This essay explores the idea of the just which allowed Ricoeur to move beyond and expand the “little ethics” presented in Oneself as Another . One key development is that he moves beyond the idea of solicitude as a kind of benevolent spontaneity on the basis of the insight that not all intersubjective relations are face-to-face. This recognition that who the other is can be important allows him to show why the just is a notion that explicitly arises at the (...) level of the distant and often anonymous other, which is that of social and political institutions where the question of justice rather than friendship is central. Another related development is that the idea of reciprocity is shown still to fall short of truly mutual recognition. Pursuing a just solution to social problems leads to the question of a limited but bounded pluralism and a concomitant role for tolerance at the level of society and politics.  . (shrink)

Machine generated contents note: 1. -- War on war, by Lewis Thomas -- 2. -- Silent genocide, by Abdus Salam -- 3. -- Error: a stage of knowledge, by Paulo Freire -- 4. -- Doing without a revolution?, by Tahar Ben Jelloun -- 5. -- Stop torture, by Manfred Nowak -- 6. -- Truth, force and law, by Rabindranath Tagore -- 7. -- Violence is an insult to the human being, by Federico Mayor -- 8. -- Totalitarianism banishes politics, by (...) Vaclav Havel -- 9. -- No one will stop us. , by Desmond Tutu -- 10. -- Colonialism and the youth bomb, by Joseph Ki-Zerbo -- 11. -- The shedding of blood -- 12. -- Letter from Nagasaki, by Takashi Nagai -- 13. -- Down with exclusion!, by Herbert de Souza -- 14. -- The nower to sav 'no'. bv loan Martin-Brown -- 15. -- Inquiry into a taboo, by Ouassila Si Saber -- 16. -- The illusions of rationalism, by Ernesto Sabato -- 17. -- The 'poisonous weed', by Ba Jin -- 18. -- Humanity, an ongoing creation, by Ali Ahmad Said Esber (Adonis) -- 19. -- Image, writing and the vandal, by Alberto Moravia -- 20. -- The charms of calumny, by Andres Bello -- 21. -- On the threshold of eternity, by the Abbe Pierre -- 22. -- The control of force, by Karl Jaspers -- 23. -- The nature of force, by Simone Weil -- 24. -- The debt of justice, by Martin Luther King -- 25. -- Democracy and barbarism, by Sergei S. Averintsev -- 26. -- If all the animals should disappear, by Richard Fitter -- 27. -- Irony and compassion, by Octavio Paz -- 28. -- Against all hatred, by Aime Cesaire -- 29. -- Creating differences, by Daniel J. Boorstin -- 30. -- I dislike the word 'tolerance', by Mahatma Gandhi. (shrink)

La tolérance est une fin en soi. L'élimination de la violence, la réduction de la répression dans les proportions requises pour protéger l'homme et les animaux de la cruauté et de l'agression sont des conditions préalables à la création d'une société humaine (Herbert Marcuse). L'ouvrage proposé par Maiwenn Boudant cherche à mettre en rapport et à confronter les débats philosophiques allemands contemporains avec ceux de la fin du siècle des Lumières sur la question des identités et de l'intégration politique. Il (...) s'agit notamment de revisiter les débats sur la tolérance tels qu'ils apparaissent dans l'Aufklärung et de théoriser le passage de la notion de tolérance à celle de reconnaissance pour expliquer les fronts actuels, notamment chez les continuateurs de l'Ecole de Francfort. Le sujet du livre s'attaque ainsi à une grande question de notre temps : la problématique du vivre-ensemble dans nos sociétés démocratiques et plurielles : comment les identités diverses peuvent-elles s'inscrire dans un horizon malgré tout commun et comment les sociétés se comportent-elles à l'égard de leurs minorités ethniques ou confessionnelles?"--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

Political violence does not end with the last death. A common feature of mass murder has been the attempt at destroying any memory of victims, with the aim of eliminating them from history. Perpetrators seek not only to eliminate a perceived threat, but also to eradicate any possibility of alternate, competing social and national histories. In his timely and important book, Unchopping a Tree, Ernesto Verdeja develops a critical justification for why transitional justice works. He asks, “What is the balance (...) between punishment and forgiveness? And, “What are the stakes in reconciling?” Employing a normative theory of reconciliation that differs from prevailing approaches, Verdeja outlines a concept that emphasizes the importance of shared notions of moral respect and tolerance among adversaries in transitional societies. Drawing heavily from cases such as reconciliation efforts in Latin America and Africa—and interviews with people involved in such efforts—Verdeja debates how best to envision reconciliation while remaining realistic about the very significant practical obstacles such efforts face Unchopping a Tree addresses the core concept of respect across four different social levels—political, institutional, civil society, and interpersonal—to explain the promise and challenges to securing reconciliation and broader social regeneration. (shrink)

A number of theorists have tried to resolve the tension between a western-oriented liberal scheme of human rights and an account that accommodates different political systems and constitutional ideals than the liberal one. One important way the tension has been addressed is through a “neutral” or tolerant, notion of human rights, as present in the work of Rawls, Scanlon and Buchanan. In this paper I argue that neutrality cannot by itself explain the difference between rights considered appropriate for liberal states (...) and rights considered to be human rights proper. The central arguments used by neutralist theorists presuppose, rather than justify, this differential treatment. Instead, that difference can be understood only by reference to the purpose of human rights as distinct from the constitutional rights of a liberal state. This requires us to reassess the point and purpose of a theory of international justice, in contrast to justice for a domestic and politically separate society. In the case of a theorist like Rawls, human rights represent guides to the foreign policy of a liberal state, rather than to principles by which all states are expected to abide. That is because of Rawls’ acceptance that no common, authoritative, third-party, institutions capable of imposing duties on all agents uniformly exist or can exist. This also makes his theory inherently conservative about human rights, given that they are simply to act as a guide to which states can be treated as legitimate when it comes to liberal foreign policy: those that possess institutions that can be said to represent a peoples, rather than being imposed through violence. This standard is lower than the ideal set of rights extended to all in a liberal society. (shrink)

After almost two decades in power, R. T. Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party have established authoritarian and Islamist governance in Turkey, which has adversely affected gender equality and women’s rights. So much so, that in 2009 the European Court of Human Rights acknowledged that there is a climate conducive to domestic violence in Turkey. Despite Erdoğan withdrawing Turkey unconstitutionally from the Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, the government cannot withdraw from the state’s (...) duty to protect its citizens from the criminal acts of private individuals. By using international and regional organisations’ approaches to positive obligations and due diligence as a measure, the article addresses whether Turkey is fulfilling its duty of protecting women from the violent conduct of others. It is concluded that the government is failing in its positive obligations and instead, is reinforcing the climate through its discourse and practices that strengthen a national tolerance of violence against women and the national authorities’ reluctance to address it, thus allowing for impunity of its perpetrators. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:RELIGION AND SYMBOLIC VIOLENCE Paul Ricoeur Université de Nanterre Paris X These are issues that I take very much to heart, so I will risk my own thoughts on the relation between religion and violence, not excluding the violence in and ofreligion. This is to say that I am not evading the objection made by Jean-Pierre Changeux in a recent discussion, namely, that religion as such produces violence. I (...) do not wish to evade the objection nor to hide behind the collateral explanation that it is when religion is detoured by politics that it produces violence. It is the presupposition that religion produces violence that brings me into discussion with René Girard. I encountered his work several decades ago and I have met him intermittently, with moments of distancing and rediscovery. This is the case for me again today regarding one of his later books, The Scapegoat. I cannot forget the dazzling excitement of 1972 when Violence and the Sacred first appeared. And then for me came a moment of hesitation, of doubt: isn't this explanation too psychologizing? Aren't the Gospels too easily exonerated ofthe accusation ofviolence? But I thereafter experienced disappointment with alternative accounts, principally sociological ones, and in particular with the one given by Maurice Bloch in La Violence du religieux. I am going to take the risk of a personal interpretation ofthe intimate relation between religion and violence. My own conviction, at bottom, is that I have been able, by broadening and deepening the issue, to discern the point where this very movement of going deeper bifurcates and branches out toward external violence. I have clarified my position in La Critique et la conviction and in my more recent debate with J.R Changeux, Ce quifait que nouspensons on this complicity between religion and violence. And it was in pursuing the direction opened up in La Critique et la conviction that I rediscovered an 2 Paul Ricoeur interest in The Scapegoat. I found his interpretation not only to be complementary to my own, but its necessary complement. I will now proceed to show how René Girard's thesis is necessary to my own thinking. So now I will go directly to my interpretive proposal, then I will turn to the position of Bloch in La Violence du religieux, a sociological interpretation, in order to come back in the end to Girard. It is by way of reflection on tolerance considered as a progressive initiation that I arrived at the interpretation I am going to present. At its minimal state, we find only the tolerance ofthe intolerant person, who states, "I don't agree with what you believe, I disapprove of it, but I cannot prevent it. I tolerate it in the sense of not being able to prevent it; I would like to prevent it, but I do not have the power to do so." At a second level, tolerance is more positive, saying, "I maintain the conviction that I am the one who has the truth, but I recognize, by way of being accommodating, that you have the right to profess what I hold as false, and I do this in the name ofjustice. That is to say, you certainly have the right, and it is one equal to mine, to profess what you believe, although I take it as false." I would say that the force of the principle ofjustice as thus expressed is this: any other life is worth as much as mine. Let us say that what I recognize here is the right to error. But at this stage I am torn within by the truth that I believe to be unilaterally mine and the justice that entails recognition ofthe other, which I place on another level from that oftruth. I make a further step in pursuing the issue, at a level farther advanced, when I say, "My adversary has perhaps a part ofthe truth but I don't know what it is." I would say that this is the perspectival version oftolerance: the other person sees a side of things, which I cannot see. But our positions cannot be substituted for each other. At this stage there is a... (shrink)

