Suchergebnisse

Many historians have argued that the rise of television in the 1950s and the 1960s has had an enormous significance to the display and workings of politics. What is remarkable is that observations about the political importance of television often ignore the role of radio, as a medium which is closely affiliated to television, but which saw its breakthrough to a mass audience in the 1920s and the 1930s. Against this background this study explores the significance of radio to interwar political culture. It does so by comparing the political dealings with radio by two likeminded political parties, the SDAP in the Netherlands and the Labour Party in Great Britain. Both parties faced entirely different circumstances in broadcasting. While the SDAP was closely affiliated to the socialist broadcasting association VARA, the Labour Party found itself facing the mighty BBC. Yet, this study sees radio as a medium that was essentially the same in both countries, which meant that its rise raised a similar challenge for both parties to adjust their rhetoric and presentation to the medium-specific qualities of radio. As such, this comparison has not only highlighted a wide variety of differences between both parties, but also a number of unsuspected parallels. In fact, this study argues that these parallels offer vital new insights, not just to understand why radio has long been ignored by political historians and political scientists, but also to conclude that its political significance was really far greater than has been recognized so far.

""Machines as the Measure of Men""; ""CONTENTS""; ""Maps and Illustrations""; ""Acknowledgments""; ""Preface to the 2014 Edition""; ""Introduction""; ""PART I. BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION""; ""1. First Encounters: Impressions of Material Culture in an Age of Exploration""; ""Technology�Perceptions of Backwardness; Qualified Praise""; """Natural Philosophy��Illiteracy and Faulty Calendars""; ""Scientific and Technological Convergence and the First Hierarchies of Humankind""; ""2. The Ascendancy of Science: Shifting Views of Non-Western Peoples in the Era of the Enlightenment

Two cautions or warnings (at least) must be heeded in the attempt to do justice to Nietzsche's project of a genealogy of morals in the text that bears that name. While the Genealogy is often regarded as the most straightforward and continuous of Nietzsche's books, he tells us in Ecce Homo that its three essays are "perhaps uncannier than anything else written so far in regard to expression, intention, and the art of surprise." If we should think ourselves successful in penetrating to these uncanny secrets and saying what Nietzsche's text means, once and for all, we would then have to read again its lapidary although parenthetical injunction that "only that which has no history can be defined." For since the work of Theodor Adorno and Max Horkeimer, Jurgen Habermas, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, and Gilles Deleuze, genealogy has become a polemical word. When Nietzsche published the Genealogy in 1887, the main uses of the term arguably had to do with the ascertaining of actual family lineages to determine rights to titles, honors, and inheritances, as in the venerable Almanach of Gotha, and a careless librarian today might classify the book among those many middle-class popularizations which might all go under the title "Tracing Your Family Tree for Fun and Profit." But Foucault characterizes his History of Sexuality as a genealogy of the modern self, and Derrida describes a large part of his intellectual project as "repeating the genealogy of morals"; Nietzsche's practice and example are invoked in both cases.

In The Eastern Christian Tradition in Modern Russian Thought and Beyond, Teresa Obolevitch elucidates the main philosophical and theological ideas of the Eastern Christian tradition of neo-patristic synthesis and considers them in comparative philosophical context.

This work offers a survey of the history of the rule, "Do unto others as you want others to do unto you". It traces the rule's history in contexts as diverse as the writings of Confucius and the Greek philosophers, the Bible, modern theology and philosophy, and the American "self-help" context

The notion of "natural law" has repeatedly furnished human beings with a shared grammar in times of moral and cultural crisis. Stoic natural law, for example, emerged precisely when the Ancient World lost the Greek polis, which had been the point of reference for Plato's and Aristotle's political philosophy. In key moments such as this, natural law has enabled moral and legal dialogue between peoples and traditions holding apparently clashing world-views. This volume revisits some of these key moments in intellectual and social history, partly with an eye to extracting valuable lessons for ideological conflicts in the present and perhaps near future. The contributions to this volume discuss both historical and contemporary schools of natural law. Topics on historical schools of natural law include: how Aristotelian theory of rules paved the way for the birth of the idea of "natural law"; the idea's first mature account in Cicero's work; the tension between two rival meanings of "man's rational nature" in Aquinas' natural law theory; and the scope of Kant's allusions to "natural law". Topics on contemporary natural law schools include: John Finnis's and Germain Grisez's "new natural law theory"; natural law theories in a "broader" sense, such as Adolf Reinach's legal phenomenology; Ortega y Gasset's and Scheler's "ethical perspectivism"; the natural law response to Kelsen's conflation of democracy and moral relativism; natural law's role in 20th century international law doctrine; Ronald Dworkin's understanding of law as "a branch of political morality"; and Alasdair Macintyre's "virtue"-based approach to natural law.​

