Search

In this article I am going to analyze and criticize the proposal for conceptualizing the defeasibility of rules and the defeasibility of principles in the theses of Manuel Atienza and Juan Ruiz Manero. For this purpose, I will carry out a brief critical reconstruction of their proposal of distinction in order to indicate in a concise, clear and precise way how they understand the defeasibility of prescriptive norms. I will do that for the purpose of justifiying three points: a) the defeat of rules is better understood as a reinterpretative process of legal material; b) defeating rules is not equivalent to defeating principles; and c) the language of rules and principles presents the same operations and results as the language of recalcitrant experiences and axiological gaps, only that, unlike these, the first of the languages presupposes a prescriptive claim about how the language of the legal material should be understood. To achieve this objective, I will take the following steps: in section II, I will present critically the distinction between rules and principles, the notion of licit and illicit atypical act, and what it means to say that rules are resistant to principles. In section III, I will present that the reconstructed thesis suffer from ambiguity when they develop the notion of defeasibility. They present, on the one hand, a problem of superability between norms and, on the other, a problem of apparent relevance of a norm to solve an individual case. Likewise, I will offer a proposal to reformulate the defeat of rules from the theory of interpretation. Finally, I will end by showing that the language of rules and principles presupposes a normative thesis about how norms should be identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to examine the impact of role stress (ambiguity and conflict) on job satisfaction through psychological empowerment in the workplace. Data was collected from 314 workers from southern Portugal (Mage= 35.39, SDage =10.66; 69.75% women) Results indicated that role conflict had a direct effect on job satisfaction, while the impact of role ambiguity on job satisfaction was totally mediated by meaning and self-determination. Psychosocial interventions in companies should focus on prevention of role stress and promotion of psychological empowerment in the workplace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to examine the mediating effect of job satisfaction in the relationship between role ambiguity and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) according to the "HEalthy and Resilient Organization" model in two local corporations. A multilevel analysis of mediation was employed to examine the relationship between these variables, controlling for the effect of employee division. The sample consisted of a total of 340 employees. The results indicate that job satisfaction exhibits a total mediation in the relationship between role ambiguity and OCB of public employees. These results indicate the importance of employees' well-being to decrease negative effects of role ambiguity in public employees' performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper follows the political life of documents produced in relation to a World Bank-funded road engineering technical study in the Peruvian Andes. By contrast with Weber's emphasis on documents as instruments of rationalisation and transparency, and the more recent focus on documents as aesthetic artefacts and instances of institutional form, I attend to the ambiguous political processes enacted through document flows. I suggest that the ways in which project documents circulated, accumulating multiple connotations as they travelled, generated not clarity, but rather increasing indeterminacy, arguing that their political quality had to do precisely with their dual character, calling up at once normativity (and its promise of justice and order) and the play of unscrupulous «interests». I argue that their dual promise of clarity and ambivalence was key to the opening up of spaces of political possibility in the project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]