This article examines the responses of two communities to hate crimes in their cities. In particular it explores how community understandings of responsibility shape collective responses to hate crimes. I use the case of Bridesberg, Pennsylvania to explore how anti-racist work is restricted by backward-looking conceptions of moral responsibility (e.g. being responsible). Using recent writings in feminist ethics.(1) I argue for a forward-looking notion that advocates an active view: taking responsibility for attitudes and behaviors that foster climates in which hate (...) crimes are more likely to occur, even when a person's individual actions do not contribute directly to harms. Using the case of Billings, Montana, I explain how recent Not In Our Town campaigns take responsibility for hate crimes in the ways feminist literature suggests. -/- I take as my point of departure hate crimes committed against the family of Bridget Ward, an African American woman, who moved into the suburb of Bridesburg in 1996. When issues of responsibility for racism arose in the local press, most Bridesbergers insisted that their community was not racist; they blamed only the individual vandals. This narrow blame-assigning focus is in keeping with most Anglo-American definitions of responsibility as belonging essentially to individuals and not to communities. Traditionally, moral and legal theory construct responsibility from a perspective that looks downward and back. These perspectives are preoccupied with punishment and reward, praise and blame; they assume justice is done when guilty parties are found and tried. -/- This focus masks deeper community problems. As Elizabeth Spelman remarks, "tolerance is easy if those who are asked to express it need not change a whit." (2) Focus on praise and blame is, in part, a function of race privilege. Bridesberg is 98% white, and part of "the arrogance whitely behavior" is positioning one's self as a judge, expert, and problem solver. (3) The view from this particular subject position limits attention to individuals and their actions, rather than to communities and their practices; it shifts attention away from the fact that Bridesberger's collective practice of distrusting outsiders has lead to hate crimes in the past. Pointing to vandals and claiming "they are racist" does not free one's community of racism. It reinscribes a community spirit that is resistant to change. -/- The second part of this essay explores what communities like Bridesberg might have done to prevent violence. Often there is little individuals alone can do to stop racial violence, but that there is a sense in which community members are obligated to organize themselves. Strategies that focus community responsibility on retribution rather than long-term change, are short lived and ineffective. Anti-racist activism requires a forward-looking view of responsibility: one that aims at inoculating the community against increased risk of violence. This requires taking responsibility for the fact that one's town might foster climates in which hate crimes are more likely to occur. It requires that we begin inquiry in the lives of those harmed. -/- Collective citizen efforts to prevent Aryan groups from gaining a foothold in Billings, Montana offers a clear illustration of how to take responsibility for hate crimes using strategies designed consciously to prevent further hate crimes (e.g., when Black Churches were threatens, all community members attended services there; when a rock was thrown through a window with a menorah, many homes displayed menorahs). The community responses in Billings are a stark contrast to those of Bridesburg, and serve as a powerful example of how forward-looking notions of responsibility can translate into effective political strategy. Although, these strategies are not in and of themselves feminist, they are powerful illustrations of what feminists mean by forward-looking views. The success of resident's collective action and coalition building gave rise to a national Not In Our Town campaign used in about a dozen cities today. (shrink)

Quels sont les rapports entre l’éthique et la politique chez Paul Ricoeur? Le Cogito herméneutique est-il un sujet du droit? Chez Ricoeur, le passage de l ’éthique à la politique se révèle paradoxale. D’une part, le politique réalise la visée éthique d’une vie bonne : c ’est donc une partie de l ’éthique, un prolongement de celle-ci. De l’autre, le rapport de la politique au pouvoir bouleverse l’éthique : il existe une violence qui ne peut pas être réglée par la (...) morale. Le rapport entre l ’éthique et le politique se configure ainsi à la fois comme une identité et une différence. Ricoeur nous propose la voie d’un kantisme post-hégélien qui trouve sur le plan de la reconnaissance mutuelle et de la logique du don la médiation nécessaire entre éthique et politique. Ainsi, le paradoxe politique assume un nouveau sens créatif.What is the relationship between ethics and politics in Paul Ricoeur? Is the hermeneutic Cogito the subject of rights? In Ricoeur, the passage from ethics to politics is paradoxical. On the one hand, the politics achieves the ethical aim of a good life: it is therefore a part of ethics, an extension of it. On the other hand, the relationship between politics and power destroys ethics: there is a kind of violence that cannot be settled by moral rules. The relationship between ethics and politics is configured as both identity and difference. Ricoeur o ffers us the path of a post-Hegelian Kantianism which finds the necessary mediation between ethics and politics in mutual recognition and in the logic of giving. Thus, the political paradox takes on a new creative meaning. (shrink)

Against the backdrop of the challenges posed by xenophobia and other social phenomena that operated with harmful strategies of “othering,” this article considers the promise that the notion of “mutual recognition” as exemplified in the later work of Paul Ricœur holds for discourse on these matters. Can the hermeneutical and mediating approach of Ricœur provide an adequate framework in order to respond to these radical challenges? In light of this question, this article discusses and ultimately affirms Ricœur’s view that places (...) mutual recognition between what he calls the prose of justice and the poetics of agápē. In addition this article draws attention to the value of symbolic gestures and an ethic of linguistic hospitality to give further texture to the plea for mutual recognition amidst experience of exclusion, conflict and violence. (shrink)

The concept of the culture of peace has been developed under the UNESCO auspices by prominent academicians, scientists and artists. The challenge is to replace the culture of conflict, which is oriented towards violence and conflict resolution by force, by the culture of peace. Its underlying basics are non-acceptance of violence, devotion to democratic principles, promotion of freedom, justice, and solidarity ant tolerance, mutual respect for others’ cultures, ideologies, beliefs and other humanistic values. As far as sport is concerned from (...) this point of view, there are numerous issues, such as: Whether sport is one of the educatingelements of the culture of peace, that is one of those elements of society which provide for development and establishment of such culture To what extent and how effectively sport has actually served this purpose Whether there is a conflict between competition which is inherent in sport and the role of sport in development of the culture of peace Whether competition which can be especially fierce on the international level can impact negatively the objectives which the culture of peace is called to attain etc. Unfortunately the research into the culture of peace has very little mention of sport as one of the phenomena affecting this culture. The bibliography on the culture of peace published in 1999 does not have any reference to sport in this respect. During the last few years the author with a group of his colleagues have started working on analyzing sport as a factor of establishment and development of the culture of peace. The principal results of this analysis are as follows. (shrink)

This article uses Ronald Dworkin's argument for the unity of value to explore the redemptive core of modern legal order. Dworkin establishes a formal unity: all legal claims reside within a linked framework of moral justification. However, Jean-Francois Lyotard's concept of the differend exposes a lingering gap. Arguments within a moral universe do inevitably converge, but such unity is only possible due to the formative violence enactedbysuch orders. Dworkin hopes to provide the definitive statement against moral subjectivity, but in its (...) purest form, he proves precisely the opposite. The lesson to draw from Dworkin's work is that ‘justice’ is ultimately only the means by which political orders categorize and thereby sustain their own formative acts of exclusion under the guise of offering their redemption. (shrink)

Justice, Humanity and Social Toleration makes a novel statement of justice as setting human affairs right in accordance with the principles of human rights, human goods and human bonds; it explores the timely embodiments of this family of justice in our age including social toleration, and democracy.

Lou Cannon, Official Negligence: How Rodney King and the Riots Changed Los Angeles and the NYPD New York: Times Books/Random House, 1997, xi + 679 pp.

