|
Showing 1 - 20 of
20 matches in All Departments
We humans are deeply convinced that there is something distinct
about us as a species, but we have never been able to agree on what
it is. In the West, the religion of Israel argued that the will is
the fundamental vehicle of our relation to God and therefore the
determining characteristic of our humanity. Greek philosophy
countered with the view that reason is the definitively human
characteristic, since humans are the only self-aware animal. Today
that unresolved argument is further complicated by the pluralism of
contemporary culture and the surprisingly different ways in which
different groups understand themselves. These essays approach the
question in two different ways. The first is a philosophical
attempt at definition. Bhikhu Parekh agrees that there is a
universal human nature but that there is also a nature which is
culture-specific and a third which is self-reflective. Daniel O.
Dahlstrom argues that we know our nature only when it is recognized
by our culture and that the liberal democratic idea of the state
both celebrates and threatens the notion of fundamental human
equality. Stanley H. Rosen gives a contemporary interpretation of
the classical Greek view in proposing that philosophy is an
expression of our humanity, an openness to the human love of
wisdom. Knud Haakonssen is not ready to endorse any given orthodoxy
regarding human nature but argues rather for openness to
experimental views and promising hypothesis. Lisa Sowle Cahill
defends a feminist interpretation of Catholic moral theology; we
must be able to say that the battering of women is everywhere and
always wrong. And Robert Cummings Neville notes that being human
means having the obligation to take responsibility for our history.
The second group of essays recognizes that we are what we do as
well as what we say we are and asks what it means to be genuinely
humane. Glenn C. Loury criticizes Murray and Herrnstein's The Bell
Curve
Happiness is a paradoxical thing. In our heart of hearts we all
want to be happy, but we do not talk much about it, lest we seem
sentimental or too optimistic. But what would happiness be like if
we could find it? The second section deals with happiness in three
major world religious traditions. The third section deals with
various issues regarding the meaning and even the uses of
happiness.
The meaning of selfhood has become an urgent question, largely in
reaction to the radical individualism in which many modern Western
notions of selfhood have been cast. The 11 contributors to "Selves,
People, and Persons" aim to reshape fundamental ideas of the self
in such varied fields as theology, biology, psychoanalysis and
political philosophy. Nearly all of them agree that selves are
always to be understood in relation to the communities of which
they are a part. The first section of the book focuses on basic
issues in the philosophy of selfhood. Erazim Kohak's title essay
explores American personalism while Harold H. Oliver argues that a
self is always in the act of relation to some other. Lawrence E.
Cahoone counters with reflections on the limits of this social and
rational notion of selfhood and Edward W. James sketches a holistic
view of the self in which the "either/or" of dualism can be
transformed by a "both/and". The second group deals with selfhood
in various cultures, beginning with Eliot Deutsch's exploration of
how each tradition can enlarge its understanding of selfhood by
incorporating elements from other traditions. John B. Carman
examines the role of the self in Hindu "Bhakti", and Livia Kohn
explores the role of spontaneity in Chinese views of selfhood. The
problem of selfhood in theology, biology, psychoanlaysis and
political theory comprises the final section: Krister Stendahl
discusses the idea that our selfhood is understood primarily in
terms of God's selfhood; Alfred I. Tauber examines biological ideas
of organism in the work of Elie Metchnikoff; John E. Mack proposes
that a spiritual point of view is now required in order to fully
understand the psyche; and Bhikhu Parekh examines how the issue of
violence is formulated and debated in liberal democracies.
