Hva er egentlig håp? Hva gjør vi egentlig når vi håper på noe? Den internasjonalt anerkjente filosofen Lars Fr. H. Svendsen vender denne gangen blikket mot håpet - og det er ikke helt uten grunn. Vi trenger det kanskje mer enn noensinne. Den ukrainske befolkningens reaksjon på russernes invasjon i februar 2022 vekket til live en gammel idé hos Lars Fr. H. Svendsen om å skrive en håpets filosofi. I mangfoldet av følelser i den ukrainske befolkningen, som raseri, (...) fortvilelse og sorg, så var det håpet som sto fremst - håpet om at de ville kunne stå imot angrepet fra den russiske overmakten og bevare friheten. I Håpets filosofi tar Svendsen oss med på en reise i filosofihistorien og viser hva de mest sentrale tenkerne har skrevet om håp. Som alltid med skarpe analyser, innsikt og snert fra en av våre beste formidlere av filosofi. (shrink)

Work is one of the most universal features of human life; virtually everybody spends some part of their life at work. It is often associated with tedium and boredom; in conflict with the things we would otherwise love to do. Thinking of work primarily as a burden - an activity we would rather be without - is a thought that was shared by the philosophers in ancient Greece, who generally regarded work as a terrible curse. And yet, research shows that (...) it prolongs life and is generally good for people's physical and mental health. This is perhaps why work is increasingly recognized as a crucial source of meaning and social identity. And our attitudes to work have been changing significantly in the last decades, with an increased demand for meaning and self-realization in the workplace.In this book, Lars Svendsen argues that we need to complete this reorientation of our feelings about work and collapse the differences between leisure and work. Work, like the poor, is always with us. But to overcome the sense of being burnt out, we must think of work as not only productive but recreative - in other words, a lot more like leisure. (shrink)

Artikkelen vurderer hvorvidt ID-kravet, som begrenser asylsøkeres anledning til å søke arbeid, er etisk velbegrunnet innenfor rammene av en liberal rettskultur. Videre anlegges et konsekvensetisk perspektiv fordi ID-kravet er konsekvensetisk begrunnet, og det kan da foretas en immanent kritikk. Det vises at ID-kravet innebærer en begrensning av asylsøkeres negative og positive frihet, og at forsvarere av ID-kravet dermed må bevise at kravet har så gode konsekvenser at det legitimerer en slik begrensning av asylsøkeres frihet. Både generelle overveielser av ID-kravets fordeler (...) og ulemper og konkrete data tilsier at bevisbyrden ikke er oppfylt. Følgelig må det enten frembringes empiri som tilsier at ID-kravet likevel har bedre konsekvenser, eller det bør gis en annen type begrunnelse enn den konsekvensetiske for ID-kravet, eller ID-kravet bør avskaffes.Nøkkelord: asylsøkere, arbeid, liberalt demokrati, konsekvensialismeEnglish summary: Undocumented migrants' right to apply for work. A consequentialist assessmentThe article evaluates whether the Norwegian ID-demand, which limits asylum seekers' opportunity for work, is ethically well founded within the limits of a liberal, legal culture. The argument operates within a consequentialist normative theory because the ID-demand is justified in terms of its consequences, and an immanent critique of the demand can therefore be carried out. It is argued that the ID-demand imposes restrictions on the negative and positive liberty of asylum seekers, and defenders of the ID-demand will then have a burden of proof to show that the demand has such good consequences that it will legitimise these restrictions. Both general considerations and specific data clearly indicate that this burden of proof is not satisfied. Hence, one must either provide new data that indicate that the ID-demand after all has better consequences, defend the ID-demand in terms of something other than its consequences or reject the ID-demand. (shrink)

Introduction: What is evil and how can we understand it? -- The theology of evil -- Theodicies -- The privation theodicy -- The free will theodicy -- The Iraenean theodicy -- The totality theodicy -- History as secular theodicy -- Job's insight-the theodicy of the hereafter -- Anthropology of evil -- Are people good or evil? -- The typologies of evil -- Demonic evil -- Evil for evil's sake -- Evil's aesthetic seduction -- Sadism -- Schadenfreude -- Subjective and objective (...) evil -- Kant and instrumental evil -- The impossibility of a "devilish" will -- The paradox of evil -- Moral rebirth -- The evil is the other-idealistic evil -- "Us" vs. "them" -- Violent individuals -- Arendt and stupid evil -- The evil and the stupid -- Radical and banal evil -- Eichmann, Hoss, and Stangl -- Normal people and extreme evil -- Thinking as opposition -- Evil people -- The problem of evil -- Theory and praxis -- Ethics of conviction and ethics of responsibility -- Politics and violence -- Evil as a concrete problem. (shrink)

