Los autores muestran por qué este principio se impone hoy día como el término central de la alternativa política para el siglo XXI: anuda la lucha anticapitalista y la ecología política mediante su reivindicación de los “comunes” contra las nuevas formas de apropiación privada y estatal. Además, articula las luchas prácticas con las investigaciones sobre el gobierno colectivo de los recursos naturales o de la información y designa formas democráticas nuevas que aspiran a tomar el relevo de la representación política y del monopolio de los partidos. Esta emergencia de lo común en la acción reclama un trabajo de clarificación en el pensamiento. El sentido actual de lo común se distingue de los numerosos usos que se ha dado a esta noción, ya sean filosóficos, jurídicos o teológicos: bien supremo de la ciudad, universalidad de esencia, propiedad inherente a ciertas cosas, incluso alguna vez el fin perseguido por la creación divina. Pero hay otro hilo que vincula lo común, no a la esencia de los hombres o a la naturaleza de las cosas, sino a la actividad de los hombres mismos: sólo una práctica de puesta en conjunto puede decidir qué es “común”, reservar ciertas cosas al uso común, producir determinadas reglas capaces de obligar a los hombres. En este sentido, lo común reclama una nueva institución de la sociedad por ella misma: una revolución.

One hundred years ago a series of seminal documents, starting with the Flexner Report of 1910, sparked an enormous burst of energy to harness the power of science to transform higher education in health. Professional education, however, has not been able to keep pace with the challenges of the 21st century. A new generation of reforms is needed to meet the demands of health systems in an interdependent world. The report of the Commission on the Education of Health Professionals for the 21st Century, a global independent initiative consisting of 20 leaders from diverse disciplinary backgrounds and institutional affiliations, articulates a fresh vision and recommends renewed actions. Building on a rich legacy of educational reforms during the past century, the Commission's findings and recommendations adopt a global and multi-professional perspective using a systems approach to analyze education and health, with a focus on institutional and instructional reforms.

Records for the 2d- sess. issued in two sections: v. 1, Proceedings and v. 2, Resolutions.

A Deleuzian reading of Whitehead and a Whiteheadian reading of Deleuze open the possibility of a critical aesthetics of contemporary culture. In Without Criteria, Steven Shaviro proposes and explores a philosophical fantasy: imagine a world in which Alfred North Whitehead takes the place of Martin Heidegger. What if Whitehead, instead of Heidegger, had set the agenda for postmodern thought? Heidegger asks, “Why is there something, rather than nothing?” Whitehead asks, “How is it that there is always something new?” In a world where everything from popular music to DNA is being sampled and recombined, argues Shaviro, Whitehead's question is the truly urgent one. Without Criteria is Shaviro's experiment in rethinking postmodern theory, especially the theory of aesthetics, from a point of view that hearkens back to Whitehead rather than Heidegger. In working through the ideas of Whitehead and Deleuze, Shaviro also appeals to Kant, arguing that certain aspects of Kant's thought pave the way for the philosophical “constructivism” embraced by both Whitehead and Deleuze. Kant, Whitehead, and Deleuze are not commonly grouped together, but the juxtaposition of them in Without Criteria helps to shed light on a variety of issues that are of concern to contemporary art and media practices.

Vols. for 1969- include a section of abstracts.