Particularism v.s Universalism

Całą książkę można zakupić na stronie wydawnictwa: https://wydawnictwo.umk.pl/pl/products/5530/nomadyczna-europa-poststrukturalistyczne-granice-europejskiego-uniwersalizmu

Ebook dostępny jest tutaj: https://www.ibuk.pl/fiszka/253907/nomadyczna-europa-poststrukturalistyczne-granice-europejskiego-uniwersalizmu.html

In seiner Kritik der Moralphilosophie der westlichen Tradition gab sich Richard Rorty als humaner, engagierter Aufklärer. Gleichgültig, ob ontologisch, mentalistisch oder linguistisch argumentiert worden sei: Platon, Kant und Habermas hätten auf je verschiedenem Wege behauptet, sie könnten aus der Vernunftbegabung, einem zureichendem Differenzkriterium, Fundamente für moralische Prinzipien ableiten. Das habe Varianten des sittlichen Universalismus hervorgebracht, die heute ein für allemal passé seien. Aus der Perspektive der kritischen Theorie wird im vorliegenden Paper gezeigt, was dabei verloren geht.

WALLERSTEIN, Immanuel (2008). L'universalisme europeu. La retòrica del poder. Traducció de Maite Insa. València: Publicacions de la Universitat de València. Col·lecció: Assaig, 128 p.
WALLERSTEIN, Immanuel (2007). Universalismo europeo. El discurso del poder. Traducción de Josefina Anaya. Madrid: Siglo XXI, 123 p.
La verdad es que nos ha tocado vivir una época de grandes transformaciones. En apenas dos décadas hemos pasado del canto triunfal del liberalismo político y económico de Fukuyama ante el derrumbe de la URSS a la constatación de otro derrumbe, esta vez el de la propia hegemonía estadounidense. En estos momen-tos nos hallamos inmersos en una grave crisis económica mundial que puede arras-trar consigo al modelo de liberalismo vigente durante la última época. Y es que en un espacio de tiempo muy breve, la teoría económica oficial ha quebrantado sus propios dogmas y ha pasado a defender el gasto público, las nacionalizaciones y el proteccionismo. No obstante, es un buen momento para un tipo de filosofía política: aquella que dialoga con otras disciplinas aparte de la suya, y esto es así porque estas transformaciones producirán importantes cambios en nuestras representaciones del mundo. Por ello no es de extrañar que autores de variado signo, como John Gray en un reciente texto, comiencen a advertirnos de la magnitud del cambio que se avecina: «Estamos ante un giro geopolítico de dimensiones históricas que está alterando el equilibrio de poder en el mundo de manera irrevocable. La era del liderazgo mundial de Estados Unidos, que comenzó en la II Guerra Mundial, ha terminado.» (Gray, J. «Mucho más que una crisis financiera», El País, 11/10/2008). Un poco más cerca, Fernando Vallespín nos da pistas sobre el tipo de giro de que se trata: «Frente a la prioridad que en la anterior fase posmoderna acabó teniendo lo cultural -en un sentido lato-, se alza ahora lo económico como el factor central de la actividad humana.» (Vallespín, F. «¡Bienvenidos a la neomoderni-dad!», El País, 23/11/2008).

In this paper I will discuss the romantic love from a cultural anthropological aspect
focusing on the problem of the universal and relative features of love. In what terms are the definitions of love general? How can one decide that he or she is in love? Do all the people around the world feel and define their feelings and experiences regarding to love the same way? What role do the surrounding social network, the society and culture play in defining love? I aim to answer these questions on the basis of my research in the Gyimes Region of Romania. I argue that romantic love is a biosociocultural phenomenon: such a drive determined by biological and evolutionary factors and would be a numerous different sociocultural meanings. Love may be celebrated, admired, or the love passion may be kept down by certain cultural habits, social-economic rules and institutions, as it emerges like an underground river and confuses social relationships. It is certain that in the above mentioned region the romantic, passionate love has only started to be treated as a positive thing during the last few decades and it became the basis for the choice of a partner and a spouse only from the 2000s. Earlier the love was treated as subversive phenomena and tried to keep it under control. It is typical to the near past and present days that behind the
relatively universal “symptoms” of love, depending on the circumstances, they assume
something different: romantic love or illness, curse or love magic.

