Suchergebnisse

The term 'worldview' harbours different dimensions that are not always clearly distinguished. A worldview can be considered to be a personal matter, but it may also be a more collective phenomenon, as it can manifest itself for example within a certain sphere of life (e.g. politics or economics) as a full-blown ideology or a more implicit 'embedded worldview'. A second distinction can be made between the dimension of a deep, existential commitment and that of an encompassing mental framework, between spiritual inspiration and a more or less intellectually coherent system. There may be tensions between these various dimensions. Having a worldview as a person may imply being in conflict with other worldviews that are embodied in certain social fields. How can people deal with these conflicts? One can easily be seduced to avoid the conflicts and to shift gears between them. With the credit crisis and economics used as an illustration, this article explores some of the techniques that people – consciously, semi-consciously or unconsciously – may employ to navigate the differences between various social domains and their inherent worldviews. In order to support people to regain some unity, the notion of worldview may still be helpful, but interpreted primarily as 'deep commitment'.

How should Europe deal politically with its legacy as a so‐called "Christian civilization"? Should this imply an overt reference to God or to the Christian or Judeo‐Christian tradition in European constitutional documents (as was debated when the so‐called "Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe" was tabled)? This debate raised the old "politico‐theological problem": does a political order need some kind of metaphysical or religious grounding, a "soul", or can it present itself as a purely rational order, the result of a utilitarian calculus? In this article it is argued that the secular idea of the state as an inherent element in the "Judeo‐Christian tradition", for a "divine state" usurps a place that is only God's. So, this religious tradition itself calls for a secular state, and this inherent relationship between religion and secularity has become a key element for the interpretation of European civilization, most notably in the idea of a separation of the church and the state. But the very fact that this is a religious idea does imply that the European political order cannot be seen as a purely rational political order without a soul. The idea of a "plural soul" is proposed as a way out of the dilemma.

How should Europe deal politically with its legacy as a so‐called "Christian civilization"? Should this imply an overt reference to God or to the Christian or Judeo‐Christian tradition in European constitutional documents (as was debated when the so‐called "Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe" was tabled)? This debate raised the old "politico‐theological problem": does a political order need some kind of metaphysical or religious grounding, a "soul", or can it present itself as a purely rational order, the result of a utilitarian calculus? In this article it is argued that the secular idea of the state as an inherent element in the "Judeo‐Christian tradition", for a "divine state" usurps a place that is only God's. So, this religious tradition itself calls for a secular state, and this inherent relationship between religion and secularity has become a key element for the interpretation of European civilization, most notably in the idea of a separation of the church and the state. But the very fact that this is a religious idea does imply that the European political order cannot be seen as a purely rational political order without a soul. The idea of a "plural soul" is proposed as a way out of the dilemma. Europos sielos Santrauka.Kaip politine prasme Europa turėtų pasielgti su savu vadinamuoju "krikščioniškosios civilizacijos" palikimu? Ar šis palikimas turėtų atvirai nurodyti Dievą arba krikščioniškąją, arba žydiškąją-krikščioniškąją, tradiciją, aptinkamą konstituciniuose Europos dokumentuose (kai buvo svarstoma pateikta vadinamoji "Sutartis dėl Konstitucijos Europai")? Ši diskusija iškėlė seną "politinę-teologinę problemą": ar politinei santvarkai reikia tam tikro metafizinio, ar religinio pamato, "sielos"? O gal ta politinė santvarka gali būti suprantama kaip grynai racionali tvarka, kaip utilitarinės apskaitos rezultatas? Šiame straipsnyje įrodinėjama, kad sekuliarios valstybės idėja yra neatsiejama nuo "žydiškosioskrikščioniškosios tradicijos", dėl "Dievo valstybės" uzurpuojanti paties Dievo ...

How should Europe deal politically with its legacy as a so‐called "Christian civilization"? Should this imply an overt reference to God or to the Christian or Judeo‐Christian tradition in European constitutional documents (as was debated when the so‐called "Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe" was tabled)? This debate raised the old "politico‐theological problem": does a political order need some kind of metaphysical or religious grounding, a "soul", or can it present itself as a purely rational order, the result of a utilitarian calculus? In this article it is argued that the secular idea of the state as an inherent element in the "Judeo‐Christian tradition", for a "divine state" usurps a place that is only God's. So, this religious tradition itself calls for a secular state, and this inherent relationship between religion and secularity has become a key element for the interpretation of European civilization, most notably in the idea of a separation of the church and the state. But the very fact that this is a religious idea does imply that the European political order cannot be seen as a purely rational political order without a soul. The idea of a "plural soul" is proposed as a way out of the dilemma. Europos sielos Santrauka Kaip politine prasme Europa turėtų pasielgti su savu vadinamuoju "krikščioniškosios civilizacijos" palikimu? Ar šis palikimas turėtų atvirai nurodyti Dievą arba krikščioniškąją, arba žydiškąją-krikščioniškąją, tradiciją, aptinkamą konstituciniuose Europos dokumentuose (kai buvo svarstoma pateikta vadinamoji "Sutartis dėl Konstitucijos Europai")? Ši diskusija iškėlė seną "politinę-teologinę problemą": ar politinei santvarkai reikia tam tikro metafizinio, ar religinio pamato, "sielos"? O gal ta politinė santvarka gali būti suprantama kaip grynai racionali tvarka, kaip utilitarinės apskaitos rezultatas? Šiame straipsnyje įrodinėjama, kad sekuliarios valstybės idėja yra neatsiejama nuo "žydiškosioskrikščioniškosios tradicijos", dėl "Dievo valstybės" uzurpuojanti paties Dievo vietą. Tad ši religinė tradicija reikalauja sekuliarios valstybės, o nesuardomas religijos ir sekuliarumo santykis tapo kertiniu akmeniu Europos civilizacijos interpretacijoje, labiausiai išryškėjančiu bažnyčios ir valstybės perskyros idėjoje. Tačiau pats faktas, kad ši idėja yra religinio pobūdžio, leidžia teigti, jog politinė Europos santvarka negali būti vertinama kaip grynai racionali politinė santvarka, neturinti sielos. "Grynosios sielos" idėja čia siūloma kaip galimas išeities taškas, sprendžiant minėtą dilemą. Reikšminiai žodžiai: Europa, Europos civilizacija, žydiškoji-krikščioniškoji tradicija, politinė santvarka, religija, sekuliarumas. First Published Online: 14 Oct 2010

Capitalism has gone astray. Today we face ecological exhaustion, persistent inequality, financialization, stress on communities, short-termism, and new power concentrations.
An avalanche of new economic thinking and a reorientation of European values show the way toward a different economy. A new perspective is necessary if we want to implement the Sustainable Development Goals and if we consider our planet as 'Our Common Home,' for present and future generations.
This book argues that European economies should be the initiators of a global transition toward a sustainable and inclusive world economy. Together, amid severe geopolitical and geoeconomic challenges, they need to develop their own perspective on what a good economy really is, in distinction to Chinese state capitalism and American big business capitalism. Crucially, this requires the rediscovery of key European values, a coherent view on responsible capitalism, and a new self-awareness as a global player for the Common Good in today's and tomorrow's world.