In recent years, the concept of social capital – broadly defined as co-operative networks based on regular, personal contact and trust – has been widely applied within cross-disciplinary human science research, primarily by economists, political scientists and sociologists. In this article, I argue why and how fieldwork anthropologists should fill a gap in the social capital literature by highlighting how social capital is being built in situ. I suggest that the recent inventions of “bridging” and “bonding” social capital, e.g., inclusive (...) and exclusive types of social capital, are fruitful concepts to apply in an anthropological fieldwork setting. Thus, my case study on the relationship between local people and newcomers in the rural Danish marginal municipality of Ravnsborg seeks to reveal processes of bridging/bonding social capital building. Such a case study at the micro level has general policy implications for a cultural clash between two different groups by demonstrating the complexity of a social capital mix where bonding social capital strongly prevails. This ultimately leads to a “social trap” (Rothstein 2005), implying widespread distrust and serious social and economic costs for a whole population. (shrink)

A presentation, lucid and concise, of Aquinas' chief philosophical views, set against the historical background out of which they developed and supplemented by an appraisal of their present-day significance. Fr. Copleston's writing is precise without being elaborately technical, simple without being superficial; he succeeds in saying something both to the general reader and to the philosophical specialist.--L. H. E.

Quelle différence y a-t-il entre des règles de droit et des ordres appuyés de menaces? Qu'est-ce qu'une obligation juridique et en quoi se trouve-t-elle apparentée à une obligation morale? Quelle est la nature des règles et dans quelle mesure le droit consiste-t-il en des règles? Qu'est-ce que la justice et en quoi diffère-t-elle du reste de la morale?Au cours d'une discussion approfondie et séparée de ces problèmes récurrents, l'auteur relève une série d'éléments d'une importance essentielle pour la compréhension du droit, (...) et réalise un nouveau départ dans la théorie du droit. L'ouvrage comporte une nouvelle analyse des notions de validité juridique, de souveraineté, et de fondement d'un système juridique, un nouvel examen du droit naturel et du positivisme juridique, une discussion originale des limites du formalisme dans l'élaboration de la décision judiciaire, et un examen de la nature du droit international.Le texte est complété par des notes bibliographiques détaillées et la discussion de thèses émises par des auteurs contemporains et plus anciens. Cette deuxième édition s'accompagne en outre d'une postface posthume, publiée sous la responsabilité de P.A. Bulloch et J. Raz. (shrink)

Où se trouve le sérieux? L'auteur se pose cette question peu commune, et se met en quête d'une réponse. Il propose une articulation du sérieux selon les modes épistémologique, esthétique et éthique, pour l'approcher indirectement par le feint, le comique et le léger. Il s'attaque d'abord au problème que pose une quête du sérieux par le " feint ", ce qui le conduit à des interprétations originales du doute cartésien, du langage philosophique et de la connaissance scientifique : il distingue (...) le feint du fictif et du faux, mais constate aussi que le feint a tendance à se transformer en l'un ou en l'autre. L'auteur s'aventure ensuite dans le domaine esthétique où, à partir d'une critique de la théorie bergsonienne du rire, il développe sa propre interprétation du comique ; il soutient que la musique est l'art relativement le plus sérieux, mais que le sérieux comme tel est absent de l'art. Passant à la morale, il se voit obligé d'abord de s'expliquer avec les existentialistes français, ennemis déclarés du sérieux, puis, après une franche appréciation du sérieux de notre époque, d'admettre finalement que le léger y joue un rôle essentiel aussi. Distinguant en plus le sérieux du fanatique, l'auteur tente de préciser les rapports entre le sérieux et la foi, la Bible, et la pensée kierkegaardienne. Il conclut que la philosophie, et plus particulièrement la métaphysique, est le ressort du sérieux, mais que le philosophe est tenu par son sérieux même de chercher toujours plus loin. Le livre est écrit sous la forme de carnets, dans un style clair et engageant ; non dépourvu d'humour, il s'adresse à tout lecteur philosophiquement averti. (shrink)