Članak je nastojanje da se razmisli o budućnosti komparativne političke i socijalne filozofije na temelju interakcije s empirijskim i teorijskim istraživanjima u društvenim znanostima i humanistici. Sastoji se od četiri dijela: 1. Kratke prezentacije izvora »komparativnog zaokreta« i četvrtog vala kritike eurocentrizma; 2. Razmišljanja o problemu »višestrukih moderna« (»nove moderne«) kao posljedice »komparativnog zaokreta« i izazova za ideju društva i politike temeljene na konceptu sekularnog javnog uma; 3. Reference na izazov klasičnoj postavci javne sfere (ukorijenjene u idealu javnog uma) razvijene od strane Nilüfer Göle koja je istraživala novu »islamsku javnu vidljivost kao kritiku sekularne verzije javne sfere« u Zapadnoj Europi. ; The paper is an effort to reflect on the prospects of comparative political and social philosophy based on interaction with empirical and theoretical research in the social sciences and humanities. It consists of the following components: 1. Short presentation of the sources of the "comparative turn" and the fourth wave of the critique of Eurocentrism. 2. Reflection on the problem of "multiple modernities" ("new modernities") as the consequence of the "comparative turn", and a challenge for the idea of society and politics based on the concept of secular public reason. 3. Reference to a challenge to the classical notion of the public sphere (rooted in the ideal of public reason) which was developed by Nilüfer Göle while studying new "Islamic public visibility as a critique of a secular version of the public sphere" in Western Europe. ; Cet article, constituant une tentative pour penser les perspectives d'avenir de la politique comparée et de la philosophie sociale, se base sur l'interaction entre les recherches empiriques et théoriques dans les sciences sociales et humaines. Il est composé des trois parties suivantes : 1. d'une brève présentation de la source du « tournant comparé » et de la quatrième vague de la critique de l'eurocentrisme ; 2. d'une réflexion sur le problème des « multiples modernités » (« nouvelles modernités ») comme conséquence du « tournant comparé » et sur le défi se rapportant à l'idée d'une société basée sur la raison publique séculaire ; 3. d'une référence concernant la récusation de la notion classique de sphère publique (incarnée dans l'idéal de la raison publique) développée par Nilüfer Göle dans sa recherche sur la nouvelle « visibilité publique islamique en tant que critique d'une version séculaire de la sphère publique » dans l'Europe de l'ouest. ; Der Artikel ist bestrebt, über die Perspektiven der komparativen politischen Philosophie und Sozialphilosophie zu reflektieren, basiert auf der Interaktion mit der empirischen und theoretischen Forschung in den Sozial- und Geisteswissenschaften. Er besteht aus folgenden Komponenten: 1. Kurze Darstellung der Quelle der "komparativen Wende" und die vierte Welle der Kritik des Eurozentrismus; 2. Nachdenken über das Problem der "multiplen modernitäten" ("neue modernitäten") als Folge der "komparativen Wende" und der Herausforderung an die sich auf das Konzept der säkularen öffentlichen Vernunft stützende Idee der Gesellschaft und Politik; 3. Bezugnahme auf die Herausforderung für die klassische Vorstellung von der öffentlichen Sphäre (verwurzelt im Ideal der öffentlichen Vernunft), entwickelt von Nilüfer Göle, die die neue "islamische öffentliche Sichtbarkeit als Kritik der säkularen Version der öffentlichen Sphäre" in Westeuropa erforscht hat.

This volume critically discusses the relationship between democracy and constitutionalism. It does so with a view to respond to objections raised by legal and political philosophers who are sceptical of judicial review based on the assumption that judicial review is an undemocratic institution. The book builds on earlier literature on the moral justification of the authority of constitutional courts, and on the current attempts to develop a system on "weak judicial review". Although different in their approach, the chapters all focus on devising institutions, procedures and, in a more abstract way, normative conceptions to democratize constitutional law. These democratizing strategies may vary from a radical objection to the institution of judicial review, to a more modest proposal to justify the authority of constitutional courts in their "deliberative performance" or to create constitutional juries that may be more aware of a community's constitutional morality than constitutional courts are. The book connects abstract theoretical discussions about the moral justification of constitutionalism with concrete problems, such as the relation between constitutional adjudication and deliberative democracy, the legitimacy of judicial review in international institutions, the need to create new institutions to democratize constitutionalism, the connections between philosophical conceptions and constitutional practices, the judicial review of constitutional amendments, and the criticism on strong judicial review

I distinguish four different interpretations of 'equality of opportunity.' We get four interpretations because a neglected ambiguity in 'opportunity' intersects a well-known ambiguity in 'equality.' The neglected ambiguity holds between substantive and non-substantive conceptions of 'opportunity' and the well-known ambiguity holds between comparative and non-comparative conceptions of 'equality.' Among other things, distinguishing these four interpretations reveals how misleading 'equal opportunity for advantage' formulations of luck egalitarianism can be. These formulations are misleading in so far as they obscure the difference between two separate claims about which inequalities are consistent with true equality. Luck egalitarianism claims that inequalities that have been chosen in some suitable sense are consistent with true equality, while the traditional ideal of equality of opportunity only claims that inevitable inequalities that have been determined through fair competitions are consistent with true equality. Obscuring the difference between these two claims therefore serves both to arrogate the rhetorical advantages of the traditional ideal to luck egalitarianism and to cover over a limitation to luck egalitarianism's ambition to provide a comprehensive principle of distributive justice.

