Suchergebnisse

The paper provides the ideal-typical narrative of European integration manufactured by Romanian intellectuals and the official national Church (Greek-orthodox), that could be summarized as follows: in the realm of the spirit, Europe would have survived mainly in the East, shepherded by such intellectuals as the Romanian ones and by the spiritual legacy of the Orthodox Church; in political and economic terms, European Union is monitored according to secularist and relativist guidelines by the bureaucracy in Brussels. Whatever the latter, together with their Romanian counterparts, may have realized in the course of European enlargement is of little concern for the former. Both the Church and the mainstream intellectuals are engaged now in an operation that should have defined them long before the fall of state socialism: to boost intellectual non-conformity with respect to the political dominant discourse as a way of refusing the debate by taking it seriously. And they do it by means of the same narrative device that kept them silent under communism: they tell the story of the prevalence of culture and the spiritual over everything political.

The author sketches a vivid intellectual history of the content and bearing of Raymond Aron's work, particularly with respect to the great scholar's analyses of totalitarian regimes and of Marxism as a "Christian heresy". He describes the dominant themes of the French philosopher, political scientist, sociologist, historian and journalist from The Opium of the Intellectuals, to Progress and Disillusion: the Dialectics of Modern Society, or Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations; from De Gaulle, Israel and the Jews to Politics and History, or to Main Currents in Sociological Thought; from Marxism and the Existentialists, to Introduction to the Philosophy of History: An Essay on the Limits of Historical Objectivity; and from In Defense of Decadent Europe, to the Memoirs and to the Committed Observer… and this list is not an exhaustive one. He writes about the most prominent of Aron's contemporaries, and about his most enthusiastic followers, particularly in the Western world. As an autobiographical detail, Tismăneanu does not fail to mention Aron's readership among the Romanian students before the fall of the Berlin wall, a triumphant moment which the great champion of "methodological doubt" and the enemy of total metaphysics and ideological orthodoxies did not live to witness.

The paper shows that Jewish memory and Israeli memory are two distinct and sometimes even opposite, intellectual constructs. In order to assess this statement, we chose one specific topic: the birth of the evenimential perception in Jewish eyes, a phenomenon linked to the Zionist thought. A real intellectual revolution were achieved in the 19th and 20th centuries, which returns up side down the antique, medieval, and even early modern paradigms of Jewish time perception. It is precisely this reversal that led to the political activism and the foundation of state of Israel.

The author tackles the controversial problem of the relation between theory and ideology in Karl Marx's and Friedrich Engels' political writings. The article is structured into two main parts: the first one is focused on Marx's vision of a revolutionary intellectual as a base for the development of both theory and ideology. The second one deals with Marx's posterity, as it was established by the contribution of Friedrich Engels.

The paper explores the merits of Protagoras' view of politics as a possible intellectual source of the post-communist theory of democracy. Unbeknownst to themselves, Romanian politicians and political scientist tend to understand the function of politics in the footsteps of Plato and Lenin, as an art, or science of leadership. Interested mainly in the effectiveness of government, they give no significant heed to the issue of rights and liberties. The great discourse of Protagoras of Abdera could supply, in a normative way, the conceptual tools for a different approach to politics, as a pedagogical rhetoric of legal and political equality.

The positive, unifying ideological resources of liberal and progressive Islamic interpretations deserve more than ever to be exploited in the contemporary socio-political context. Their conceptual tools, principles and theses could solve the conflictual cleavage, politically manipulated, between Islam and Western modernity, without repudiating the references to an Islamic paradigm. Therefore, liberal and progressive Islamic understandings could avoid the recent superficial oscillation between two ideological -artificially constructed- extremes, namely either confining the discussions to the secular, colonialist or postcolonialist perspectives, or promoting the defensive opportunist neotraditionalist Islamic approaches, specific to the nationalist movements of the last century so-called Islamic revival. Liberal Islam does not fully adopt all liberal theses and does not obediently imitate Western philosophy. Liberal Islamic understandings are defined by the opposition against teocracy and by supporting the democracy. Women, minorities and non-Muslims' rights in Muslim-majority countries, freedom of thought and trust in human progress, are other essential tenets that are fundamented on contemporary understandings of the major Islamic sources. Trying to correct some excesses that the liberal Muslims were accused of, but maintaining the reformist tendencies, progressive Muslims' approach is centered on a "multiple critiqueˮ ‒ a simultaneous critique of the diverse discourses and communities in which Muslims are situated. Not only the authoritarian constructions of literalist, puritanist Muslims, the violation of human rights, freedom of expression and of religion, the oppression of women in some Muslim countries are condemned and deconstructed, but also some political, economic, intellectual hegemonic Western aspects of modernity. In Romania these contemporary tendencies of interpreting Islam are not yet represented at a community level.

