>> Go to Current Issue

Journal of Philosophical Research

Volume 37, Issue Supplement, 2012
Selected Papers from the XXII World Congress of Philosophy

Table of Contents

Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:


  • Issue: Supplement

Displaying: 21-30 of 39 documents


conflict and tolerance
21. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Ruben Apressyan The Principle of Toleration: Under What Conditions?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
As a moral principle toleration is universal, but only in the sense that potentially it is addressed to every rational and moral agent. The question is whether this principle is appropriate in all situations and what are those moral agents who recognize its practical actuality for them? Toleration is not an absolute ethical principle, but one among others in the context of a particular moral system. It should be given a proper place in the hierarchy of principles. Understanding toleration as the absolute or even overriding principle may lead in the face of obvious and directly threatening wrong to its use as an umbrella for adoptive or escapist behavior. The limits to toleration are given by basic and minimal ethical task to resist evil. The principle of active opposition to evil by all possible means is prior to the principle of toleration.
globalization and cosmopolitanism
22. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Alexander N. Chumakov Globalization and Cosmopolitanism in the Context of Modernity
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Globalization and cosmopolitanism, on the one hand, and autarchy and nationalism, on the other, are two extremes between which humankind is destined to balance constantly, due to diversity and the natural confrontation of various cultural and civilizational systems by which it is represented. At the same time, globalization and cosmopolitanism are natural phenomena and are the most important characteristics of social development. That is why we should not put obstacles in the way of their dissemination and rooting in social life, but to aim at deeper understanding of their essence and what is hidden behind them in order, preventing ourselves from rash evaluations and one-sided conclusions, to contribute to the formation of a stable and just global world.
23. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Cyrille B. Koné Mondialisation et cosmopolitisme
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Rather than unifying the peoples in the world, globalization divides them into zones: either developed and prosperous, or underdeveloped and ravaged by poverty. How, then, can one imagine economic and financial globalization as a current implementation of cosmopolitanism, which abolishes the old fratricidal strife and seals the reunion between men across national borders? And how can we not doubt the cosmopolitan order facing the proliferation of identity claims, the rise of competitors due to globalization? Are we condemned to live in a world ever more unequal, more “hard” for the losers, the weak? What space is there in philosophy to think the new solidarity? This paper sketches some answers to these questions.
24. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Peter McCormick Globalization and Cosmopolitanism: Claims, Attitudes, and Experiences of Friendship
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper focuses on four brief points only: first, the general character of today’s understandings of globalization; then, one substantive danger that arises from this general understanding of globalization; third, by contrast, the universal character of just one of the most important traditional understandings of cosmopolitanism; and, finally, on what might bring together a certain globalization and a certain cosmopolitanism into something more than either just a so-called European or African “anthropocentric ethics.” The key conceptual resource highlighted is that of friendship.
25. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Francis Cheneval Mind the Gap: Introductory Thoughts on Globalization and Cosmopolitanism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Globalization stands for systemic integration, mainly economical and technological. It is related to the expansion of the free market economy, trade, and the global integration of systems of communication and information technology. As such, globalization co-exists with strong cultural affirmations of individual and collective difference and with political fragmentation. Cosmopolitanism needs to take into consideration cultural and political conditions of human existence. The cosmopolitan imperative to form a political community beyond the nation state is a process-guiding principle or regulative ideal, not an institutional blueprint. Cosmopolitanism needs to stress the voluntary character of integration among self-governed peoples who are willing to enhance the transnational rights and freedoms of their citizens while accepting institutional constraints.
bioethics, environmental ethics, and future generations
26. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Jean-Yves Goffi La communauté morale et son extension
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
On se propose de fédérer les questions relevant de la bioéthique, des générations futures et de l’éthique environnementale autour du thème de la communauté morale. On examinera certains problèmes théoriques posés par l’élargissement de celle-ci. On soutiendra qu’il n’est possible d’y faire face qu’en se ralliant à une forme d’anthropocentrisme. Toutefois, il s’agit d’un anthropocentrisme méta-axiologique, pas d’un anthropocentrisme normatif: il ne saurait être question de soutenir que les intérêts des être humains ont, toujours et partout, priorité sur les intérêts des autres créatures.
27. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Vittorio Hösle Why Does the Environmental Problem Challenge Ethics and Political Philosophy?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This essay discusses the challenges that the problem of environmental destruction represents for both ethics and political philosophy. It defends universalism as the only ethical theory capable of dealing adequately with the issue, but recognizes three limitations of it: First, its strong anthropocentrism (as in Kant); second, the meta-ethics of rational egoism (Spinoza and Hobbes); and, third, the reduction of ethics to symmetric relations in the mores of modernity. With regard to political philosophy, universalism rejects the idea that consensus is a necessary and sufficient condition for morality; it points out that democratic rule is rule by majority, only rarely by unanimous consensus, and insists on the fact that even a unanimous consensus does not guarantee justice if the people affected by a decision are not identical with those entitled to make it. The latter is the case in issues of intergenerational justice. The essay ends by opposing a formalist and proceduralist concept of democracy with one that understands democracy as one reasonable tool for achieving a substantive concept of justice.
28. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Marie-Hélène Parizeau Towards an Ethic of Technology? Nanotechnology and the Convergence of Applied Ethics
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The hypothesis I develop involves that we have been witnessing, during the last ten years or so, an interpenetration in the area of applied ethics of certain concepts originally belonging to different areas of ethics, namely bioethics, environmental ethics, and also business ethics. Certain concepts such as “future generations,” “consent,” “precautionary principle,” “intrinsic value,” “global governance,” “sustainable development,” or “scientific uncertainty” are becoming “thick ethical concepts,” in the terminology of metaethics; or in the terminology of American pragmatism: “living beliefs.” They are now charged with strong moral contents that unfolds a new horizon of meaning at the heart of Western Modernity, a horizon largely defined by science and technical actions. Nevertheless, is this conceptual convergence in the area of applied ethics the sign of the coming of a new ethic of technique? I will discuss this topic taking as an example the case of nanotechnology.
tradition, modernity, and post-modernity: eastern and western perspectives
29. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Bengt Kristensson Uggla Nowhere is always Now and Here
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper presents a critical reflection on the attempts to determine the historical meaning of the present situation as a philosophical topic. To determine the specific interpretative character of the diagnostics of our contemporary situation—beyond both absolute knowledge and arbitrary thinking—this paper argues that “now” and “here” need to be defined in accordance with the concepts of “historical time” and “inhabited space.” This has been made possible as a result of the recent metamorphosis within the hermeneutical tradition.
30. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 37 > Issue: Supplement
Elmar Holenstein Overcoming Dichotomies
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
A symposium with the title “Tradition, Modernity and Postmodernity: Eastern and Western Perspectives” is in need of a subtitle auch as “Overcoming Dichotomies.” Societies, as well as historical epochs, are complex and overlapping phenomena. A clash between complex civilizations will naturally be a complex encounter. The conflicting parties will always find kindred souls on the other side, motivated by converging interests and values. Modernity and secularism are not inseparable, and tradionality and secularism are not incompatible (see Confucian politology). Two main philosophical reasons for the complexity of civilizations are the heterarchical structure of the human value system and the creative potential of human individuals. These highest values cannot be optimally realized at the same time. The potential for self-fulfillment that every human being has, thanks to his mental structures, excedes the potential for self-fulfillment a singular culture can provide.