La mondialisation libère les uns et oppresse les autres. Et dans cette partition du monde, chacun est renvoyé à une identité prétendument essentielle et "vraie". D'où un véritable "piège identitaire", négation de l'autre et de sa subjectivité, parfois justifié par l'anthropologie - à l'opposé de sa vocation humaniste et critique. Face à ce défi, le regard contemporain sur le monde doit être repensé, en dépassant le relativisme culturel et ses "ontologies" identitaires. Dans ce livre, Michel Agier prend une position résolument (...) "décentrée", invitant le lecteur à reconsidérer les sens de la frontière : lieu de passage, instable et sans cesse négociée, elle nous fait humains en instituant la place et l'existence sociale de chacun tout en reconnaissant celles des autres. Le mur est son contraire : il incarne le piège identitaire contre l'altérité. Cette enquête sur l'état du monde et sa violence, sur les frontières et les murs, sur le sens des mots ("identité", "civilisation", "race", "culture") propose ainsi une réflexion originale sur la condition cosmopolite, figure à double face : d'un côté, l'étranger absolu, global et anonyme, que dessinent les politiques identitaires sous des traits effrayants ; de l'autre, le sujet-autre, celui qui, venant de l'extérieur de "mon identité", m'oblige à penser tout à la fois au monde, à moi et aux autres. En plaidant pour la validité de l'approche anthropologique, Michel Agier montre ici que pour dépasser le piège identitaire, d'autres manières de penser sont possibles. Réapprendre à passer les frontières où se trouve l'autre, à les reconnaître, est devenu l'un des enjeux majeurs de notre temps. (shrink)

Normal 0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE Cet article traite des notions de reconnaissance, de justice, et de vie bonne, d'abord, séparément, et ensuite comme un réseau où elles se renforcent et s’impliquent. Je commence en abordant les significations de “la reconnaissance,” et en prenant comme texte de référence Parcours de la reconnaissance de Paul Ricoeur. On peut distinguer la reconnaissance au sens épistémologique, la reconnaissance de soi, la reconnaissance d’autrui sur le plan (...) social et politique. Dans un second temps, je concentre mon attention sur le sens de la justice, dans le sens de la justice judiciaire, c’est-à-dire toute la structure des cours et le système pénal et policier. Enfin, je décris les exigences sociales, légales et politiques pour accéder à "la vie bonne" dans un pays moderne. Des systèmes de transport, d'éducation, marchand, bancaire, etc. sont aussi requis pour atteindre "la vie bonne". L'importance de ces éléments est particulièrement saillante lorsque nous observons ce qui arrive dans des pays en pleine guerre civile comme la Syrie, ou des pays détruits par des forces naturelles, comme le tremblement de terre en Haiti. Ma conclusion est que la "vie bonne" exige la reconnaissance de l’un et de l’autre et d’un gouvernement légitime ainsi que des systèmes de justice. Normal 0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE. (shrink)

L'article lit la pensée de Mausbach et Nell-Breuning de façon constructive de façon à explorer la base théologique d'une éthique sociale productive. La transcendance divine est continuellement engagée dans l'histoire des hommes; par ailleurs, le développement et l'engagement des hommes dans l'histoire glorifient Dieu. Le discernement des valeurs et la doctrine de la loi naturelle rendent possible l'oeuvre de la justice. Une perspective trinitaire sur le discernement favorise l'initiative, l'engagement dans le monde, et la découverte. Les réalisations du commonweal introduisent (...) la ressemblance divine dans la société. Au milieu des conflits, la volonté manifeste un engagement souple, dirigé eschatologiquement. L'amour spécifie la justice sociale et libère; il établit ainsi un cadre civique. La révérence vis-à-vis de l'altérité divine fonde la tolérance active qui est l'expression obligée de l'amour en vue de la collaboration qui est nécessaire aujourd'hui. Cette éthique sociale fondée sur des catégories théologiques contribue à la mission chrétienne dans des sociétés complexes et turbulentes. (shrink)

Alors que les relations interreligieuses furent souvent marquées par le mépris et l’hostilité voire la violence, des attitudes plus positives soulèvent elles aussi des questions. Ainsi l’emprunt d’éléments provenant d’une autre tradition spirituelle. Des chrétiens, par exemple, recourent à des formes bouddhiques de méditation, adoptent un symbole hindou ou reprennent des textes de la mystique islamique. Ce geste d’ouverture trahit-il une secrète volonté de mainmise? Conduit-il à de nouvelles formes d’impérialisme culturel? Entre annexion «cannibale», qui méconnaît l’altérité, et discrétion excessive, (...) qui maintient dans l’ignorance et l’isolement, il importe de rechercher ensemble les conditions et critères d’une authentique reconnaissance. (shrink)

Cette édition numérique a été réalisée à partir d'un support physique, parfois ancien, conservé au sein du dépôt légal de la Bibliothèque nationale de France, conformément à la loi n° 2012-287 du 1er mars 2012 relative à l'exploitation des Livres indisponibles du XXe siècle. Pages de début Avant-propos Première recherche - Autrui, présence sans concept Présentation 1 - L'état de la question : de l'anthropologie à la philosophie de la notion d'autrui 2 - Aporétique de l'altérité personnelle 3 - La (...) problématique de la proximité et la seconde personne 4 - Une catégorie linguistique de la personne? 5 - Connaissance ou reconnaissance d'autrui? L'illusion spéculative 6 - Une formulation linguistique du problème de l'altérité personnelle 7 - Vers une éthique des relations interpersonnelles par l'exercice de la parole 8 - L'hypothèse transcendantale 9 - La parole tronquée faire échec à la peur et à la violence : la réciprocité du signe Deuxième recherche - Essai pour introduire en pragmatique les concepts de rétro-référence et de co-référence Présentation I - Questions de méthode II - L'état de la question III - La référence aux interlocuteurs IV - Les conditions dialogiques de la référence au monde Troisième recherche - Eléments pour une pragmatique du dialogue. Le dialogue référentiel Présentation I - L'espace logique de l'interlocution II - L'intégration des théories existantes III - Le dialogue régulier IV - Pour une typologie du dialogue Quatrième recherche - L'enjeu épistémique du dialogue : avoir une croyance commune Présentation 1 - Les trois voies de l'analyse : une homologie 2 - Du registre modal de la croyance à sa dynamique interne : vers un élargissement des référentiels 3 - Le dialogisme de la croyance commune 4 - Individuation et identification le problème posé par l'identification bilatérale des individus 5 - Caractère réflexif de la croyance commune la convention des critères et les hypothèses restrictives 6 - Les phases du dialogue et le travail de quantification logique une objection dirimante? 7 - « Fixer la référence » des termes singuliers remarques sur l'interprétation de Saul Kripke 8 - Le recours à la théorie des jeux de stratégie notion de règle stratégique 9 - De la logique du dialogue à l'idée d'une logique fondée sur le dialogue 10 - La métaphore secourable du jeu compétitif compétition et coopération dans le jeu dialogique 11 - Le consensus pragmatique : notion de confrontation épistémique le dynamisme novateur de la relation dialogique 12 - Triple relativité de la référence 13 - Questions en suspens : figuration et symbolisation l'opinion droite 14 - L'appel à une sémantique de l'action Cinquième recherche - Le système sublogique des phrases en « nous » Présentation 1 - Clore le dialogue : réussite, échec, contrefaçons 2 - La mise en communauté de l'énonciation équivocité, plurivocité, polysémie 3 - Le dialogisme de la compréhension remarques critiques sur l'instance transcendantale 4 - Variables logiques et variables pronominales 5 - Le « nous » comme sujet apparent d'une double prédication 6 - Degrés de dépendance à l'égard du contexte pragmatique 7 - La pluralisation de « je » : pluriel objectif et pluriel personnel 8 - L'autodétermination du « nous » 9 - Les supplétifs stylistiques 10 - La parole heureuse matrice de la relation humaine de mutualité NotesIndex des noms propres Index analytique Pages de fin. (shrink)

The article discusses human dignity in the aspect of modern challenges of technological civilization, which has entered a new stage of its development. Human dignity as a category of ethics remains underestimated, since in the first row of ethical values humanitarians, as a rule, put the categories of freedom and justice. Today, “dignity” acquires a special and higher status, the concept of human dignity is being rethought, going beyond the ethical category itself as a virtue. In the global world, human (...) dignity is a response to such contemporary challenges as the formation of a communicative world community with a focus on digital civilization, the anthropological problem of the future of humanity, the ecological situation on a global scale, the reorientation of the ethical and legal relations of a globalizing world. Human dignity is a problem of national-ethnic and national-state relations in the transition to transnational regulatory interactions. In the interpretation of the nation, the authors do not share the well-known two approaches to understanding the nation, on the one hand ethnocultural, and on the other - national-civil. Both approaches lead, whenever possible or necessary, to the transnational posing of the question, when human dignity becomes a priority regardless of nationality. In this connection, the utopian idea of the possibility of a global ethos is touched upon. The authors focus on the anthropoxy-axiological approach to the understanding of human dignity, where the cosmological principle of human existence is determined by his creative power. The urgency of the problem of human dignity is due to the fact that, as it were, in the modern life world a person did not put the economy above morality, the basis of human dignity in its being is a value moral consciousness, in the depth of which basic human values of transnational nature “work”, contradicting values consumer society driven by practical interests. Human dignity in this regard should be interpreted as an absolute value and at the same time one should take into account the multidimensionality of the problem of dignity in the context of modern globalization processes. Based on the ontological understanding of globalization as megatrends in the self-movement of the natural historical process, the authors substantiate the anthropological value of human dignity, which has universal, transcultural significance. The use of an anthropoxy-axiological approach and interdisciplinary methods reveals the universal value of virtue, based on the anthropo-social moral nature and the creative value of man. The creative transformational activity itself will not be worthy in quality without moral responsibility. The modern concept of human dignity is addressed to the ethics of responsibility, which means responsibility, which highlights the moral and axiological attitude to life, the adoption of responsible decisions in modern conditions of sociocultural interactions. In the context of globalization, the philosophy of human dignity becomes the dominant of all conscious-volitional activities, the core of the moral rethinking of the transnational and national ratio in the light of tolerance, the ability to non-violence. At the same time, the authors indicate in the formulation of the main issue of the philosophy of human dignity the possibility of going beyond the ethical category of human dignity, since the unchanging core of the universal human values of goodness-beauty-truth does not lose its meaning in the global, changing world. (shrink)

