but that found their way into French law books and theological discourse during Vichy, so throughout this book series, once closely examined, open the door to fathoming the violence caused by religious differences. Inspired in particular by James Carroll\u27s Constantine\u27s Sword and Harold Bloom\u27s Jesus and Yahweh, the book provokes its reader to seek answers to millennia of atrocities disguised as Judeo-Christian affinity and at the same time to re-engage with a series of superb stories.
The author is already seen as a pioneer of the modern Law and Literature movement and is associated with connecting stories to fraught questions about history. The book continues to impart actual data from the wartime period, innovated in Vichy Law and the Holocaust in France (NYU), but it is a work of law, literary criticism, and comparative religion. Weisberg has a PhD French and comparative literature from Cornell, taught those subjects on the graduate faculty of the University of Chicago, practiced and taught law at Cardozo Law School in NYC and in many venues around the world. He was awarded the French Legion of Honor for his work on behalf of victims of the Vichy regime . His previous books have been translated and reviewed widely.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-books/1128/thumbnail.jp
- …