Gre za prvo celovito monografijo v slovenskem jeziku s področja teološke etike po Drugem vatikanskem koncilu. Zavest o nujnosti etičnega diskruza je tudi znotraj naše družbe čedalje večja in tudi
teologija se želi dejavno vključiti v razmišljanje, kaj je dobro za človeka kot posameznika, za človeško družbo in za celotno stvarstvo. Monografija predstavlja velik prispevek tako k opredelitvi etične metodologije kot tudi k uvajanju izrazoslovja na tem področju. Vsebina knjige je na ravni zadnjih dognanj na tem področju v svetovnem merilu.

Moralisches Handeln, lehrte Kant, ist praktische Vernunft, freie Selbstbestimmung. Das Wesentliche »jeder Moral ist, dass sie ein langer Zwang ist«, schrieb Nietzsche (1886, 91). Wir haben es hier mit mehr zu tun als mit inkompatiblen Paradigmen der philosophischen Tradition. Die beiden Aussagen widersprechen einander, weil sie die gegensätzlichen Bestimmungen benennen, die in der Sache selbst liegen: Keine freie Selbstbestimmung ohne Selbstbeherrschung; kein Zwang ohne den Widerstand, den er hervorruft und aus dem sich Freiheit herausbilden kann. Im Buch wird diese Dialektik ethischer Grundbegriffe diskutiert.

Dostoevsky analyzed Western society in its religious, political and social manifestations and at every opportunity related his metaphysical thoughts to the present political situation and possible future of the West. Although he criticized the West in all
its aspects, he thought that the main antagonism was between Russia, the prospective leader of the West, and the Ottomans, the representative of the East and he saw the Turks as the main enemy. Dostoevsky criticized the West with the intention of finding a remedy for its present crisis. On the contrary he criticized and attacked to the Turks in order to bring the East to her knees. According to the universal ideal of Dostoevsky, Eastern peoples are predestined to succumb to the Western powers led by Russia and serve it as a colonized entity. Thus the universal mission, to which Dostoevsky assigned Russia, is also a proposal for a new Russian-centered Eastern policy for the West.
Dostoyevsky claims that Russia should capture Constantinople in order to realize its historical mission and take the place of Byzantine Empire. However, this Eastern policy which stems from the ideal of Third Rome has upset the balances in the Western World and driven a wedge between Russia and the other Western powers. At this point, the Eastern question has become a Western question for Russia and Dostoevsky.

The philosophical and religious ideas of Simone Weil bear on theory of history and historiography in ways not previously explored. They amount to a view of history as a consequence of the original creation, but they also generally exclude theodicy. By examining these ideas we see some of the ways in which to develop a theory of history centered on a conception of moral understanding that is impartialist and universal. For Weil such understanding is both inside of and outside of history. This leads to an approach to human history that centers on the moral dilemmas and choices of historical actors and that matches the force of compassion with that of power. Under an approach inspired by Weil’s ideas, the historian’s work of understanding can be an experience of moral growth.

This article revisits the dispute between Moses Mendelssohn and Rabbi Jacob Emden on the question of Jewish chosenness and Universalism, based on a renewed analysis of their correspondence concerning Maimonides’ synthesis of the Noachide laws. Whereas Mendelssohn advocates for a universalism of Reason, Emden develops a surprising idea of universalism as mediated by divine commandment. This article proposes to uncover the philosophical layers beneath the Mendelssohn-Emden debate, which permits to highlight the theoretical originality of Emden’s idea of Jewish universality, often regarded as dogmatic and pre-modern in comparison to Mendelssohn’s enlightened thinking. More importantly, this paper demonstrate how, would Mendelssohn have accepted Emden’s doctrine of universalism, he could have find a solution to one of the most important problems he struggles with in his book Jerusalem, i.e., the contradiction between universalism and chosenness.

This book examines the relationship between globalization and religion from a variety of perspectives. After establishing working definitions for both core concepts, it considers certain conceptual homologies between globalization and religion, but also several points of divergence. The universalist and universalizing dimensions of both notions are compared alongside some reflections on the differences between religion and ideology—two terms often used interchangeably. The central theme is globalization and religion in the contemporary era, beginning with the historical role of religion in the emergence of the global system of empires, markets, and eventually nation-states, examining how world political powers have at times articulated their claims within and through religious frameworks. As we enter the most immediate period of globalization following World War II, we consider religious responses to various dimensions of globalization as expressed through new social movements and new theologies. We also consider the views of those who have argued that contemporary globalization, representing as it does a relative decline in the importance of the nation-state as an actor on the world stage, paves the way for non-state forces—such as cultures and religions—to dominate global affairs.

