title: Joint parental school choice: Exploring the influence of individual preferences of husbands and wives

authors: Mariel, Petr

abstract: The objective of this paper is to study school choice as a deliberate joint parental decision. This decision is affected by the underlying preferences of the husband and wife. We use survey data from a sample of parents in the metropolitan area of Bilbao (Spain) to estimate a bargaining discrete choice model. The collected data set contains hypothetical school choices gathered in the form of a typical discrete choice experiment (stated preferences) and the actual school choice (revealed preferences). Stated preference data are obtained separately for husbands and wives, but the revealed preference choice is taken jointly. Our findings show, firstly, that the husband's and wife's stated preferences regarding school choice do not differ markedly. Secondly, the results obtained for the revealed preferences deviate from the stated preferences for some school characteristics. Finally, we find that neither the husband's nor the wife's preferences prevail in the actual joint school choice decision.

text: Joint parental school choice: Exploring the influence of individual preferences of husbands and wives The objective of this paper is to study school choice as a deliberate joint parental decision. This decision is affected by the underlying preferences of the husband and wife. We use survey data from a sample of parents in the metropolitan area of Bilbao (Spain) to estimate a bargaining discrete choice model. The collected data set contains hypothetical school choices gathered in the form of a typical discrete choice experiment (stated preferences) and the actual school choice (revealed preferences). Stated preference data are obtained separately for husbands and wives, but the revealed preference choice is taken jointly. Our findings show, firstly, that the husband's and wife's stated preferences regarding school choice do not differ markedly. Secondly, the results obtained for the revealed preferences deviate from the stated preferences for some school characteristics. Finally, we find that neither the husband's nor the wife's preferences prevail in the actual joint school choice decision.

year: 2018

title: Can virtuous people emerge from tragic dilemmas having acted well?

authors: van Zyl, Liezl

subjects: virtue ethics

abstract: A tragic dilemma is thought to arise when an agent, through no fault of her own, finds herself in a situation where she must choose between two courses of action, both of which it would be wrong to undertake. I focus on tragic dilemmas that are resolvable, that is, where a reason can be given in favour of one course of action over another, and my aim is to examine whether Hursthouse's virtue-ethical account of right action succeeds in avoiding two problems presented by tragic dilemmas. The first of these is that they produce the seemingly contradictory conclusion that an agent, in doing what she ought to do, acts wrongly, making it appropriate for her to feel guilt. The second is the paradox of moral luck, which consists in the conflict between the intuition that an agent cannot be held responsible for actions that are not fully voluntary, and the fact that she may nevertheless believe that she has done something morally reprehensible. I argue that if we accept Hursthouse's separation of action guidance and action assessment, her account succeeds in solving the problem of contradiction. However, it does not completely avoid the problem of moral luck. I argue, against Hursthouse, that the virtuous agent can emerge from a tragic dilemma having acted well, and that this is the conclusion we must arrive at if we want to avoid the problem of contradiction and of moral luck.

text: Can virtuous people emerge from tragic dilemmas having acted well? A tragic dilemma is thought to arise when an agent, through no fault of her own, finds herself in a situation where she must choose between two courses of action, both of which it would be wrong to undertake. I focus on tragic dilemmas that are resolvable, that is, where a reason can be given in favour of one course of action over another, and my aim is to examine whether Hursthouse's virtue-ethical account of right action succeeds in avoiding two problems presented by tragic dilemmas. The first of these is that they produce the seemingly contradictory conclusion that an agent, in doing what she ought to do, acts wrongly, making it appropriate for her to feel guilt. The second is the paradox of moral luck, which consists in the conflict between the intuition that an agent cannot be held responsible for actions that are not fully voluntary, and the fact that she may nevertheless believe that she has done something morally reprehensible. I argue that if we accept Hursthouse's separation of action guidance and action assessment, her account succeeds in solving the problem of contradiction. However, it does not completely avoid the problem of moral luck. I argue, against Hursthouse, that the virtuous agent can emerge from a tragic dilemma having acted well, and that this is the conclusion we must arrive at if we want to avoid the problem of contradiction and of moral luck.

year: 2007

title: The arguing genre and the explaining genre: A comparison in terms of discourse relational analyses of texts written in English and texts written in Māori

authors: Crombie, Winifred

subjects: Māori linguistics

abstract: There is a commonly held belief that those who are immersed in indigenous cultures have a tendency, when constructing academic texts, to avoid sequential, deductive argumentation. We report here on a comparison of two groups of texts exhibiting two different genres - 'explaining' and 'arguing'. One group of texts was written in Māori by indigenous authors, the other group was written in English by non-indigenous authors. Our findings are that although the percentage use of logico-deductive relationships is roughly equivalent for both groups of texts/ writers in the case of the explaining genre, the Māori texts/ writers use almost twice the percentage of logico-deductive relationships as do the English texts/ writers.

text: The arguing genre and the explaining genre: A comparison in terms of discourse relational analyses of texts written in English and texts written in Māori There is a commonly held belief that those who are immersed in indigenous cultures have a tendency, when constructing academic texts, to avoid sequential, deductive argumentation. We report here on a comparison of two groups of texts exhibiting two different genres - 'explaining' and 'arguing'. One group of texts was written in Māori by indigenous authors, the other group was written in English by non-indigenous authors. Our findings are that although the percentage use of logico-deductive relationships is roughly equivalent for both groups of texts/ writers in the case of the explaining genre, the Māori texts/ writers use almost twice the percentage of logico-deductive relationships as do the English texts/ writers.

year: 2005-02