Suchergebnisse

Social equality of religion or belief protects individuals against discrimination related to their religious identity. It also requires the state to treat all religions and non-religious belief systems in a similar fashion, and to be even-handed in its treatment of religious identity, compared with other identities of gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity, age, disability or social caste. It is clear, fair, firm and flexible in its approach, and its principles can be applied to economic, legal, political or cultural issues. It offers to promote the integration of different religious communities within a liberal framework of equality and human rights. This book brings together a distinguished group of academics and practitioners to discuss the pros and cons of this approach and its influence to date on a wide range of issues concerning religion's relation to the state both in Europe and in North and South America, including the next Coronation in the UK, the US and Canadian constitutions, the Catholic Concordat in Brazil, religious fundamentalism, same-sex marriage and 'the impossibility of religious freedom'. The new perspective on religion and society is contrasted with existing doctrines such as constitutional separation, religious establishment, multiculturalism and secularism. This interdisciplinary volume will appeal to followers of religious studies, jurisprudence, philosophy, politics and social science alike

Critiques Runciman's Treatise on Social Theory (1989) in terms of (1) his effort to develop a social theory analogous to neo-Darwinian evolutionary biology & (2) the connection between his theory & a version of historical materialism based on competitive primacy. Runciman's so-called "Compact Statement" regarding his social theory is provided & explicated; his Darwinian views of the macroscopic distribution of social types & Mendelian analysis of the microfoundations of social reproduction & social change are then addressed. It is suggested here that Runciman deems it allowable to postulate directedness in history, but only if the direction is inferred from the historical record & not presupposed; & that history's direction is related as a matter of fact to a growing intensity in material resource use & to systematic changes in the primary locus for the exercise of power. The concept of power is then situated vis-a-vis concepts of practice, role, & institution; relationships among those ideas are then considered. Runciman's axiom that practices are the social DNA, ie, the impetus behind social reproduction & social change, is then rejected, arguing that the most plausible replicator is the set of social expectations surrounding the performance of a role. Thus, the power key to social reproduction spreads social expectations required for role performance. Reproductive success depends on the degree to which the exercise of power contributes to the propagation of social expectations in competition with others. Runciman's take on long-run historical trends is viewed as consistent with historical materialism. He seems to have taken a "Weberian route" toward that end; however, he fails to provide test cases for his explanatory theory & lacks the doctrine of competitive primacy. In addition, the causal arrangement of his theory & his over-reliance on social power are deemed problematic. 13 References. J. Zendejas

Analytical Marxism involves the attempt to reconstruct Marxist theory and to refocus Marxist politics in the light of contemporary intellectual developments-especially in analytical philosophy and economic theory – and historical events-above all, the failures of Communist regimes. In order to assess this reconstruction it is necessary to bear in mind a conception of the overall Marxist project. By this standard of comparison it remains to be seen whether Analytical Marxism can effect the required kind of connection between its theory and its practice.