Suchergebnisse

Argues that the reasons provided for protecting Aboriginal art -- (1) the appropriation of art is the appropriation of identity & (2) without appropriate protection for art, indigenous cultures will be destroyed -- are substantially true in relation to ceremonial Aboriginal art, & that the protections sought are consistent with the reasons given & with common law protecting signs relating to group identity. To make this argument, it is asserted that Aboriginal art produced in ceremonial contexts is insignia, ie, institutional facts maintained by rules regarding who may use signs & when, with the rules recognized in the common law protection for insignia. It is contended that Aboriginal art ought not be protected exclusively under copyright law as copyright does not adequately serve the needs of Aboriginal peoples; four claims to this end are elaborated, eg, copyright only covers work produced in material form & it is too narrow. Whether copyright should be strengthened to meet these demands is considered. How art is insignia & the connection between insignia & identity are next addressed, suggesting that the moral wrong of appropriation involves a disregard for the normative aspects of insignia -- ie, bearing insignia without authorization amounts to a sort of lie about identity. Further, the appropriation of insignia not only misrepresents identity, it can also potentially destabilize & destroy those groups & impair their capacity to act in the world. It is then demonstrated that Western insignia is already protected under common law in the manner that Aboriginal peoples wish to see their art protected. It is concluded that there should be strong protection for ceremonial Aboriginal art from appropriation, ensuring Aboriginal ownership & control of a subsection of works key to the stability of Aboriginal communities. J. Zendejas

The creation of a secular education system was one of the great social experiments designed to break down religious intolerance within society. One element of this design was administrative, involving the creation of non-denominational schools, and another element involved a centralised curriculum. In this collection of essays, political philosophers, lawyers, sociologists, theologians and educators explore the role of state schools in promoting tolerance within 21st century multicultural, religiously pluralistic societies. How may different models of liberalism in the secular state have different outcomes in relation to religious tolerance in the education system? Does a state education system have a role in teaching values such as tolerance, and if so, how is this best achieved? How are epistemology and truth connected with tolerance? How does the ideal of a 'value free'secular education mask the values that the secular state teaches? The essays are written from both theoretical and practical perspectives and engage with each other directly to address one of the significant issues of our day. This is the fourth volume arising from a series of conferences on the theme of 'Negotiating the Sacred'. Previous volumes have included Blasphemy and Sacrilege in a Multicultural Society; Blasphemy and Sacrilege in the Arts; and Medicine, Religion and the Body

Introduction: Lines in the sand /Elizabeth Burns Coleman and Maria Suzette Fernandes-Dias --Section I:Understanding Blasphemy and Sacrilege.Blasphemy and sacrilege: A challenge to secularisation and theories of the modern? /David Nash --'The devil's centres of operation': English theatre and the charge of blasphemy, 1698-1708 /David Manning --Madonna and piano accordion: Disrupting the order of the world /Elizabeth Burns Coleman --Materialising the sacred /Dianne McGowan --Section II:Motivations for Artistic Blasphemy.Blasphemy and sacrilege in the novel of magic realism: Grass, Bulgakov, and Rushdie /Peter Arnds --Les fees ont soif: Feminist, iconoclastic or blasphemous? /Maria-Suzette Fernandes-Dias --The body of Christ: Blasphemy as a necessary transgression? /Carolyn D'Cruz and Glenn D'Cruz --Section III:Reinterpreting Freedom of Expression.The monologue of liberalism and its imagination of the sacred in minority cultures /Jasdev Singh Rai --Blasphemy in a pluralistic society /Jeremy Shearmur --Section IV:Self-expression and Restriction.Blasphemy and the art of the political and devotional /Christopher Braddock --Negotiating the sacred body in Iranian cinema(s): National, physical and cinematic embodiment in Majid Majidi's Baran (2002) /Michelle Langford --Silence as a way of knowing in Yolngu Indigenous Australian storytelling /Caroline Josephs.

Abstract
At The Lock-Up in Newcastle one weekend in September 2015, a group of artists, musicians and performers, performed to an audience which included philosopher commentators. The idea was to look for points of intersection, interface or divergence between art and philosophy. However, what we found was that the commentators were not engaged in analysing what was simply given them, but instead actively constructing the meaning they would ascribe to the work. As such they were co-creators. The objective of this report of the event is to establish a basis for more collaboration between art and philosophy in the future on the assumption that interdisciplinarity reveals possibilities and perspectives masked by the general insularity of well-established disciplines.