This comparative philosophy of law book aims at formulating a new analytical approach to the Islamic legal tradition based on juridical categories, a concept that facilitates comprehension and understanding of juridical phenomena. Building upon legal comparativism and legal pluralism, this project intends to avoid bias caused by universalizing Western categories when analyzing foreign juridical notions, which inevitably results in the miscomprehension of non-Western ideas and institutions. Unlike existing literature, this project will not focus on substantive comparisons between normative contents, but on the juridical perspectives that helped to shape the Islamic and Western legal orders. The book focuses on the most relevant juridical questions regarding the Islamic and Western legal perspectives, such as the different visions regarding juridical spatiality, the role of human reason and the relationship between law, man and the divinity. While contributing to legal philosophy, this work intends also to develop and define a new interdisciplinary approach, aiming to provide a starting point for novel analyses in research fields such as legal comparativism, legal pluralism, and constitutional law. Finally, by formulating a new interdisciplinary approach, it will provide a foundational discussion of a continuously evolving subject that will never be exhaustively explored. As such, it aims at broadening scholarly reflections on the relationship between the West and Islam, eventually placing these concepts within a suitably comprehensive and contextualized framework.

This book presents the first-ever comprehensive assessment of whether national laws enacted in 50 countries across Asia, Africa, and Latin America comply with international standards on expropriation, compensation, and resettlement as established in Section 16 of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (VGGTs). The VGGTs are supported by the international consensus of governments, civil society, and the private sector. The UN Committee on World Food Security officially endorsed the VGGTs in 2012. This book uses indicators to compare laws with international standards. Illustrative examples of how expropriation laws are implemented in practice, including a case study of Nigeria's Lekki Free Trade Zone expropriation case, are provided to highlight the importance of adopting international standards. Along with establishing a benchmark for measuring progress that indicates most of the national laws assessed do not comply with international standards, this book offers a set of recommended legal reforms that support the adoption of international standards in national laws.

The war on terrorism, say America's leaders, is a war of Good versus Evil. But in the minds of the perpetrators, the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington were presumably justified as ethically good acts against American evil. Is such polarization leading to a violent "clash of civilizations" or can differences between ethical systems be reconciled through rational dialogue? This book provides an extraordinary resource for thinking clearly about the diverse ways in which humans see good and evil. In nine essays and responses, leading thinkers ask how ethical pluralism can be understo

Kant's notion of cosmopolitanism is influential to a range of topical issues, from multiculturalism and human rights to globalization and an ethical society. Cosmopolitanism promises a conception of the rational subject not constrained by commitments to the nation or the self. The universality of this conception has been challenged by feminist and critical race philosophers. The Cosmopolitics of Race, Gender, and Indigeneity in Kant offers a new approach towards investigating these promises and limits. By examining the deep background of the production of the rational subject, it argues that that there is a political-epistemological paradox at the heart of Kant's notion of cosmopolitanism. An impasse is generated between the pure, practical reason that motivates Kant's critical philosophy and the empirical framing of historical reason at play in accounts of political autonomy and cosmopolitan subjectivity. I claim that this paradoxical dimension of Kant's cosmopolitanism has not been sufficiently interrogated. The central argument of my project is that Kant treats this paradox through a complex movement of identity and difference between the concepts of the human and humanity. I demonstrate that exclusions of race, gender, and indigeneity are needed by Kant to establish this movement as coherent. Drawing on recent scholarship that combines philosophical analysis with a historical and literary approach, the dissertation's arc makes this argument across a series of discourses. Chapter 1 revisits the relationship of Kant's concept of race to his moral philosophy by placing Kant's notion of cosmopolitan destiny alongside an original moment in the 18th century invention of the concept of race. Chapters 2 and 3 argue the centrality of gender to ideas of cosmopolitan subjectivity by examining Kant's account of political autonomy alongside his participation in a discourse of gender in German civil society. Chapter 4 demonstrates the significance of indigeneity to Kant's cosmopolitan vision by exploring his use of source material from an influential polemic on indigeneity in the New World. This project concludes that discourses of race, gender, and indigeneity qualify inclusion in the constituency of a future cosmopolitan society and form the horizon upon which the impasse between epistemology and politics is elaborated.

I distinguish four different interpretations of 'equality of opportunity.' We get four interpretations because a neglected ambiguity in 'opportunity' intersects a well-known ambiguity in 'equality.' The neglected ambiguity holds between substantive and non-substantive conceptions of 'opportunity' and the well-known ambiguity holds between comparative and non-comparative conceptions of 'equality.' Among other things, distinguishing these four interpretations reveals how misleading 'equal opportunity for advantage' formulations of luck egalitarianism can be. These formulations are misleading in so far as they obscure the difference between two separate claims about which inequalities are consistent with true equality. Luck egalitarianism claims that inequalities that have been chosen in some suitable sense are consistent with true equality, while the traditional ideal of equality of opportunity only claims that inevitable inequalities that have been determined through fair competitions are consistent with true equality. Obscuring the difference between these two claims therefore serves both to arrogate the rhetorical advantages of the traditional ideal to luck egalitarianism and to cover over a limitation to luck egalitarianism's ambition to provide a comprehensive principle of distributive justice. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]