|
On Freedom (Hardcover)
Leroy S. Rouner; Leroy S. Rouner
|
R2,824
Discovery Miles 28 240
|
Ships in 10 - 15 working days
|
What does "death" really mean? Is there life after death? Is that
idea even intelligible? Despite our constant confrontation with
death there has been little serious philosophical reflection on the
meaning of death and even less on the classical question of
immortality. Popular books on "death and dying" abound, but they
are largely manuals for dying with composure, or individual "near
death" experiences of light at the end of the tunnel. This lively
conversation includes various views on these matters, from John
Lachs's gentle but firm insistence that the notion of immortality
is philosophically unintelligible, to Jurgen Moltmann's brave and
careful examination of various arguments for what happens to us
when we die. David Roochnik searches the Platonic dialogues for a
metaphorical immortality which might satisfy the human longing for
some meaning which does not die with us. Aaron Garrett traces the
naturalization of the idea of immortality from Scotus to Locke in
the history of Western philosophy, and David Schmidtz offers
autobiographical reflections in shaping his philosophy of life's
meaning. David Eckel takes us through a synopsis of Buddhist ideas
on these issues, and Brian Jorgensen offers a response. Rita Rouner
uses the poems she wrote after the death of her son to chronicle a
survivor's struggle with life and death. Peter Gomes casts a
critical eye on our death rituals, and defends a classical
Christian view of death and immortality, while Wendy Doniger
examines the literature on those who were offered immortality by
the gods and chose instead to remain mortal.
Are Americans less civil than they used to be? If so, is that a bad
thing? Perhaps we are just learning to be more honest. And what
does civility mean? Is it just good manners? It so, perhaps it is
only the complaint of privileged classes, annoyed that taxi drivers
are increasingly rude and that men no longer give up their seats to
women on public transportation. Or is civility a question of
morality? The philosopher Peter Bertocci once argued that
promptness is a fundamental form of social justice.
In this lively conversation on an increasingly significant
theme, major philosophers and religious scholars argue the issue on
three levels. The first is manners: Henry Rosemont argues the
Confucian case that manners are the substance of social relations,
while Edwin Delattre and Adam Seligman believe that the issue is
deeper than that; and the sociologist Alan Wolfe is persuaded that
we are not less civil or ill-mannered than our predecessors.
Secondly, as a social issue, James Schmidt, Lawrence Cahoone, and
Adam Seligman turn to questions of structure and meaning in a civil
society; Ninian Smart, David Wong, and Virginia Straus put the
issue in a cross-cultural context; and Carrie Doehring warns that
civility may be a barrier to honest Communication in family life.
Finally, the metaphysical and religious dimensions of civility are
explored by Robert Pippin and Adam McClellan.
There seems to be a consensus that the lack of civility is,
indeed, an increasing problem, that it is more than a class issue
of manners, and that its current loss is troubling for contemporary
society.
This work aims to defines the question Is there a human nature? It
argues that we know our nature only when it is recognized by our
culture and that the liberal democratic idea of the state both
celebrates and threatens the notion of fundamental human equality.
In its tradition of dialogue and exchange, the Boston Studies in
Philosophy and Religion continues the exploration of major issues
in human life which are often neglected by most professional
philosophers and religious thinkers. The authors of The Longing for
Home explore the notion that home is both a place and a condition
of the spirit.
While a person may have a place that is home, he or she may also
be nostalgic for an inner spiritual home which beckons even as it
lies beyond the human grasp. This latest book in the Boston
University series explores the spiritual and emotional depths of
our human sense of home, providing ample ground for intellectual
engagement and personal reflection.
Happiness is a paradoxical thing. In our heart of hearts we all
want to be happy, but we do not talk much about it, lest we seem
sentimental or too optimistic. But what would happiness be like if
we could find it? In the first section of this volume, the
essayists begin by discussing happiness as a form of tranquility,
desire, and blessedness. Charles L. Griswold provides a brief
survey of the Western literature and concludes that tranquility is
the definition of happiness. Margaret R. Miles emphasizes the role
of the body in human happiness, turning to Augustine for an
understanding of happiness as desire, and Huston Smith reflects on
blessedness, beginning with a philosophical analysis of human
experience and concluding with a theological affirmation about
transcendence. The second section deals with happiness in three
major religious traditions. Michael Fishbane articulates the
dynamic tensions between law and spirit in which the Jewish sense
of spiritual joy is generated. Robert A. F. Thurman's essay on "The
Buddha's Smile" claims that enlightenment is happiness in the
Buddhist tradition. Tu Wei-ming discusses the Confucian view of
happiness, noting that "the fundamental concern of the Confucian
tradition is learning to be human." The third section deals with
various issues regarding the meaning and even the uses of
happiness. Leroy S. Rouner explores the thesis that ecstasy, the
ultimate form of human happiness, is the necessary context for a
certain type of knowledge. Ruth L. Smith presents a dialogue with
Reinhold Niebuhr, exploring the relationship between happiness and
what Niebuhr called "the uneasy conscience." William M. Sullivan
examines the possibility of happiness inherent in the promise of
professionalism. And James R. Langford provides a light-hearted
philosophical piece on happiness that focuses on the long-ago
baseball rivalry between the Cubs and the Red Sox.
