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

Displaying: 61-70 of 1237 documents


articles in english
61. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 51
Jay G. Williams Absolute Skepticism, Lao Zi and Krishnamurti
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Ordinary skepticism is based upon some form of certainty. One may be skeptical about the claims of religion because one accepts the certainties of science or some philosophical argument. One may be skeptical about a certain investment strategy because one believes in various proven economic principles. Absoluteskepticism, on the other hand, has no such certainty upon which to rely. Every standpoint, including absolute skepticism itself, is open to doubt. Thus absolute skepticism is not another philosophical position but raises severe doubt about all philosophy and all knowledge. In this paper I will explore some of the implications of absolute skepticism and how Lao Zi and Jiddu Krishnamurti (1895-1986) may serve as possible representatives of absolute skepticism.
articles in chinese
62. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 51
Hui-Ling Wu 老子論人與自然
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The relationship between mankind and nature is a precarious one at best; at once seemingly irreconcilable and yet there is still certain interdependency. In discussing this relationship we need not merely touch upon modern science or environmentalism as the ancient Chinese thinker Lao-tzu had something to say on the matter in the pre-Qin period of Chinese history. But Lao-tzu writes not merely about the relationship between mankind and its environment, taking theterm ‘nature’ in a much broader sense. I would like to discuss Lao-tzu’s idea of nature from the evolution of the meaning of the term, the relationship between mankind and nature and one of establishment and co-existence. This paper will consider how mankind and nature have an interdependent coexistencethat often turns into contradictory and at times conflicting circumstances. It will divide the relationship between mankind and nature into three categories, namely“mankind and natural conscience,” “mankind and other objects” and “mankind and the natural environment” an pose questions as to how to use Lao-tzi’s thought to establish a “coexistence” between mankind and nature.
articles in korean
63. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 51
Jeong-Jun Choi 서법(筮法)의 관점에서 바라본 천부경과 주역의 象數論
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In the Choui, the way of worldly change is presented with symbols of Yin and Yang, but the actual situations are discussed with the phase of Gue Hyo (卦爻). And, the operation to determine the phase of Gue Hyo is made by the number. So, the phase number of Gue Hyo and the way order always go along. When we call theoperation that reveals the future world with the specific phase of Gue Hyo as the Jeom (Prediction) of Choui, the Jeom is operated with the number. At this time, the operation method of the number is called Seobeop. In this paper, by examining the Seobeop in the book of Hongbeomhwangeuk (洪範皇極) along with that in Choui, the numerological research will be carried out about the coincidence and difference between the Samjaeron (Three element theory) in theCheonbugeong and the Yin-Yang theory of Choui in the Seobeop.
64. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 51
Yonghao Yuan Lao Tzu and Zhuang Tzu’s Critique of Confucian Theory of Moral Community
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
What is called theory of moral community is a socialpolitical idea that was established by Confucius and Mencius on the base of political practice of Yao, Shun, Yu and King of Chou and that was used as ideology of ancient Chinese Empire. Lao Tzu and Zhuang Tzu criticized the theory of moral community and established their naturalistic philosophical system. Lao Tzu said in the first chapter of Tao Te Ching that “The Tao is too great to be described by the name Tao. If it could be named so simply, it would not be the eternal Tao”. If Tao which is indispensable to mortal fortune can be described, it must have existed in discourse of human beings; If the important pole that accords with fact can be named, it must have named by human beings. So people who lived in ancient times regarded the political idea of Yao, Shun, Yu and King of Chou as Tao that has been justified. At the same time they named Yao, Shun, Yu and King of Chou as sons of Heaven who inherited the vocation of Heaven. Hence by all appearances,Lao Tzu was denying the validity of traditional social-political idea. And Lao Tzu thought the traditional social-political practice, in fact, had kept away from intrinsic morality and switched to extrinsic criterions. Zhuang Tzu, as an inheritor of Lao Tzu, criticized the moral community of Confucius straight from the shoulder. First, according to Zhuang Tzu’s opinion, the system of demise is a way of handing over and taking over power accorded with particular instance of the time which was chosen by Yao, Shun and Yu, but it is not a perfect and universal political pattern as Confucius thought. Second, Zhuang Tzu enumerated many immoral behaviors done by these sons of Heaven, on the one hand, on the other hand he regarded the Confucian politics of all over the world was an hegemonic politics in essence which would destroy human’s moral faith on their autonomy. Contrary to Confucian theory of moral community, Lao Tzu brought forward a social idea of “a little state with a small population" which was often misunderstood as “a small state with a little population”, in fact the idea of “a little state with a small population" is a naturalistic political idea that will safeguard and realize freedom, equality and plural values by weakening compulsion of state and lusts of human beings furthest. Lao Tzu and Zhuang Tzu’s critique and reflection of Confucian theory of moral community, with their social-political idea of “a little state with a small population" will be very helpful to establish correct historical consciousness and build wonderful future society.
articles in english
65. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 50
Kevin B. Anderson Unilinearism and Multilinearism in Marx’s Thought
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Marx concentrated on Western Europe and North America in his core writings, but discussions of Asia, the Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe, and Latin America are scattered throughout his work. In the Communist Manifesto (1848) and his writings for the New York Tribune Marx posited a universal theory of historical and economic development in which non-Western societies represented backwardness, but could progress into modernity with the external impetus of the world market. Later, especially in the Grundrisse (1857-58) and the recently available Ethnological Notebooks of 1879-82, Marx gradually altered this implicitly unilinear model, replacing it with a more multilinear one in which non-Western societies (in which he included Russia) might be able to embark upon an alternate form of modernity that would offer a new challenge to capitalist modernity. The basis of this alternate form was economic, in the “communal” property forms that he saw as underlying many Asian societies, as opposed to Western-style private property.
66. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 50
Pavo Barišić Does Globalization Threaten Democracy?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The topic of this article is the relation between the modern process of globalization and democracy. The agenda starts with the concept of globalization, its different meanings and various layers, traps and paradoxes, consequences and effects, advantages and disadvantages in the horizon of contemporary life. Following a brief introduction into the theme, the article outlines a short historic philosophical review into the development of globalization from theancient times to the contemporary world. The focus of the philosophical view is that of two significant authorities and opposite approaches in the process of developing ‘World Society’ – Immanuel Kant and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Kant explained the means to the status of ‘World Civility’ as a ‘Natural Purpose’. Hegel exposed the necessity of the development of world history to the state of global freedom. The question: Does the process of making global society threaten democracy in the modern world - is the key issue nowadays. All agree that the globalization process diminishes the area of the authentic political acting. Democracy originates from the ‘polis’ or small town republic and is a symbol of the government in the small political community. The step from the polis democracy to the national state democracy was the result of change from the direct to the representative democracy. The transition from the national to the supranational and global politics requires new essential transformation of the being of democracy.
67. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 50
Thummapudi Bharathi Dr. Ambedkar’s Philosophy: A Step towards Total Humanism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The one great quality of Socratic gift is that thinking as an activity continues but not repetitively but every time thinking takes place, it takes place a new. Thinking is the one activity that cannot be repeated like prayers and other pieties. All philosophical thinking is new thinking; it has to be new in order to be thinking. Philosophy had to become the handmaid of sociology and could not be allowed to remain surrogate sociology. When this happened new concepts or new conceptualizations became the need of the hour: in the place of the age-old hierarchic social stratification a novel concept of materialism had to be inducted - after all matter is what matters. And in India morally entangled sociology was holding down the rich human resources of the sub-continent and a development-oriented ideology had to convert this moral society into a legal society: An unlegislated, unlegislatable society is condemned to be unstable andcollapsible; in its place a stable, legislatable society had to be created. With this felt-need Dr. Ambedkar came into the Indian political arena and gave a modernist rethinking to the outmoded Indian social structure: His hallmark was think to change.
68. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 50
Ömür Birler Political (or) Philosophy? A Critical Account of Leo Strauss’s Response to the Crisis of Modernity
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Leo Strauss has generally been regarded as an historian of ideas, albeit a very unusual one. He wrote many very momentous commentaries on the major figures in the history of political thought; yet Strauss’ main intellectual quest was to take himself back in the history, to classical antiquity and to the fountainhead of political philosophy, Plato. In this paper, however, I am mostly interested in the philosophical nature of Strauss’s basic dissatisfaction with modernity and with the adequacy of his criticisms. I shall focus attention on his well-known book On Tyranny, his claim that the politics in the modern age is inescapably defined by a tyrannical rule and his criticisms that the contemporary political science is unable to diagnose the symptoms of this present-day disease, and finally his attempt to revive political philosophy in its original sense. In addressing these issues, this paper raises a fundamental criticism: Strauss’s approach jeopardizes political philosophy-i.e. his very inquiry-by ultimately putting philosophy against politics, and politics against philosophy. I will begin with a few remarks about what Strauss understood as the problem of modernity. Then I will introduce the question of tyranny which stands as the key notion for grasping not only Strauss’s criticism of contemporary politics but also as the treatment for it. Finally, the discussion of On Tyranny, I hope, will shed light on Strauss’s conception of political philosophy and will open the stage for a critical discussion of his views.
69. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 50
Aleksander Bobko Evolution of the Concept of Justice
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The aim of this paper is to analyze what kind of understanding of justice prevails at the beginning of the 21st century. I will shortly show the evolution of justice, concerning on the ancient and Enlightenment understandings of this concept. I shall attempt to justify the thesis that in the contemporary world the factors that play the most important part in the evaluation of justice are aesthetic ones. The essence of the aesthetic evaluation I will describe by refer to the Kant’s “Critique of Judgment” where he analyses the specific character of the judgments of beauty. I will try to show that the characteristics which Kant ascribed to beauty havebeen transferred by modern philosophy to moral judgments and categories – specially to the judgment concerning justice. Finally I will focus on the contemporary dispute concerning economic human rights – this is a good concrete example for my thesis that today our understanding of justice (or better “social justice”) is based on the aesthetics arguments.
70. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 50
Piotr Boltuc The Four Pillars of Contemporary Political Philosophy
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
We can define all political theories pertinent in contemporary modern societies using a model based on only two variables. The first variable can be characterized as a spectrum between economic right and left wing theories. The spectrum can be easily defined by a strictly economic tradeoff of the desired level of taxation juxtaposed to the desired level of social services. The second variable can be defined as a distinction between liberal-individualisticand communitarian conception of persons.This leads to four positions, the four pillars of contemporary political philosophy: left wing liberalism (popular liberalism), right win liberalism (popular libertarianism), left wing communitarianism (popular socialist communitarianism) and right wing communitarianism (thetraditionalist stripe of conservatism). The problem is that the last of those positions has not been well presented in philosophical literature.