Cosmic pluralism - Factbites
 Where results make sense
About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   PR   |   Contact us  

Topic: Cosmic pluralism

    Note: these results are not from the primary (high quality) database.

Related Topics

In the News (Tue 11 Dec 18)

 Excerpt from The Lost Promise of Patriotism: Debating American Identity, 1890-1920 by Jonathan M. Hansen
Rather than regarding cosmopolitan patriotism as a means to reconcile universalism with cultural pluralism or liberalism with nationalism, we do better to view cosmopolitan patriotism as a site on which these and other ideologies conflict.
The point was not to obliterate nations, she later recognized, but to impress upon national communities that their own rights and privileges could never be secure if they came at the expense of others.
Far from impinging on individuality, the cosmopolitans asserted, a nation genuinely committed to liberty could marshal the political, economic, and cultural resources required to safeguard individual autonomy from the illiberal outcomes of a corporate-industrial, mass-market society. /Misc/Chicago/315843.html

 Dreams of Difference: CHAPTER ONE
Deep ecologists and postmodern theorists alike are suspicious of Wilber"s view about human evolution, because his neo-Hegelian theocentrism (the goal of human history is attainment of absolute consciousness) is all too reminiscent of totalitarian and ecologically destructive regimes, which assert that they are the historical manifestation of the iron laws and goals of cosmic evolution.
Leading deep ecologist, Arne Naess, however, celebrates cultural and intellectual pluralism both as an end in itself and because it strengthens the deep ecology movement, defined in terms of the Deep Ecology Platform (DEP) that was devised by Naess and George Sessions in 1984.
Deep ecologists stress that all life is to be protected not only because of its instrumental value, but also because it has a worth of its own. /books/pages/6283/6283.ch01.html   (13790 words)

 Books in Review: Against Liberalism
Kekes concludes Against Liberalism with a suggestion that what is worthwhile in liberalism might best be preserved by a conservative pluralism, one that recognized the incompatibility of human ends, the necessity of difficult trade-offs, and the existence of certain goods—among them, security, civility, and peace—not given much time of day by contemporary liberals.
But Kekes’ belief in the death of God (he describes it as "the absence of cosmic justice"), along with the unresolved status of human nature in his thought, may prevent him from giving an adequate theoretical treatment to these problems in the future.
Kekes does not sufficiently stress how the contemporary variant of liberalism is at far remove from the earlier, richer, and more modest liberalism of Montesquieu, Tocqueville, or, in our century, Raymond Aron, Bertrand de Jouvenel, and Isaiah Berlin. /ftissues/ft9801/reviews/anderson.html   (13790 words)

Creative involution is thus ultimately synonymous with a sort of cosmic expressionism through which Nature ceaselessly generates differentiation by cutting across any and all boundaries.
It cannot assemble its actual parts that remain external to each other: The Whole is never 'given.' And, in the actual, an irreducible pluralism reigns--as many worlds as living beings, all 'closed' on themselves.
The evolution of life really continues, as we have shown, an initial impulsion: this impulsion, which has determined the development of the chlorophyllian function in the plant and of the sensori-motor system in the animal, brings life to more and more efficient acts by the fabrication and use of more and more powerful explosives. /pmc/text-only/issue.900/11.1hansen.txt   (12886 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)

  About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   Press   |   Contact us  
Copyright © 2005-2007 Usage implies agreement with terms.