|
1.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Editor
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
George F. McLean
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
3.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Andrzej Walicki
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
4.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Eugeniusz Kabatc
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
5.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Walery E. Choroszewski
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
6.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Walter Wiesław Gołębiewski
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
7.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Józef L. Krakowiak
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
8.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Edward Demenchonok
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
This essay combines information on the recent ISUD Sixth World Congress Humanity at the Turning Point: Rethinking Nature, Culture, and Freedom and some reflections inspired by presentations and discussions at the congress. It is focused on the presentation of one of the keynote speakers, Karl-Otto Apel, entitled “Discourse Ethics, Democracy, and International Law: Toward a Globalization of Practical Reason”. Apel argued that the transcendental-pragmatic foundation of morality serves as the ultimate basis for the universal conception of law, e.g., of human rights. It establishes the transcendental basis of the idea of democracy, and at the same time establishes a regulative principle for a possible critique of the democratic states. Apel discussed the question of a political order of law able to represent the idea of human rights. In his approach to it, he referred to Kant’s idea of “a federation of free states” (as opposite to a “world state”) in the solution of the problem of a cosmopolitan system He noticed the tension between two orientations of international law: one towards “human rights” and hence a cosmopolitan law of single citizens and the other towards the sovereignty of single states. He asserted that the universal conception of law cannot be reduced to the legislative autonomy of any state. Consequently, the universal conception of human rights cannot be adequately realized either by particular democratic states or by a world state as a despotic superpower. Apel concluded that an adequate institution for the current debate regarding the issues of global peace and security can only be a federation of nations like the UN, the meta-institution of global discourse and the political representation of international law. At the heart of the essay is Kant’s cosmopolitan ideal and its relevance for today’s discussions about peace and security. Attention is paid to the attempts to rethink Kant by Karl-Otto Apel, Jürgen Habermas, Jaques Derrida, Martha Nussbaum, and David Held, among others. Some of the authors indicate the tension between the sovereignty ofstates and the universality of human rights. Other authors criticize cosmopolitanism as overly unifying in contrast to the socio-cultural diversity of societies. The essay draws a contrast between two tendencies concerning international relations. One is the current neoconservative course toward American domination throughout the world. An alternative to this is the philosophers’ call for “the cosmopolitan model of democracy” and strengthening the network of transnational grass-roots movements and international institutions, including the UN.
|
|
|
9.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Charles Brown
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
10.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Andrew Targowski
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
This paper investigates the future of civilization in terms of its threats and possible solutions. The future of human civilization may enter a stage of crisis in the 2050–2500 years if the known reserves of the strategic resources will be depleted. Even worse, about the year 5000 all potential reserves of the strategic resources will be used up, if the population will grow constantly. The solution, which can prevent this decline, at least at its current pace, is in the development of the Universal Civilization, which should minimize conflicts and trigger dialog within mankind for its good sake. In this approach one can seek the development of wise humans, who will be able to self-sustain their civilization. Otherwise our time is limited and we will not survive our knowledge, which we have been developed so far and may look as a lost time. This grand issue defines the philosophical inquiry—what to do to survive? Has any effort sense, if we know that the Sun will stop heat us and afterwards the Earth will be a dead planet?
|
|
|
11.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Andrew Targowski
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
12.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
Werner Krieglstein
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
13.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
14.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 11/12
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
15.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 9/10
Andrzej Walicki
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
16.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 9/10
Andrzej Walicki
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
17.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 9/10
Isaiah Berlin
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
18.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 9/10
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
19.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 9/10
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|
|
20.
|
Dialogue and Universalism:
Volume >
15 >
Issue: 9/10
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
|
|
|