Utilizing insights from liberation theologians and critical theorists, this paper examines the intersection of tolerance and violence, as manifest in contemporary world events, particularly the 2010 G20 protests in Toronto. Connecting Marcuse’s scathing critique of tolerance to first, second, and third forms of violence, elucidated by Dom Hélder Câmara, suggests that the modern conception of tolerance does little to hinder the violence of the state. Câmara asserts that reactionary violence is wholly dependent on the initial engagement of representatives of authority; (...) Marcuse may have considered such reactions a refusal of blind tolerance and an assertion of agency in the face of repression. (shrink)

This paper addresses how states improve their responsiveness to violence against women in developing countries with little political will and few resources to do so. One key to engendering justice and improving responsiveness is building specialized institutions within the state that facilitate the implementation of laws addressing violence against women. Why and how do states engage in institution-building to protect marginalized populations in these contexts? I propose that developing countries are more likely to create and maintain specialized institutions when domestic (...) and international political and legal frameworks make the state more vulnerable to women’s demands, and when civil society coordinates with the state and/or international organizations to take advantage of this political opportunity. This coordination brings necessary pressure and resources that would be difficult, if not impossible, to deliver otherwise. This inter-institutional coordination is necessary for building and maintaining new state institutions and programs that help to monitor the implementation of laws, develop public policies, provide services for victims, and improve responsiveness of the justice system. This fills an important lacuna in the literature, which focuses on women’s state institutions as an important catalyst for responsiveness to violence against women, but does not explain how these institutions are initially constructed. (shrink)

