Condividiamo con piacere l’abstract di un articolo scritto da Ida D’Ambrosio, Ricercatrice presso l’Università Giustino Fortunato
Il presente articolo offre un contributo alla riflessione sull’annosa questione dell’applicabilità agli interessi moratori della disciplina antiusura. L’analisi è condotta non solo alla luce della più recente giurisprudenza della Corte di Cassazione, ma anche sulla base del collegamento rintracciato tra divieto di usura e ordine pubblico. L’analisi si concentra sulla definizione di limiti e criteri chiari per distinguere gli interessi moratori legittimi da quelli ritenuti usurari, con particolare attenzione agli impatti pratici e alle implicazioni sul sistema finanziario.
Liminality was described more than
20 years ago as a major category explaining how cancer is experienced. Since
then, it has been widely used in the field of oncology research, particularly
by those using qualitative methods to study patient experience. This body of
work has great potential to illuminate the subjective dimensions of life and
death with cancer. However, the review also reveals a tendency for sporadic and
opportunistic applications of the concept of liminality. Rather than being
developed in a systematic way, liminality theory is being recurrently
‘re-discovered’ in relatively isolated studies, mostly within the realm of
qualitative studies of ‘patient experience’. This limits the capacity of this
approach to influence oncological theory and practice. In providing a
theoretically informed critical review of liminality literature in the field of
oncology, this paper proposes ways of systematizing liminality research in line
with a processual ontology. In so doing, it argues for a closer engagement with
the source theory and data, and with more recent liminality theory, and it
sketches the broad epistemological consequences and applications.