The rule of law has become a watchword in international politics over the last few decades. It has been transformed from a descriptum into a prescriptum, a criterion for judging legal orders, transferred from the legal to the political sphere. For Hungary, its impact coincided with the dissolution of the Soviet empire and the advance of globalization in our unipolar world. But what did not become, could not become, an operative term in law, since it is not linked to a definition of facts that would allow it to become legally ascertained and established as a set of facts constituting a legal case. Because, by its very nature, it is not a class concept with sharp boundaries, but a concept of order that can only be clarified by characterization and through examples. It is what literature calls essentially contested, and what institutions and authors are constantly expanding with competing formulations, which has long since led to its internal emptying out. In its origin and development, it has never been anything other than the accumulated experience of civilizational self-growth in the operation of the law by the state, which has evolved in responses to the challenges of various places and times. That is, it is particular. And the way in which our present attempts to universalize this—in which, of course, mutual learning processes between nations and ages are also involved—is a mere artificial projection, which conceals the Westʼs urge to export the values that guide it. Not a yes or no category, but an ideal towards which we strive. Contradictory, with compromises, because if we attempted to satisfy it in its entirety, the conflicting values within it could extinguish each other; consequently, only a case-by-case weighing up of these values can ensure that a balance, optimally satisfactory there and then, is achieved.

* This essay aims to argue that Karl Barth’s doctrine of the atonement necessarily leads to universalism. It seeks to prove the thesis by observing Barth’s reception of Anselm’s doctrine of the atonement. Barth’s doctrine of objective atonement develops as he distances himself from Anselm’s doctrine of the atonement.
In his Römerbrief, Barth endorses Anselm’s idea that God who is robbed of his honor must punish those who robbed him. In Church Dogmatics I/2, Barth advocates divine freedom in the incarnation with the support of Anselm’s Cur Deus Homo. Barth holds that Anselm’s doctrine of the atonement preserves both God’s freedom and the necessity of Christ’s incarnation. The positive endorsement of Anselmian motives in Cur Deus Homo continues in Church Dogmatics II/1. Barth maintains with Anselm that the sin of humanity cannot be removed by the merciful act of divine forgiveness alone.
In Church Dogmatics IV/1, however, Barth’s doctrine of the atonement diverges from that of Anselm. By over-christologizing the doctrine, Barth completes his formulation of objective atonement. He finalizes the necessity of God’s mercy at the place where Anselm firmly establishes the dignity and freedom of the will of God. In Barth’s view, God’s mercy is identified with God’s righteousness in a distinctive way where God’s mercy always takes the initiative. The change in Barth’s reception of Anselm’s doctrine of the atonement shows that Barth’s doctrine entails support for universalism.
* Key words: Karl Barth, Anselm, atonement, universalism, Allversöhnung
* 바르트가 보편구원론을 주장하는가 아닌가 하는 문제에 대해서는 —그의 신학의 다른 주제들과 마찬가지로— 다양한 답변들이 주어졌다. 어떤 학자들은 바르트가 보편구원론자가 아니라고 주장하며(조셉 베티스, 존 콜웰), 다른 학자들은 그가 보편구원론자라고 주장하고(한스 우르스 폰 발타자르, G. C. 베르카워, 올리버 크리스프), 또 다른 학자들은 바르트가 그 문제에 대해서는 일부러 답하지 않고 남겨 두었으며 그의 구원론은 보편구원론과 그렇지 않은 것으로 양분시키는 틀에 끼워 넣을 수 없다고 한다(T. F. 토런스, 조지 헌싱어). 본 논문은 바르트의 속죄론은 필연적으로 보편구원론에 봉착할 수밖에 없음을 증명하고자 한다. 이때까지의 학계에서는 바르트의 보편구원론이라는 주제에 대해서 주로 그의 예정론에 집중하여 연구해 왔다. 하지만 이 논문에서는 “바르트가 안셀무스의 속죄론을 어떻게 수용하며 또한 어떻게 반대하고 있는가”를 살펴봄으로써 이 문제에 접근하고자 한다. 이 점이 이 논문의 기여이다. 『로마서 주석』에서 바르트는, 하나님께서 자신의 명예를 실추시킨 자들을 반드시 벌해야 한다는 안셀무스의 명제를 받아들인다. 『교회교의학』 I/2에서 바르트는 안셀무스의 Cur Deus Homo의 주장을 따라 성육신에 있어서 하나님의 자유를 옹호한다. 하나님은 타락한 인간을 구원하실 수도 있고, 벌하실 수도 있는 자유를 가지신다. 하지만 인간을 구원하시기로 스스로 결정하신 이상 하나님의 지혜에 가장 맞는 방법은 오직 성육신하신 신인(神人)을 통해서 구원하시는 길이다. 이와 같은 안셀무스의 속죄론이 하나님의 자유와 그리스도의 성육신의 필요성 모두를 잘 설명해 준다고 바르트는 믿는다. 이러한 논조는 『교회교의학』 II/1에서도 이어진다. 바르트는 안셀무스에 동의하면서, 인간의 죄는 단지 신적 용서라는 자비의 행위로만으로는 제거되지 않는다고 주장한다.
바르트는 그러나 『교회교의학』 IV/1에서 안셀무스의 속죄론과 결별하기 시작한다. 속죄론을 지나치게 기독론화 함으로써, 바르트는 객관적 속죄론(혹은 보편적 화해론)의 입장으로 점점 기울어진다. 안셀무스가 하나님의 존엄과 신적 의지의 자유 모두를 확고하게 견지한 지점으로부터 바르트는 떠난다. 이제 『교회교의학』 IV/1의 바르트는 다만 하나님의 자비의 필연성만을 강조할 뿐이다. 하나님의 자비와 하나님의 정의 사이의 관계에서는 언제나 하나님의 자비가 주도권을 잡는 방식으로 역사하며, 그런 방식으로 하나님의 자비와 하나님의 정의는 일치된다고 바르트는 주장한다. 이것은 하나님의 자비와 하나님의 정의를 대등하게 보고 둘 사이의 균형을 잡는 안셀무스의 속죄론의 기본 논조를 떠난 것이다. 이렇듯, 바르트가 안셀무스의 속죄론을 수용하고 배제하는 과정을 고찰해 본다면, 후기 바르트의 속죄론은 보편구원론을 내포하고 있음을 알게 된다.
* 주제어: 칼 바르트, 안셀무스, 속죄론, 보편구원론, 보편적 화해론