The study of social, ethical, and political issues from a naturalistic perspective has been pervasive in social sciences and the humanities in the last decades. This articulation of empirical research with philosophical and normative reflection is increasingly getting attention in academic circles and the public spheres, given the prevalence of urgent needs and challenges that society is facing on a global scale. The contemporary world is full of challenges or what some philosophers have called ‘existential risks’ to humanity. Nuclear wars, (...) natural and/or engineered pandemics, climate change, global totalitarianism, and emergent technologies, are some of the challenges mentioned by many authors devoted to the study of long-term potential risks for the survival of the human species. However, while there are many reasons to be a pessimist about the future of humanity, there is also a lot of ink wasted in showing that the world today is far better than we had in the past and also that there have been many instances of social and moral progress in the last centuries. Some authors have even claimed that “we have made more progress over the last 100 years than in the first 100,000”. According to ‘our world in data’, some of the most relevant advances of humanity in the last centuries have to do with the reduction of poverty and/or inequality, better health and security, the decline of violence and war, and the development of democracy and institutional mechanisms to guarantee individual freedom and rights. Yet, there is a more concrete concern that our world faces nowadays, and requires a particularly detailed analysis. In a few words, the advance in information and communication technologies, the huge volume of people migration because of prevalent instances of global inequality, and the reality of an interconnected world that just mirrors an extensive history of massive human intergroup relations open the question about the feasibility of social and moral progress in the contexts of diverse, multicultural, and unequal societies. This makes it crucial to reflect not only on whether human societies may keep advancing on a path of social progress, but how this can be achieved by addressing the challenges of inequality and potential intergroup conflict. This concern closely relates to the further consolidation of democratic values and the achievement of a more generalized consideration of the equal moral value of human individuals far from group, ethnic, or collective distinctions. This vision of progress follows the moral convictions that have been considered right and worthy to be pursued by most ethical theories explored by philosophers and social scientists so far. This work aims to contribute to the study of the mechanisms and feasibility of social and moral progress grounded on the precept of human equality and is guided by the idea that social and moral progress in a plural world requires the accomplishment of a more democratic and tolerant society. These forms of progress have already been defined by philosophers Allen Buchanan and Russel Powell as inclusivist forms of moral progress. According to these authors, inclusivist moral progress is featured by the transformation of moral judgments, motivations, and norms guided by the rejection of “group-based restrictions on moral standing and moral status” (2018). The work of Buchanan and Powell is fundamental for the argumentation developed in this work since they have pioneered a more complex debate in the field of evolutionary social sciences and philosophical anthropology. In brief, these authors have inquired how human nature, conceptualized by the advances in evolutionary thinking and the empirical sciences, is related to our moral convictions and the possibilities that we have to establish certain forms of social and moral progress. The work of Buchanan and Powell contributes to the debate on moral progress by incorporating empirically-informed concepts and arguments. With this objective in mind, they develop their discussion around a generalized tension between exclusivist and inclusivist forms of moral progress. This tension revolves around the question of whether and to what extent human moral concerns, motivations, and norms, are limited or bounded by social identities, group thinking, or collective values. This question is at the center of this work. In other words, I aim to answer whether and to what extent the nature of our social and moral cognition hinders or enables the development of inclusivist forms of morality and moral progress. As I mentioned so far, the distinction between exclusivist and inclusivist forms of morality has a practical implication and facilitates the reflection on the mechanisms and feasibility of concrete forms of progress based on the precept of human equality, which is the road to progress that we should follow according to most ethical theories. The distinction between exclusivist and inclusivist morality is not used here as a form of summarizing highly divergent descriptive approaches to morality, but as a way to address the practical implications of morality research, particularly around the question of the feasibility of social forms of progress based on the precept of equality and tolerance. My objective then has less to do with offering a conceptualization of human morality or with the proposition of a new ethical perspective. Instead, I aim to identify, from an empirically informed perspective, what enables the achievement of egalitarian forms of social progress, to subsequently offer a normative reflection about what we should do if we want to accomplish such inclusivist forms of progress. This task is of great relevance, having in mind that some theoretical proposals on the matter have claimed that human prosocial behavior and morality are constrained by exclusivist fixed tendencies as a product of our evolutionary history. According to these views, human morality is a group-centered cognitive and behavioral expression that has severe limits in its scope and extent, which hinders in the end the emergence of inclusivist forms of moral concerns and behaviors. These claims align with the philosophical intuition about the ‘dissociation of empathy’, or the fact that human individuals tend to express empathy and sympathy preferably for members of their group whereas their empathic and moral concern and recognition for outgroup individuals tend to be reduced or eliminated in real-life social interactions. Multiple theorists have expressed, however, that these assumptions are wrong for empirical and philosophical reasons, which results in a serious challenge to the conception of human morality as exclusivist by nature. Furthermore, simple intuition and practical experience constantly show us that human individuals can develop and endorse a broad spectrum of moral considerations and adopt an arguably inclusivist stance concerning the kind of persons or agents that deserve moral concern. Moreover, and adopting a historical perspective, the expansion of cultural and commercial exchanges, the consolidation of democracy, the development of welfare states, or the emergence of institutions based on the concept of universal human rights, have partially driven human progress based on the impartial concern for the well-being of persons. These historical instances of cultural evolution and institutional design have shown that it is feasible to promote behaviors and attitudes grounded in impersonal prosocial and inclusivist principles. This optimistic perspective, however, still begs the question of the exact relationship between social, cultural, and historical contexts, and the emergence of certain behavioral expressions of inclusivist morality. This is crucial since a great number of human individuals around the world still do not make part of these instances of social progress, and some authors have suggested that such instances of social and moral progress are particularly favored by the contexts of the WEIRD world, that is the world of Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic societies. Some of these approaches consider moral inclusivity a ‘luxury good’ and follow the ‘dependency thesis’ according to which the expression of moral inclusivity depends on the presence of very concrete material conditions that trigger inclusivist and impersonal prosocial tendencies that human beings are not able to express in threatening contexts without physical security. This thesis is problematic for various reasons and has led to incomplete explanations about the enabling and causal factors of inclusivist moral progress, as well as unsatisfactory suggestions about what we should do to foster the accomplishment of more generalized instances of progress based on inclusivist concerns. In an attempt to contribute to this debate, the main objective of this thesis is to offer an alternative proposal about the nature of human morality and a more detailed reflection on what we should do if we want to further accomplish such instances of progress. More precisely, this work adopts a particular developmental and constructivist vision of human morality to answer the question of how feasible it is to reach generalized forms of social progress based on the precepts of moral inclusivity. Furthermore, it offers some ideas about what are the most adequate and favorable conditions to foster such progress both at the individual and the collective level. At this point, a preliminary clarification of some starting points is necessary. In the first place, and contrary to what other authors have proposed when debating moral progress from an empirically-based approach, my perspective adopts a radical developmental and constructivist perspective, following particularly the conceptual and empirical ideas of the social-domain theory in moral psychology. From this perspective, morality is a domain of normative and social knowledge that develops and emerges in human interactions. Moral concerns, judgments, and norms are not only the result of the expression of innate adaptive intuitions, nor the product of social conformity and a simple process of mirroring the normativity that communities have established to organize their social life. Human individuals, instead, construct moral concerns and judgments during their situated interactions. More specifically, the constructivist tradition claims that we need to research how moral concerns, judgments, and reasons emerge in social interactions and how human beings construct the content of their moral knowledge in the first place. Based on these ideas, morality is defined here as the result of a constructive process through which human individuals, by the means of constant interactions on a background of mutual respect and recognition, develop evaluative concerns about how we ought to treat others, and how to ‘care’ and ‘respect’ others’ well-being, needs, and vulnerabilities. This developmental-constructivist theory of human psychology contributes to an alternative understanding of the origins of moral variability and informs a very particular normative stance about the most desirable contexts needed for the urgent accomplishment of inclusivist forms of morality in contemporary societies. This is so given that the very same definition of morality adopted presupposes the feature of inclusivity. The main objective of this work is then to argue, based on a developmental perspective, what are the most favorable conditions to foster the development of moral inclusivity and what we should do to accomplish concrete instances of moral progress that truly help us to overcome our most urgent moral challenges. The whole thesis is organized as follows. In part I, I show how received visions about human social evolution have informed conceptions of morality as an adaptive function evolved to solve the challenges of cooperative life. Based on these assumptions, some theories argue that human morality is limited by the boundaries of group thinking, and always obeys the mandates of collective interests and the will of the majority. However, this conception has problematic implications from a normative and ethical perspective. The aim of Chapter 1 is to present this introductory debate in detail. In chapter 2, I consider a relevant amount of scientific evidence that helps to consolidate a more optimistic and inclusivist perspective about the starting conditions of human prosocial behavior. Later, I will summarize some ideas offered to explain the possible evolutionary mechanisms that led to the consolidation of these inclusivist capacities. However, I will also show how evolutionary theories that share the same adaptationist foundations but initially seem relevant to explain the feasibility of moral inclusivity, result incomplete when considering the complexity of moral behavior and its ethical implications. Part II is devoted to presenting a developmental alternative to the adaptationist versions around the starting conditions of morality. In this section, I first summarize the epistemological, conceptual, and empirical basis of a constructivist perspective already proposed by several authors in the last decades. This is the goal of chapter 3. More precisely, I adopt the conceptualization of morality established by the social-domain theory school and clarify its conception of the situated development of moral concerns, motivations, and norms. All these ideas are essential for my argumentation on the feasibility of inclusivist moral progress offered later. Chapter 4 provides a more detailed idea of constructivist thinking about moral development, by analyzing one particular dimension: the development of moral concerns for fairness and the sense of justice in distributive dilemmas. In Part III, I assume a constructivist perspective on morality to contribute to the philosophy of moral progress. In particular, I discuss the implications of such a perspective for the conceptualization of human moral nature and discuss what are the most favorable conditions for moral inclusivity to emerge. Answering that question is of enormous relevance since favoring the transition of human societies towards more inclusivist forms of moral concern and behavior supposes a more generalized accomplishment of our most urgent moral convictions. Previous developmental or culturally-sensible attempts to explore this issue are already on the market. As mentioned before, most authors have approached the topic by situating the cultural evolution and development of (inclusivist) moral progress in the WEIRD world. For instance, some of these authors claim that very concrete material conditions (mostly present in the Western World) have been necessary for triggering inclusivist and impersonal prosocial tendencies that human beings are not able to express in threatening contexts without physical security. Despite their interest in explaining inclusivist morality and the feasibility of inclusivist forms of progress following a naturalistic and culturally situated approach, these theories are problematic for two main reasons. In the first place, most of the authors that explain moral progress tend to focus exclusively on the consolidation of liberal values in the Western world and the underlying adoption of laws, social-epistemic practices, and public narratives about tolerance and inclusivity, as unequivocal signs of inclusivist morality. Nevertheless, there is an enormous distance between the institutional and public support of inclusivist moral values or the construction of public images of tolerance and inclusivity, and the real materialization of impersonal moralities in situated social interactions. Secondly, the variability of human moral behavior is far bigger than most of the theories in moral psychology and moral progress tend to assume. Accordingly, inclusivist and exclusivist forms of morality may develop simultaneously in similar or divergent geographical and socio-ecological environments, including those with harsh conditions such as competition for scarce resources, potential intergroup conflict, and risks of disease transmission. In addition, harsh environmental conditions are usually present in almost all societies around the globe, and the presence of socio-ecological conditions such as physical security and prosperity, predominant in highly resourced populations, do not prevent the existence of exclusivist moral tendencies. My model explores a different perspective on the relationships between cultural, institutional, and historical factors, and the situated development of human morality. This supposes a clear distinction from previous approaches to the matter since it offers a different view on what we should do to pursue further instances of inclusivist social progress. In the fifth chapter, I first analyze the proposals of some defenders of the ‘dependency’ theory. The attention is focused on the ‘Evolutionary Developmental Model’ proposed by Buchanan and Powell (2018). Based on a critique of this approach, I will argue that to explain the evolution and development of human morality in its multiple manifestations, it is essential to put focus on social interactions. This also involves a different perspective on human-environment relations that in line with a constructivist worldview makes an innovative contribution to the philosophy of moral behavior and moral progress. Later, in the sixth chapter, I will define my alternative relational view of inclusivist morality and I will offer my view on how to establish favorable conditions that make inclusivist morality possible. Complementing the constructivist approach, my conception is based on the essential role of equality and individuality and on how moral inclusivity is favored if moral concerns do not develop driven by the accomplishment of group-centered, binding, and communitarian concerns and values. In brief, my relational model suggests that the accomplishment of moral inclusivity not only depends on the overall achievement of certain levels of physical security or economic prosperity. Instead, its development is favored by transforming the interactional contexts in which moral concerns towards autonomy and individuality emerge. In arguing so, I will need to start with a critique of contemporary situated and embodied approaches in ethics. Then, I will show how societies guided by the accomplishment of group-centered values of power, dominance, and relational inequality tend to express exclusivist moral behaviors, while individualistic societies tend to be more inclusivist. Starting from this diagnosis, my final attempt is then to reflect on which are the best conditions for the moral valuation of individuality to emerge and what we should do to promote the accomplishment of moral inclusivity at the societal level. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Music Education for Social Change–Constructing an Activist Music Education by Juliet HessMartin BergerJuliet Hess, Music Education for Social Change–Constructing an Activist Music Education (New York, Routledge, 2019)Juliet Hess’s book is written with great passion and composed for a very good reason. It is published in troubling times when music educators are looking for new perspectives on old problems and in search of a revived relevance for the subject. (...) Although music educators appear to be better qualified for their jobs than ever before, there is still an underlying concern that we have lost the positive political influence on society we might have had in the past, that our contributions to enhancing tolerance and social justice are at stake again, and that our voices are not being heard. Or, in other words, that we lack relevance if we do not act.Juliet Hess raises her voice, reclaiming this relevance at a time when “[h]ate continually manifests in both new and familiar ways” and “the presence of oppression is consistent across time.”1 According to her, rising-up against oppressive ideologies, injustices, and material violence is imperative and urgent. Hess calls on finding ways for music education to contribute to resistance and hails concepts that allow educators to devise a distinctly anti-oppressive pedagogy. Her purpose is to offer a framework for what she calls an “activist music education,” a pedagogy that “aims to address the sexism, racism, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, heterosexism, cisgenderism, classism, ableism, anti-immigrant [End Page 207] sentiments, and other oppressions so prevalent in our society.”2 Inspired by the impact of their musicking, Hess conducts interviews with twenty activist musicians, exploring common themes, perceptions, values, philosophies, and ideas. All individuals interviewed are involved in social change movements across the United States and Canada. Hess positions them as “catalysts for change in music education,”3 providing “a means to conceptualize activist music education for school music.”4 Activism and music, says Hess, are “enmeshed and inextricably connected,”5 since both intrinsically involve exploring historical, political, social, and cultural contexts.Inspired by the relevance of activist music to a society, Hess is in search of a similar meaning for music education. As a result, she sketches a possible K-12 curriculum with three essential goals: fostering connection with Others, honoring and sharing lived experience, and enabling critical reflection on the world.6 In search of a conceptualization for her idea, Hess draws mainly on Freirian and critical pedagogy as a theoretical framework, placing lived experience at the center of education, and with conscientization and praxis being her key terms.7 According to Hess, praxis, defined as “the integration of thoughtful reflection and action,”8 is fundamental to any kind of transformation, while conscientization refers to processes through which learners “become aware and reflect upon the conditions that shape their lives.”9 Although Hess acknowledges the valuable scholarly contribution to critical pedagogy in the past, she remains careful in its application, urging music educators to “avert any dogmatic implementation.”10 As a result, she suggests a “tri-faceted pedagogy for future activism,”11 which is connective, communicative, and critical: “a pedagogy of community, based on activist musicians’ emphasis on connectivity, a pedagogy of expression rooted in honoring lived experiences and sharing them through music, and a pedagogy of noticing that emerges from activist-musicians’ work on critical thinking.”12 This combination will, according to her, set “the conditions for future activism among youth and offers a possible practical enactment of critical pedagogy for music education.”13 A valuable and most inspiring read!Although I strongly agree with the intention of this book, I do have some questions. The dream of a classroom that exercises social criticism both through thinking about music and through musicking itself has always been an aspiration. Scholars have regularly encouraged music educators to be public intellectuals and agents of change, ideally striving for social justice (or at the very least for social awareness), and preparing learners to be global citizens, able to think critically and ready to engage with the world.14 It is widely agreed that “music education deserves to be seen as a serious form of cultural... (shrink)

