international

The Encyclopedia of Law was created to be a central, one-stop resource for everything related to law. Our primary goal is to provide a steady stream of current, informative, and credible information about law and related fields to enhance the professional and creative lives of legal practitioners and those exploring law, including the general public. Our content is driven and created by an impressive roster of experienced professionals who work in all areas of the law and cover the field from diverse angles and perspectives.

The following is a list of entries related to this topic (in practice and theory), specially in regard to international and comparative law. The entries below offer descriptions and cross-references of this topic of countries around the world.

United Nations Resolutions

by

United Nations Resolutions United Nations Security Council Resolutions Some of the United Nations Security Council resolutions covered in this encyclopedia … Read more

United Nations Security Council Resolutions

by

United Nations Security Council Resolutions United Nations Security Council Resolutions Some of the United Nations Security Council resolutions covered in … Read more

United Nations General Assembly Resolutions

by

United Nations General Assembly Resolutions Note: for information on United Nations activities in general, see here. United Nations General Assembly … Read more

Structural Bias

by

Besides “partisan bias” in media reporting, a second type of media bias is known as “structural bias.” This type of bias stems from certain “structures” (customs, reporting routines, commercial pressures, etc.) that operate within the news industry. As a result of the highly commercial and purportedly nonpartisan nature of the mainstream media, the issue of media bias surfaces in a unique way in some western democracies.

Speciesism

by

Historically there have been two major routes for defending animal experimentation: deontological and utilitarian. Deontological arguments attempt to identify a fundamental difference between humans and non-human animals which morally justifies a difference in treatment. The previous argument does not directly challenge the claim that humans and non-human animals are relevantly different. However, the dilemma does indicate that animal experimentation is unjustifiable even if they are relevantly different. If humans and non-human animals are relevantly different, then animal experiments are scientifically questionable. And if the experiments are scientifically questionable, then experimentation will be morally objectionable since it wastes scarce public resources. On the other hand, if humans and non-human animals are relevantly similar, then experiments will be scientifically respectable, but morally objectionable.

It appears the straightforward deontological defense of experimentation is implausible. Some deontologists might acknowledge that non-human animals are sufficiently similar to humans to make experimentation both scientifically reputable and morally problematic. However, they might then argue that even as deontologists they recognize the (limited) relevance of consequentialist considerations. On this view, the benefits of experimentation are so overwhelming that they outweigh the cost of experimenting on animals creatures of some moral worth. For those who wish to take such a tack, their fate will lie with consequentialist defenses of experimentation. But we have argued in a previous paper that a utilitarian defense of research is flawed.35 It is no longer certain how the researchers can morally justify their practice.