„Die Menschen trachten in der Tat nach dem Guten und nicht nach der absoluten Bewahrung des Hergebrachten.“ – Von diesem positiven Menschenbild geleitet, propagiert Martha Nussbaum (1998) die Idee einer globalen Ethik, welche universale und partikuläre moralische Forderungen nicht als Widerspruch betrachtet, sondern auf Basis der aristotelischen Idee einer essentiellen conditio humana zu einer kohärenten Moraltheorie verbindet. Diese beinhaltet entgegen der relativistischen Auffassung nicht bloss den Anspruch, dass sich durch die allen Menschen gemeinsame Grundlage nicht-relative Tugenden ableiten lassen, sondern eröffnet auch die Möglichkeit, bestehende konkurrierende Wertvorstellungen zu vergleichen und  gegeneinander abzuwägen, und so einen globalen ethischen Fortschritt zu erzielen. Wie eine Untersuchung der Kritisierbarkeit der Erbsünde jedoch aufzeigt, sieht sich Nussbaums Moraltheorie selbst unter Einbezug ihres Fähigkeiten-Ansatzes mit substantiellen Einschränkungen konfrontiert.

With reference to Heidegger's history of being, this paper offers a critical examination of the political thinking of Alain Badiou, focused on his appropriation of St Paul as thinker of subjectivity. Badiou seeks to integrate Paul's "theological virtues" of faith, hope, and charity into a revolutionary philosophy of an "uprising" against the technological determination of mankind and nature, understood as the destiny  of metaphysics.

This chapter explores the theme of "immediacy" in Frantz Fanon's work, through a focus on social struggles and state authoritarianism in Pakistan.

Published in a volume commemorating 60 years of the publication of Fanon's Wretched of the Earth, edited by Nigel Gibson.

“Before the Law” (“Vor dem Gesetz”) is one of the most if not the single most commented upon of Kafka’s texts : “Helplessness seizes one face to face with this page and a half,” notes George Steiner. Has everything not already been said, been written, been thought, about this text? Like a detective, the commentator searches for the key that will once and for all resolve the enigma, unveil the mystery that hides so secretively within its depths. A mystery which we know everything depends upon. One might skeptically wonder at the discovery of yet another interpretation of “Before the Law”: “What more can be added?” he asks himself. And he may be right.  Perhaps the gates of interpretation are henceforth sealed. We may have arrived too late.
But before this text, do we not always already come too late? Has not the doorkeeper always already shut the door? The moment one realizes there is nothing to add to this text might be the very moment one realizes that, from the start, this text, though soliciting interpretation, in fact defies interpretation. We are indeed seized by helplessness. Equally impotent before this text, the first reading equals the last reading, because strictly speaking there is no first and no last here. Before this text, as before the law, we find ourselves equally exposed, equally empty, without resources. Before this text, we find ourselves, exactly like the story’s protagonist, the countryman, the Mann vom Lande: ignorant. And from this position the text inspires us infinitely. Ignorance serves therefore as my starting point in the interpretation of "Before the Law" proposed in the following study.