Ce bref texte en forme de manifeste rappelle que les mouvements de transformation sociale dirigés vers davantage de justice sont d’autant plus forts que leurs membres reconnaissent avec lucidité et compassion leurs propres implications dans les mécanismes générateurs de violences. Plutôt que des gestes de condamnation et d’annulation ( cancel ), ce sont donc des attitudes d’écoute, de soutien et de solidarité active qui sont requis.

ABSTRACTThere is a wide consensus that violence in schools is something so morally wrong that it must not be tolerated. Therefore, the intolerance shown by a teacher towards students’ violent behaviour in school could be understood as a virtue and his moral obligation and legal duty. On the other hand, extreme toleration towards an evil such as violence becomes a vice, for example, when a teacher makes it possible for an innocent student to become a victim of other students’ physical (...) or verbal violence. It seems, therefore, that the idea of ‘zero tolerance’ policies is the right one, although the results of its application in practice have been many times problematic, inefficient and unjust. (shrink)

In The Course of Recognition, Paul Ricœur pays special attention to Honneth’s social theory, on the one hand, because it is devoted to the important issue of the struggles for recognition and, on the other hand, because Axel Honneth proposes a convincing neo-Hegelian conception of social justice. However, while adhering to Honneth’s project, Ricœur establishes a dialectical relationship between love and justice, in order to correct an inherent defect of Anerkennung. The reference to agápē would provide the only way out (...) of the endless struggle, by demonstrating that human beings are capable of mutual recognition through the social practice of gift/counter-gift. Ricœur presents agápē as a simple add-on to the Honnethian project. The present paper returns to this assertion, and demonstrates that, on the contrary, the use of agápē alters the struggles for recognition, and does not help us to arrive at a conception of social justice, which is capable of revealing experiences of injustice and combatting them. (shrink)

The article deals with a unique even within the age of European Enlightenment humanist essence and human rights activity of the great French philosopher, writer, poet Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire. The author focuses his attention on a new aspect of the well-known thinker - the unselfish and persistent protection of victims of religious intolerance, obscurantism, judicial tyranny. According to the author, Voltaire’s advocacy was the result of his political and legal socialization. This idea is supported by the facts of Voltaire’s (...) earlier life: the assistance to the villagers of Ferney, the intercession for the serfs from the oppression of the clergy, the humanist’s poems against tyranny and religious intolerance, against any violence and cruelty. Voltaire’s valuable judgments of natural law, legitimacy, justice and dignity of a person convincingly support the author’s hypothesis. (shrink)

Guy Jobin | Résumé : Cette étude est consacrée aux effets de la mutation de la question sociale sur le discours magistériel en éthique sociale et politique. Le mot « mutation » désigne le fait qu’aux enjeux socio-économiques qui formaient traditionnellement le noyau dur de la question sociale s’ajoutent d’autres enjeux de nature différente, notamment ceux liés à la reconnaissance morale et juridique des identités individuelles et collectives. Deux thèmes de l’enseignement social de l’Église seront retenus et explorés ici (...) pour tester l’hypothèse d’une répercussion de la mutation de la question sociale sur l’enseignement social de l’Église catholique. Ce sont l’enseignement sur le bien commun et l’enseignement qui condamne la discrimination. Nous concluons qu’il y a bien une ouverture du discours magistériel aux transformations des idées et des jugements dans le domaine éthico-moral. On voit pourtant que, même dans ces conditions, l’arrimage de logiques hétérogènes génère dans l’enseignement social des « tensions » épistémologiques et pratiques qu’on ne saurait minimiser. |: This article studies the effects of the mutation of the social question on the magisterial discourse in social and political ethics. The word “mutation” refers to the fact that to the socio-economical stakes which traditionally formed the hard core of the social question are added other stakes of a different nature, notably those that are tied to the moral and juridical recognition of individual and collective identities. Two themes of the social teaching of the Church are here retained and explored to test the hypothesis of a repercussion of the mutation of the social question upon the social teaching of the Catholic Church. These are the teaching concerning the common good and the teaching that condemns discrimination. We conclude that there is indeed an opening of the magisterial discourse to transformations in ideas and judgments in the ethical moral domain. Yet one can see that, even under those conditions, the coordination of heterogeneous logics generates in the social teaching epistemological and practical “tensions” which cannot be minimized. (shrink)

In Nicholas Wolterstorff’s ‘Toleration, Justice and Dignity’, he argues for tolerance between religious traditions on the basis of human dignity. In this response to his paper, I argue that a general philosophical argument from human dignity will at best lead to indifference or mere praise, but not true tolerance. In the second part of the paper, I offer a sketch of a distinctly Christian way of arguing for tolerance towards adherents of other religions, namely on the basis of the insight (...) that Christianity itself is a hybrid tradition. (shrink)

Rigby (Center for the Study of Forgiveness and Reconciliation, Coventry U., England) investigates different approaches to "policing" the past, from mass purges ...

As a natural result of globalization and migration from village to city, peace, ease, and happiness of people who have to coexist in cities are extremely important. Beliefs, systems, ideologies, and institutions aim to achieve this. This situation forces individuals and groups who live together, whether they want to or not, to get to know and communicate with each other within a trust environment. The most important factor that makes recognizing segments of society with different characteristics and communicate with them (...) in a healthy way is to develop a culture of coexistence among the community members. Coexistence means that people with different identities and affiliations are united around the citizenship denominator and contributing to the continuation of social life in unity and solidarity. This understanding must be transformed into a cultural consciousness in the community members. Because, polarization, marginalization, discrimination, and violence become common among individuals who live in societies where the culture of living together and the awareness of citizenship are not developed. It is not possible to ensure coexistence only by law. In societies where a culture of cohabitation develops, differences are not seen as a cause of separation, but as a richness that diversifies society and gives dynamism to social life. In societies dealing with political, social, economic, and moral problems, religion, language, race, ethnic identity, and regional sense of belonging might be more likely used as terrorization tools. The self-confidence that accurrate religious knowledge gives to individuals might weaken such a possibility. Islam anticipates a social system that facilitates a pecaful and easeful life for the people. Giving importance to principles such as love, respect, tolerance, justice, consultation, assistance, and solidarity in the Qur'an is an indication of the need for this system. The Prophet Mohammad had the opportunity to apply an example of this system in Madinah anticipatedin the Qur'an in Madinah. After the migration, some principles related to the basic rules of coexistence were included in the Madinah agreement, which the Prophet signed with representatives of different segments living in Madinah. It is very important that these principles are able to shed light on the issues happenin in the recent world. The experience of living together in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) should be introduced to the next generations with correct information. Because, The Medina Agreement, which has an important place in the history of Muslims, is an important example of the ability to live together in peace and ease by maintaining differences in society. The Medina Agreement is the first written document that allows different groups of people residing in Medina to live together. The main purpose of this agreement, which the Prophet made with the Jewish, Christian, and polytheistic tribes in Medina after the migration, is to protect the fundamental rights stemming from the citizenship of people who live in the same city by having different faiths and cultural values. If so, the Madinah Agreement might be an example for many societies that recently experience discord and unrest due to their characteristics such as religion, language, race, political thought, and etc. In this regard, this article focuses on the importance of the culture of coexistence in the context of the Madinah Agreement and the process of formation of this culture and offers some suggestionsthat will facilitate peace and ease for different groups living in the same society. Some of these suggestions are as follows: Differences such as language, religion, race, culture, and political thought among the realities of social life should not be seen as an element of discrimination, everyone should contribute to the peace and well-being of society by combining in the common denominator of citizenship. In educational institutions, it should be taken into account values such as human love, respect for the other, tolerance, freedom of thought, empathy, and peace. In addition to educational institutions, all segments operating in the field of law, politics, economics, religion, and media should unite, and thus, should develop a consciousness of citizenship in society, where differences in race, religion, language, culture and political views are seen as richness. (shrink)