In this tenth volume of the highly respected Boston University
Studies in Philosophy and Religion series, contributors explore new
approaches to the role of freedom in the contemporary world. It is
clear that the idea of freedom has progressed with autonomous
selfhood. But it is not yet evident how freedom is to be understood
or promoted in a context where economic, political, cultural, and
religious issues demand both pluralism and globalization. The
essays consider three major areas of the debate. The first group of
essays is concerned with the relation of Christian thought to
freedom in the post-Christian age. Philosophical reconstructions of
the idea of freedom are the focus of Part II, which investigates
how the past and present can be used to create a new idea of
freedom. Part III explores the possibility that individual selves
are no more autonomous that they are social and asks the question:
"What can we learn about the freedom of the self from contemporary
social philosophies like Marxism and feminism and the unprecedented
phenomenon of manmade mass death?" Contributors: Nicholas Lash,
Jurgen Moltmann, David W. Tracy, and Robert C. Neville on
Theologies of Freedom; John E. Smith, Frithof Bergmann, James R.
Langford, and J.N. Mohanty on Philosophies of Freedom; Louis Dupre,
Ruth L. Smith, and Edith Wyschogrod on Freedom in Society.
Meaning, Truth, and God provides essays by 11 eminent scholars
concerned not only with the logic of religious belief and the
effect of social content on religious meaning, but also with the
truth-claim concerning the reality of God. The collection is
divided into three parts, each of which includes a reinterpretation
of central nineteenth-century thinkers (Hegel, Schleiermacher,
Weber, Royce, Feuerbach, Nietzsche, and Schelling) as well as
constructive articles. Part I explores the logic of theological
inquiry and challenges to the veracity of religious discourse; Part
II discusses social process and religious belief, and Part III
directly addresses the question of the reality of God.
The authors of The Longing for Home explore the notion that home is
both a place and a conditon of the spirit. While a person may have
a place that is home, he or she may also be nostalgic for an inner
spiritual home which beckons even as it lies beyond the human
grasp. Essays by Elie Wiesel, Werner Gundersheimer, and Frederick
Buechner complete part one. Part two focuses on philosophical
explorations of the meaning of home.
Focusing on the contemporary experience of cultural and religious
pluralism, the authors in this volume work toward a reconception of
the basic concepts in philosophy of religion—the idea of God and
the religious ways of knowing that idea—as historically dynamic.
Eliot Deutsch argues that aesthetic and religious considerations
are not peripheral to philosophy but are at the heart of the
philosophic enterprise. Cornel West shows how recent developments
in American philosophy, particularly in the work of Quine, Goodman,
and Sellars, have opened up the possibility of a historicist
philosophy of religion. After reviewing some of the fundamental
defenses for belief in God in his neoclassical theism, Charles
Hartshorne elaborates the argument from order and the argument from
the rational aim. J.N. Findlay insists that the philosophy of
religion is itself part of religious knowing, and so, that there
can be no radical distinction between philosophic method and
personal religious belief. Ninian Smart proposes a “soft
epistemology” in dealing with religious matters. Anthony Flew and
Kai Nielsen represent longstanding criticism of the philosophy of
religion. Naomi R. Goldenberg looks for a salvific religious
message in psychoanalysis and feminism. Gordon D. Kaufman’s
“Reconceiving God for a Nuclear Age” criticizes traditional
conceptions of God from within the Christian tradition. In a study
of meaninglessness in the modern world, Wolfhart Pannenberg argues
that religious consciousness deals explicitly with the totality of
meaning implicit in all everyday experience. Langdon Gilkey
considers the creationist controversy as it was argued in the
Arkansas courts in 1981. Leroy S. Rouner examines the significance
of Tillich’s doctrine of the Fall as a contribution to
interreligious understanding. Jurgen Moltmann finds in Ernst
Bloch’s atheism a particular challenge to Jewish and Christian
theology.
