Suchergebnisse

The image of the European culture is given by the association of the concepts people – culture – history – territory, which provides certain local features. From this relation, we identify a cultural area with local, regional and national features beyond a certain European culture. Thus, we identify at least two cultural identity constructions on the European level: a culture of cultures, that is a cultural area with a particular, local, regional and national strong identity, or a cultural archipelago, that is a common yet disrupted cultural area. Whatever the perspective, the existence of a European cultural area cannot be denied, although one may speak of diversity or of "disrupted continuity".
The paper is a survey on the European cultural space in two aspects: 1. Europe with internal cultural border areas; 2. Europe as external cultural-identity border area. From a methodological point of view, we have to point out that despite the two-levelled approach the two conceptual constructions do not exclude each other: the concept of "culture of cultures" designs both a particular and a general identity area. The specific of the European culture is provided precisely by diversity and multiculturalism as means of expression on local, regional, or national levels. Consequently, the European cultural area is an area with a strong identity on both particular and general levels.

An examination of Chpt 27 of the Second Book of John Locke's Essay concerning Human Understanding (Of Identity & Diversity) traces arguments concerning the issue of identity to Locke's rejection of the Cartesian doctrine of thought as the essence of the mind. For Locke, the "I" is not only a thinking thing, defined only by perception or conscience, but also a thing capable of pleasing or hurting, & thus concerned with itself & of its own present & past actions. Responsibility is defined in the context of an individual as a human. The responsible human being is conscious & preoccupied with personal happiness &, thus, the consequences of personal actions. J. Sadler

Outlines problematic latitudinarian concepts concerning human fallibility & the school's tendency toward theological & ecclesiastical moderation & the acceptance of freedom of judgment & conscience. It is suggested that these latitudinarian themes are not grounded epistemologically, but, rather, are based in theological, ethical, & anthropological notions. In particular, they refer to the structural finiteness of man, man's creatural dignity, & an ethical vision of the roots of evil & sin. Together, these underlying concepts highlight the freedom & responsibility implied in the use of human faculties. The contributions of 17th-century English latitudinarians Benjamin Whichcote, H. More, R. Cudworth, Isaac Barrow, J. Wilkins, & J. Tillotson are surveyed, noting the rejection of the ideas of human infallibility, skepticism, fideism, or authoritarianism. J. Sadler

A reflection on A. M. Ramsey's Philosophical Principles of Natural and Revealed Religion (1748-49) discussing liberty as free will, & liberty & self-determination belonging to the rational subject. Ramsey argues that liberty is the eternal, immutable, & universal law in the world, which applies equally to loving God for oneself, & loving all other creatures in proportion to their resemblance to God. Tolerance & political liberty are justified by virtue of universal salvation & freedom, & the universality of grace & the free cooperation of intelligent creatures. While Ramsey's politics aligned with exiled Jacobites, he was also guided by providentialism in protecting the integrity of divine & human freedom, & in choosing a conciliatory, but skeptical, approach to English rule. His classic defense of Freemasonry drew on his position in the organization in France in the 1730s. J. Sadler