Michiels, Thomas | : Si les théories de la reconnaissance ont permis de renouveler plusieurs domaines de l’éthique, peu d’auteurs se sont intéressés jusqu’à présent à leur apport aux débats éducatifs. Or, que peut précisément le concept de reconnaissance pour l’éthique de l’éducation? C’est la question posée par cet article. Examinant de prime abord plusieurs propositions faites par la littérature, cette étude leur oppose ensuite une vision plus exigeante de la reconnaissance, soit, le fondement légitime d’une théorie (...) relationnelle de la justice éducative. (shrink)

La tradition juive imprègne à tel point le discours philosophique de Levinas qu'on a pu le soupçonner d'être une théologie masquée de la transcendance. L'ambiguïté n'est qu'apparente. Son judaïsme est la voix singulière d’un recommencement. Dans sa jeunesse talmudique à Vilna, il a été à l'école d'une si haute pensée de la grandeur excessive de Dieu qu'elle échappe à nos représentations et décourage la philosophie de s'en faire l'interprète. Arrivé en France, s'adonnant avec émerveillement à la phénoménologie, il apprend d'elle (...) que l'esprit n'est rien que liaison au dehors, échange avec le monde et ouverture à autrui. Pour elle, le monde repose fondamentalement sur l'expérience empirique de la rencontre de l'homme, non directement sur la relation à Dieu. Mais dans l'exploration de son domaine propre, celui de l'existence finie, la raison se heurte à des limites – la mort, le visage d'autrui – où surgit une altérité exigeante, qui se refuse aux réductions et aux accaparements dont la transcendance divine est l'objet dans les religions même révélées et qui dénonce les violences infligées aux hommes au nom du divin. Ainsi transformée par son écoute de l'illimité, la raison phénoménologique déplace la notion de révélation. Dans le visage se révèle la sainteté de la personne, avec la justice absolue qui lui est due ; dans la sainte écriture, la responsabilité suprême de chacun vis-à-vis de l'autre. L'homme en perte d'identité se découvre orienté par un souffle de transcendance, non vers une vérité absolue, mais vers un Dieu absent qui s'est retiré dans son incognito.The Jewish tradition impregnates the philosophical discourse of Levinas to such an extent that one suspects it to be a theology of transcendence in disguise. The ambiguity is only apparent. His Judaism is a unique voice of a new beginning. In his Talmudic youth in Vilna, Levinas was at a school with such a high idea of the excessive greatness of God that it escapes our representations and discourages philosophy to be its interpreter. When he arrived in France he gave himself up to the wonder of phenomenology. From it he learned that the spirit is nothing other than liaison to the outside, interchange with the world, and openness to the other. The world is fundamentally based on the empirical experience of man’s encounter, not directly on relation to God. But reason, in the exploration of its own domain, finite existence, meets its limits – death, the visage of the other– where a demanding alterity arises. This latter refuses reductions and monopolizations whose object is divine transcendence, even in revealed religions, and denounces violence inflicted on men in the name of the divine. Thus transformed by listening to the limitless, phenomenological reason displaces the notion of revelation. In the visage is revealed the holiness of the person, with the absolute justice that is due him ; in Holy Scripture we find the supreme responsibility of each one toward the other. Man, in losing his identity, finds himself oriented by a breath of transcendence, not towards an absolute truth, but towards an absent God who has drawn back into its incognito. (shrink)

This article argues that the civic virtue of tolerance has to be understood as a virtue of justice. Based on an analysis of the concept of toleration and its paradoxes, it shows that toleration is a 'normatively dependent concept' that needs to take recourse to a conception of justice in order to solve these paradoxes. At the center of this conception of justice lies a principle of reciprocal and general justification with the help of which a distinction between moral norms (...) and ethical values is possible. While the former are strictly binding and define the realm of the tolerable, the latter are subject to reasonable disagreement that calls for toleration. Essentially, the virtue of tolerance is the capacity and willingness to accept the principle and criteria of justification of generally binding norms in an ethically pluralist society.This virtue is analyzed with respect to its normative and epistemological components. Finally, the idea of a 'tolerant character' is discussed. (shrink)

Equality is the great political issue of our time. Liberty is forgotten: Fraternity never did engage our passions: the maintenance of Law and Order is at a discount: Natural Rights and Natural Justice are outmoded shibboleths. But Equality—there men have something to die for, kill for, agitate about, be miserable about. The demand for Equality obsesses all our political thought. We are not sure what it is—indeed, as I shall show later, we are necessarily not sure what it is—but we (...) are sure that whatever it is, we want it: and while we are prepared to look on frustration, injustice or violence with tolerance, as part of the natural order of things, we will work ourselves up into paroxysms of righteous indignation at the bare mention of Inequality. (shrink)

Cosmopolis A Review of Cosmopolitics -/- 2015/3-4 -/- Editorial Dominique de Courcelles & Paul Ghils -/- This issue addresses the general concept of “spirituality” as it appears in various cultural contexts and timeframes, through contrasting ideological views. Without necessarily going back to artistic and religious remains of primitive men, which unquestionably show pursuits beyond the biophysical dimension and illustrate practices seeking to unveil the hidden significance of life and death, the following papers deal with a number of interpretations covering a (...) wide field extending from belief to theory, from emotions to concepts, from the wisdom of personal experience to the most sophisticated doctrines. Spirit and spirituality are indeed many-faceted notions. They may refer to the intricate world of the interacting spirits which inhabit living beings in animistic traditions, without excluding a “grand force” linking human beings within a dynamic whole on which their very existence rely . They also bear upon more atomistic and either/or approaches of Western philosophy, which have become embodied in Cartesian dualism against a monotheist background, to the point of freezing the essence of individuals and culminating in the extreme individualism that characterizes our contemporaries. However, this equally refers to the opposite conception of materialism, across times and cultures, from ancient India and Greece (Cārvāka, originally known as Lokāyata, or some Buddhist doctrines for the former, Democritus or Lucretius for the latter) to more contemporary materialistic schools, whether modern or postmodern. -/- The following papers look at the contrasting forms of the philosophy and spirit of the human factor set into a whole, with no artificial disjoint between the psychical and the physical levels, as Wittgenstein put it: “And how can a body have a soul?”. This approach is not unrelated to the notion of anthropocene examined in a recent issue of Cosmopolis, with provides another comprehensive framework open to a spiritual life emerging from the very environment that generated it. -/- *** The first section of this issue was edited by Dominique de Courcelles, director at the National French Research Centre (CNRS), whom we wish to thank for collecting relevant studies relating to the religious and political questions, with a view to focusing on the war of ideas inevitably waged behind images, concepts and perceptions, taking an asymmetrical approach. To the extent that they are mindful of global/local interactions and include representations, opinions and beliefs, such disciplines as philosophy, philology, history and social sciences can provide useful studies accounting for new practices in geopolitics and a fair diplomacy. -/- In her introduction, Dominique de Courcelles first poses the question of how the religious and political spheres interrelate, with their corresponding religious demands and humanistic values. She then suggests that the right question today may be breaking with the philosophy of human rights concerned with the defense of human beings against the hazards of arbitrary politics or the instrumental use of religion, in favour of a fair philosophy of humankind, a new humanism. This would consist in recognizing a common loyalty of all towards one interhuman, not only interstate community, to protect it from both the autonomy demanded by individuals and the instrumental use of minorities. -/- Considering the fact of diversity, so important today in terms of both politics and religion, Abdelhai Azarkan looks at the conditions under which tolerance could obtain the double status of right and duty. He revisits to two philosophers, John Locke and Voltaire, who thought about it from the historical reality of religious wars. The former made tolerance into a right, basing his analysis on the political-legal level, while the latter saw tolerance as a duty, from an analysis based on ethical-political criteria. -/- Mathieu Guidère examines what he calls semantic denominationalism, a term which implies religious attributes and identities, whichever national loyalties or personal belonging they may have at the same time. Since the early 2000s, thie phenomenon has expanded tremendously, compounded by the “war on terror” and the over media-oriented terrorist actions. Denominational expressions act as formal names for ordinary and high-profile players in domestic and foreign policies of democratic states. These systems reveal a receding secularization, while the powerful comeback of religious identities signals the failure of nation-states and the weakening of the humanist spirit. -/- Barbara De Poli retraces the history of a contemporary jihadism claiming its Islamic essence and asserting the truth of genuine coranic principles via the war on infidels, with a view to restoring the Caliphate. After defining the term jihad, she shows that even if this contemporary jiadism is spreading in the Muslim world, it radically departs from Islamic law and the received use of the term jihad, in so far as it is rooted in the early radical thinking of Islamic ideologues in the 20th century, starting with with Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. This current has been fueled by by international conflicts since the outbreak of the war in Afghanistan, in which the so-called Western countries bear a major responsibility. -/- Abderrazak Sayadi starts from the Tunisian experience to ask the question of humanist values and democracy within the relationships between the religious and political spheres. As a historian of religion, he is brought to demystify certain islamic principles and to paying attention to the reform of law, seeing the separation of religion and politics as a precondition to a successful democratic gamble and the establishment of a renewed humanism. -/- Dominique de Courcelles reminds us that getting a better knowledge of narrations and words makes it possible to better understand how logical and rhetorical thinking works for those who wage an asymetriccal war, re-enchanting and mystifying the world to better take control. As soon as 1932, an exchange of letters between Einstein and Freud made it clear that, in order to free man from fatality and war, education understood as culture was fundamental. Such illustrations as the exécution of Oussama ben Laden and the Caliph’s speech in Mossoul show that a premiminary analysis of images and words is essential to a fair diplomacy conducted by people from civil society, whose culture and wisdom allow justice and force to speak together and better resist war. -/- Marcel Boisard thinks that on the day the guns fall silent, exhausted by war, we will not return to the state borders that have prevailed for a century as an outcome of the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916. It is time to prepare the “day after”, which will be a huge challenge. To this end, a summit of Middle-East nations is urgently needed to globally decide the fate of those peoples. On the condition that we know who the enemy is and accept to name it, to understand the history of the countries, groups and alliances, and to question any false or self-interested sense of certainty. -/- *** In the second section, Paul Schafer provides the author’s experiences to explain how culture, from the artistic to the biological, has the power to to open the doors to spirituality, from the inner self to the global environment. He asks himself whether a relative permanence of spirituality can arise from the specific moments that characterize it. Laurent Ledoux synthesizes the conclusion of a symposium held on 22 January 2015 on the links between philosophy and management, on the basis of the spiritual dimension conceived as “natural” and the answers it may suggest to the issues that face the organizations in a “contemporaniversal” world. Jacques Rifflet makes that question in a secular perspective, based on the wellsprings of personal commitment before it can be caught by any religious creed or scientific theory. In this sense spirituality, in alliance with reason, both inspires human consciousness and illuminates its destiny. Sami Aldeeb asks himself whether Islam can be reconciled with human rights. Caught between the belief in an absolute and final Word descended from the sky, and evidence showing that any religion is the creation of a given culture and a society situated in time and space, the Makkan and … contexts et médinois call for differentiated, if not opposite answers and exegeses. Bernard Carmona provides the outline of a dialogical framework, which is known to be a feature of debates between the various philosophical schools of classical India, exemplified here by the transdisciplinary perspective of debates within a Buddhist context. *** The articles not focused on the previous topic include a study by Landry Signé on China’s strategy, competing with the United States to control African resources. The author deals with the specific case of China’s rapprochement with Southern Sudan since Sudan was broken up. In the last paper, Goran Fejić and Rada Iveković, return to the essential role that women should play, and comments upon the role of some international legal instruments related in particular to the elimination of all forms of discrimination. The perspective is transnational and transethnic and is based on secular criteria, as regards nation-building and more generally society-building. Considering the persistence of widespread violence, whether in times of armed conflict or in times of peace, the question remains whether it is possible to fully implement rights and justice instruments. (shrink)