Monografia jest rezultatem wysiłku intelektualnego, którego podjęli się wspólnie naukowcy z Mołdawii, Niemiec, Polski, Rumunii, Stanów Zjednoczonych Ameryki i Ukrainy podczas Międzynarodowej Konferencji Naukowej "Wspólne dziedzictwo kulturowe i językowe" w Jastrowiu w czerwcu 2019 roku. Na publikację składają się poszerzone wersje wypowiedzi zaprezentowanych podczas tego spotkania. Tom, który oddajemy do rąk Czytelnika, pomyślany jest jako zbiór zróżnicowanych spojrzeń na problematykę dziedzictwa. Języki i kultury Bukowiny stały się inspiracją dla analiz wychodzących poza tematykę tego regionu. Autorzy tekstów reprezentują różne perspektywy i dyscypliny naukowe: językoznawstwo, kulturoznawstwo, literaturoznawstwo, historię, politologię, socjologię, etnologię i historię sztuki. Do tomu zaproszono doświadczonych naukowców i młodych badaczy zajmujących się bogactwem językowym i kulturowym historycznej Bukowiny, obszaru karpackiego oraz Europy Środkowej. Książka składa się z trzech części. Część pierwsza obejmuje teksty poświęcone językowi rozumianemu jako dziedzictwo kulturowe. Część druga poświęcona jest pamięci dziedzictwa. Kolejna część prezentuje dziedzictwo kulturowe w działaniach społecznych i aktywności twórczej. ; This collective monograph comes as a result of intellectual work undertaken jointly by the American, German, Moldovan, Polish, Romanian and Ukrainian scholars who participated in the international conference entitled "Bukowina: Wspólne dziedzictwo kulturowe i językowe" (Bukovina: Common Cultural and Linguistic Heritage), held in Jastrowie, Poland, in June 2019. The present volume, which contains extended versions of their papers, is conceived as a collection providing different perspectives on the issue of cultural heritage. The cultures and languages of Bukovina have also inspired contributions which go beyond the issues of the region but are related to it in the geographical or cultural sense. The invited authors represent various perspectives and fields of study: linguistics, cultural studies, literary studies, history, political studies, sociology, ethnology and art history. The list of contributors includes experienced scholars and young promising researchers studying the cultural and linguistic richness of the historical Bukovina, the Carpathian region and Central Europe. The volume consists of three parts. The first one includes contributions on language as cultural heritage. The second part is devoted to the memory of heritage. Part three presents cultural heritage in social and creative activity. ; Publikacja przygotowana w ramach zadania: "Międzynarodowa konferencja naukowa Wspólne dziedzictwo kulturowe i językowe" – zadanie finansowane w ramach umowy 570/P-DUN/2019 ze środków Ministra Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę. ; The work has been prepared in fulfilment of the task "Common Cultural and Linguistic Heritage – an international conference", financed under contract no. 570/P-DUN/2019 from the funds of the Minister of Science and Higher Education allocated for the dissemination of science.

The phenomenon we have tried to approximate in our work is that of Romanian inter-war spirituality. The "protagonists" of this research belonged to the so-called "young generation" or "generation 27", that is "The Criterion group": Mircea Eliade, Emil Cioran, Constantin Noica, Mircea Vulcanescu, as well as other two representatives of a different generation: Nae Ionescu and Nichifor Crainic.
The first chapter, entitled "Steps and traps in the perception of Romanian inter-war spirituality" stipulates the topic of our research. The novelty of the approach lies in our desire of deciphering the way in which these persons had perceived themselves and their role in what we are going to refer to as the great inter-war experiment. We intend to regard reality as the sum of various images, arising from different layers of perception, coming from the respective personalities, their critics and exegetes. These images overlap to an extent that does not justify the metaphor of a "mirror broken into pieces" and reconstructed; they merely form a sort of kaleidoscope whose images are recomposed in ever changing pictures every time the object one looks through revolves. In the same time, we make a starting point in an idea suggested by social psychology, which leads to our belief that the way in which the protagonists under discussion perceived themselves was defined by their representations on the events of the time, a sort of intellectual projection of collective consciousness.
We made clear some terms such as "post-event perception": the type of cognitive reflection upon a cultural background that occurs under the circumstances imposed to the subject, situated at considerable distance in time, capable of placing him in a favorable position – as the absence of subjectivism cannot contaminate direct, synchronic perception of events; possible reiteration of the moment achieved by means of reading, an experiment possessing the supplementary cognitive charge of an anticipatory knowledge of the denouement, as well as a series of disadvantages – such as the informational deficiencies caused by the passing of time, the reality of events being an indirect, secondary one; the contamination of hypothetical decisions and post-event judgments by the bulk and value of information on the events, as well as their subsequent evaluation, jeopardizing the accuracy of perception.
Evaluating the working hypotheses we notice that there is a considerable difference between the way in which we, who were not directly involved in the events, perceive the "epoch", and the way it was perceived by the persons whose intentions we are striving to decipher, together with the ideas and attitudes they shared, the people they came into contact with, the events they took part in or carried them along a sometimes disagreeable, often ungrateful History. Our protagonists observed that whatever culture consecrates or recovers is in possession of another type of reality. It is a relatively continuous reality; even if it becomes the subject of ever renewed evaluation, it constantly perpetuates a series of values, while history is anthropophagous, swallowing in an equally inconsiderate manner both geniuses and jesters, bringing together in its terrifying ignorance both illustrious characters and the most ordinary of all people.