Suchergebnisse

Examines the two concepts of secularist thinking that have dominated 20th-century US political culture. Positive & a negative secularism, similar to Berlin's (1958) terms of positive & negative liberty, have had an impact on the institutions & practical politics of the current cultural conflict. Negative secularism, similar to First Amendment reasoning, holds that religion should not be established in the political framework, while positive secularism wishes to triumph over religious faith & to leave religion, at best, without influence in the political realm. Negative secularism implies a theoretic possibility that religionists & nonreligionists could be equal players in political decision making & that citizens have the freedom to participate according to their individual consciences & to associate in moral communities possessing political freedoms. Positive secularism contains the sinister features that fuel crusades, but there is a need to recognize that vibrantly pluralistic religious life offers the greatest potential for respect of the dignity of human life. L. A. Hoffman

HINDU MOBS IN AYODHYA, MUSLIMS MASSACRED IN GUJERAT. INDIA'S PROUD BOAST THAT ITS SECULARISM HELD TOGETHER ITS MANY CREEDS AND RACES IS IN TATTERS

Stability of Kyrgyzstan in light of economic problems and ethnic and religious tensions.

Looking back over the century just ended, it is not easy to assess the status and prospects of secularism and the secular ideal in the United States. As is so often the case in American history, when one sets out in search of the simple and obvious, one soon comes face to face with a crowd of paradoxes. The psychologist Erik Erikson once observed that Americans have a talent for sustaining opposites, and he could hardly have been more right. Such Janus-faced doubleness, or multiplicity, is virtually the Americanspecialité de la maison.

Uses Adrian Peperzak's (1993) interpretation of Emmanuel Levinas's indictment of Western philosophy to identify the religious dimension of modern liberalism. At issue for Levinas are the Platonic elements of the Other & the Same, where in the case of modern liberalism, the Same represents everything in the framework of capitalist society, & the Other is everything outside of it. Levinas contends that Western philosophical tradition's idea of modernity, developed from Machiavellian & Hobbesian notions, mistakenly & arrogantly addresses Otherness through the language & mechanisms of the sameness framework (liberalism). By overcoming the limitations of this traditional philosophical approach, Levinas exposes the religious elements of modern liberalism, first in an ethical examination of the Other, & second by locating Western liberalism's metaphoric surrogate for God. Using this sort of negative theology, the liberalized concept of the sacred is exposed, & parallels are drawn between the liberal notion of totality & the religious concept of infinity. D. Bajo