RISULTATI RICERCA

The recent developments in genetics have made new methods of modification available that enable a hitherto inconceivable degree of control over man’s inner na-ture to be exercised. The suitability of the use of these methods and the manners in which they are used, especially in the framework of human reproduction, raise an ethical and moral question. This article starts from the liberal assumption that the only reason for restricting personal freedom, and thus the freedom to access these new methods, by imposing prohibitions and limitations is to prevent unacceptable harm. It then considers the pros and cons, both direct and indirect, that may derive from the use of these new methods, which could rely on the arguments that lead to the legislative regulation of the field. Lastly, it offers some opinions, based on a liberal-social democratic conception of jus-tice, about the directives that are intended to act as guidelines for the legislative regu-lation of access to new methods of genetic engineering.

The aim of the present study is to underline and syntetize a possible consumer be-haviour and willingness to pay towards a particular type of genitally modified food linked to specific indications on the label about the implementation of corpo-rate social responsibility initiatives by manufacturing companies. Through a quan-titative model on a sample of hundreds Italian families, it was possible to consider possible consumers’ preferences regarding that consumption through a choice ex-periment and to verify the drivers of that purchase and preference heterogeneity across consumers’ choice, and the willingness to pay, for the products with those features. Indications obtained from the relationships between the variables ana-lyzed also form a topic for future studies and useful for companies’ strategies.

Where is genius to be found in the age of its economic and financial reproducibility? Ingenious individuals. Crisis of a myth and new possibilities sets out by considering the present uncertainty as to whether one may still speak of artistic geniuses in contemporary society, in order to critically examine some basic aspects of the traditional figure of the genius, as this has been developed in the aesthetic field, and to highlight some of its problematic implications, particularly in relation to the issue of individuality. The author suggests to approach the crisis of the ideology of genius not as a completely negative phenomenon, but as a stimulus for rethinking the individuality of the artist from alternative perspectives. In John Dewey’s pragmatism the author finds some useful conceptual tools and critical arguments, as well as different ways of understanding artistic production and its role.

Lo stereotipo dell’imprenditore geniale che, contando solo sulle sue doti personali, introduce innovazioni radicali partendo spesso da un "garage" è ancora molto diffuso. Benché molto efficace, questo tipo di narrazione nasconde una realtà innegabile: la maggior parte delle imprese innovative nascono dall’esperienza pregressa dei fondatori e non dalla loro genialità. Partendo da questa evidenza, il presente articolo analizza la relazione tra l’esperienza del fondatore e l’innovatività della nuova impresa. Per essere innovativa, la nuova impresa deve possedere un capitale intellettuale diverso da quello dell’impresa dove il fondatore ha precedentemente lavorato. Questa diversità non può che provenire dal capitale sociale che il fondatore sviluppa attraverso la casa madre o fuori dai suoi confini organizzativi. Le relazioni con attori esterni alla casa madre possono aiutare a sviluppare un’idea di business innovativa, ad acquisire conoscenza in nuovi settori o ad amalgamare capitali intellettuali di fondatori con diverse provenienze.