This essay presents a critical interpretation of Derrida’s deconstructive reading of Walter Benjamin’s text, "Critique of Violence." It examines the relationship between deconstruction and justice, and the parallel Derrida draws between deconstructive reading and Benjamin’s account of pure violence. I argue that Derrida blurs Benjamin’s distinction between the political general strike and the proletarian general strike. As a consequence, Derrida criticises Benjamin’s metaphysical complicity with the violence that lead to the Holocaust. Derrida’s deconstructive reading of Benjamin, I conclude, underplays its (...) Marxist dimensions, privileging the theological and textual dimensions of Benjamin’s thought over the political and historical. (shrink)

This chapter interrogates the intersections between wealth, violence, and justice by considering two very different cases: refugees who have had their wealth taken from them, and political activists who are considering using Robin-Hood-style tactics to protest economic injustice. Ordinarily, the involuntary loss of wealth that refugees suffer, while it is viewed as an injustice, is not considered a violent injustice. However, when the involuntary redistribution of wealth is brought up in the context of resolving long-standing economic injustices, opponents cry out (...) that such redistribution would be, not only unjust, but an act of violence. This raises an interesting question: how should we view the involuntary loss, or redistribution, of wealth? Disregarding for the moment whether such involuntary losses of wealth are justified or unjustified—which might well depend on the circumstances and context—it is worth considering whether they are instances of violence. If they are, then refugees have suffered more violence than we normally recognize. If they are not, then Robin-Hood-style tactics (absent the bows and arrows) may be allowed for those who wish to engage in non-violent resistance against economic injustice in all its forms. (shrink)

Who gets to use force and when? How are we supposed to justify the use of violence in achieving political goals and establishing and maintaining political communities and structures? With Anthony Ellis , David Garren , and Scott Hibbard.

Selon une certaine tradition phénoménologique (Levinas, Marion, et Sartre en particulier), la relation sociale soumise à la convenance de la civilité et de la mondanité est considérée comme intrinsèquement intolérante par rapport à une expérience plus bouleversante et authentique de l’altérité. « Nous avons affaire à des êtres habillés », comme l’écrit Emmanuel Levinas dans De l’existence à l’existant (1947). Selon Levinas et Marion, la civilité et la mondanité reconduiraient phénoménologiquement le primat de l’individualisme et nous condamneraient à une intolérance (...) transcendantale (contrairement au mouvement de la « charité » selon Marion, dont la phénoménologie prolonge à cet égard la distance pascalienne entre civilité et charité). Ce texte a pour objet de montrer, en s’appuyant sur une réinterprétation phénoménologique de certaines dimensions de la civilité humaniste (telle qu’elle se déploie notamment dans l’œuvre de Baldassar Castiglione, Le Livre du courtisan ), qu’une autre phénoménologie de la civilité et de la mondanité est possible. Cette autre phénoménologie a pour objet de dépasser l’alternative entre une expérience « non-civile » de l’altérité (qui tend par ailleurs à prendre une forme théologique étrangère au champ de la civilité traditionnellement fondé sur une relation d’égalité) et un enfermement allergique dans la solitude du moi. Selon cette perspective, la mondanité n’est pas conçue comme une conjuration de l’altérité ou de l’extériorité matérielle, mais comme une dimension de l’existence et de la phénoménalité qui intègre le rapport à la transcendance et le dessaisissement de la subjectivité. (shrink)

Twenty-two essays from the 1998 conference in Boston weigh in on current debates in political and social philosophy. Topics include: global justice, intercultural dialogue and human rights, consumerist and cultural hegemony, justice and toleration, the limits of law, liberal and radical democracy, public reason and religious values, communitarianism, collective acceptance and social reality, freedom and equality, violence, aesthetics, and various interpretations of Rawls. Name index only. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR.

After discussing the nature of toleration, giving a brief history of the emergence of religious toleration in the West, and presenting my understanding of religion, I develop what I call ‘the dignity argument’ for religious toleration: to fail to tolerate a person’s religion is to treat that person in a way that does not befit their dignity. And to treat them in a way that does not befit their dignity is to wrong them, to treat them unjustly.

In ‘Force of Law’, Derrida’s discussion of the ‘unstable’ distinction between law and justice exemplifies the deconstructive double bind and makes this a very significant text in virtue of its juridical, political and ethical import. The first section focuses on Derrida’s deployment of the polysemous term ‘force’. ‘Force’ refers to the enforceability of the law but also to the performative and interpretative foundational violence at the moment when a new order of legality is instituted. In the second section, I argue (...) that Derrida’s insistence on the differential relation between law and justice and on the corollary deconstructibility of the law leads to a critique of the current legal system and its axiomatics. I show that deconstruction appeals to unconditional justice in order to call for an excessive responsibility on the part of the legal system, to broaden the category of subject of law, and to have an impact on the lives of others in the margins of the established political order. (shrink)

This paper explores the feasibility of offering a restorative justice (RJ) approach in cases of domestic violence (DV). I argue that widely used RJ processes—such as ‘conferencing’—are unlikely to be sufficiently safe or effective in cases of DV, at least as these processes are standardly designed and practiced (Sections 1-6). I then support the view that if RJ is to be used in cases of DV, then new specialist processes will need to be co-designed with key stakeholders to ensure they (...) embody not only RJ principles, but also feminist theory and the concept of transformative justice (Section 7). (shrink)