Just when we need them the most, our ethical resources seem least
clear and reliable. Hence our search for foundations of ethics. Our
intent in this volume has not been to solve any specific moral
problem, but to explore basic issues: the prospects for a rational
ethic; the relation between ethics and a religious mythos; the
challenge of non-Western ethical values; problems raised by the
practice of confession, the evaluation of privacy, the ubiquity of
science, and more. We obviously have not explored all the
foundation issues. We cannot even claim that the ones we have
explored are always the most significant. We do claim, however,
that these explorations give a vivid picture of our ethical
dilemma, and present some of the best thinking currently being
done. -from the Introduction
What does "death" really mean? Is there life after death? Is that
idea even intelligible?Despite our constant confrontation with
death there has been little serious philosophical reflection on the
meaning of death and even less on the classical question of
immortality. Popular books on "death and dying" abound, but they
are largely manuals for dying with composure, or individual "near
death" experiences of light at the end of the tunnel.This lively
conversation includes various views on these matters, from John
Lachs's gentle but firm insistence that the notion of immortality
is philosophically unintelligible, to Jurgen Moltmann's brave and
careful examination of various arguments for what happens to us
when we die. David Roochnik searches the Platonic dialogues for a
metaphorical immortality which might satisfy the human longing for
some meaning which does not die with us. Aaron Garrett traces the
naturalization of the idea of immortality from Scotus to Locke in
the history of Western philosophy, and David Schmidtz offers
autobiographical reflections in shaping his philosophy of life's
meaning. David Eckel takes us through a synopsis of Buddhist ideas
on these issues, and Brian Jorgensen offers a response. Rita Rouner
uses the poems she wrote after the death of her son to chronicle a
survivor's struggle with life and death. Peter Gomes casts a
critical eye on our death rituals, and defends a classical
Christian view of death and immortality, while Wendy Doniger
examines the literature on those who were offered immortality by
the gods and chose instead to remain mortal.
Are Americans less civil than they used to be? If so, is that a bad
thing? Perhaps we are just learning to be more honest. And what
does civility mean? Is it just good manners? It so, perhaps it is
only the complaint of privileged classes, annoyed that taxi drivers
are increasingly rude and that men no longer give up their seats to
women on public transportation. Or is civility a question of
morality? The philosopher Peter Bertocci once argued that
promptness is a fundamental form of social justice. In this lively
conversation on an increasingly significant theme, major
philosophers and religious scholars argue the issue on three
levels. The first is manners: Henry Rosemont argues the Confucian
case that manners are the substance of social relations, while
Edwin Delattre and Adam Seligman believe that the issue is deeper
than that; and the sociologist Alan Wolfe is persuaded that we are
not less civil or ill-mannered than our predecessors. Secondly, as
a social issue, James Schmidt, Lawrence Cahoone, and Adam Seligman
turn to questions of structure and meaning in a civil society;
Ninian Smart, David Wong, and Virginia Straus put the issue in a
cross-cultural context; and Carrie Doehring warns that civility may
be a barrier to honest Communication in family life. Finally, the
metaphysical and religious dimensions of civility are explored by
Robert Pippin and Adam McClellan. There seems to be a consensus
that the lack of civility is, indeed, an increasing problem, that
it is more than a class issue of manners, and that its current loss
is troubling for contemporary society.
|
|