"This book takes on the political by developing a practice and a thought we call ‘polemicization’. We draw from the work of Jacques Rancière, for whom a polemic or disagreement does not refer to the case when one interlocutor says white and another black. Instead, it designates the conflict arising when, for example, both parties say white, yet each understands something different by whiteness. This situation forces the interlocutors to construe the scene of the validity of their claims, which is just another way of saying that the given or commonplace is never settled once and for all. We generalize the logic of this encounter and claim that disagreement is the very process through which objectivity is instituted. We develop the contours of polemicization and deepen its philosophical implications through a critical engagement with the work of contemporary theorists, such as Lefort, Schmitt, Laclau, Derrida and Žižek. In particular, we interrogate commonplace narratives of modernity, identity, difference, universality, antagonism and subjectivity. The result is a text that cuts across the boundaries between political thought, cultural studies and social theory.

Table of Contents

Preface
1. Polemic and Polemicization
1.1 Polemic and the Commonplace
1.2 The Commonplace of Political Modernity
1.3 Polemicizing the Commonplace

2. Polemicization and Political Philosophy
2.1 Polemicization and Attitude
2.2 Polemicization and the Political
2.3 Polemicization and Critique
2.4 Polemicization and Metaphysics
2.5 Polemicization and Plurality

3. Polemicizing Subjectivity
3.1 The Modern Subject
3.2 The Basic Antagonism
3.3 Outing the Subject
3.4 Who Wants to be Popular?

4. Polemicizing Universals
4.1 The Persistence of Universals
4.2 The Pragmatics of the Referent
4.3 Deliberation and Confrontation
4.4 Commonality Through Polemics"

"Il virus dell'Occidente": da oggi in libreria.

In questo libro parlo male di: Foucault, Heidegger, Agamben, Cacciari, Di Cesare, Wu Ming, Zizek, Badiou, C. Galli, Runciman, Urbinati, Ignazi, Panebianco, Giavazzi, della Loggia, Battista, Molinari, Brennan, Mearsheimer, Milanovic, Aresu, Zhok, Formenti e molti altri.

Parlo invece bene di: Hegel, Marx, Engels, Croce, Gramsci, Lukacs, Jullien, Habermas, Prospero, Illetterati, Moroncini, Tedesco, Brancaccio, Mazzucato, Bell, Pieranni, Esposito, Dal Lago, Marramao, Losurdo, Deng Xiaoping, Zhang Boying, Zhao Tingyang, Balibar, Nancy, Chomsky, Bergoglio e altrettanti.

Cerco di dare infine a Costanzo Preve il suo, nel bene come nel male.

Accattatevèllo. Il divertimento non è assicurato ma nel mio minuscolo ci ho provato.

"La pandemia di Covid-19 ha fatto emergere le contraddizioni delle  società capitalistiche, rese sempre più fragili e disuguali da decenni  di guerra ai salari e ai diritti delle classi subalterne, dallo  smantellamento del welfare e dal prevalere di forme di  coscienza ultracompetitive. Certo della propria eternità e incapace di  immaginare un modello alternativo di legame sociale, l’Occidente ha  creduto che il “virus cinese” colpisse solo i paesi arretrati o ritenuti  autoritari e che mai potesse diffondersi nelle nostre efficienti e  trasparenti democrazie tecnologiche. Invece di prendere sul serio  l’esperienza di altre realtà che hanno gestito meglio l’emergenza grazie  alla capacità dello Stato e della politica di guidare l’economia e la  produzione, subordinando gli interessi privati a quelli della  maggioranza, ha negato a essa ogni riconoscimento, fino a procurarsi da  solo un rischio estremo per eccesso di hybris.

A questa  rinuncia suicida a guardare l’alterità non è sfuggito il dibattito  filosofico: di fronte allo stato d’eccezione, sia le posizioni  dirittumaniste astratte sia il sovranismo particolarista e populista –  che dell’odierna egemonia neoliberale costituisce non l’alternativa, ma  una scissione conservatrice – condividono infatti il medesimo  atteggiamento suprematista, con il rifiuto di elaborare una forma  concreta di universalismo e di pensare una diversa configurazione del  rapporto tra individuo, società civile e Stato, ma anche una diversa  forma di convivenza tra le nazioni".

Stefano G. Azzarà (Messina, 1970) insegna Storia della filosofia all’Università di  Urbino. È segretario alla presidenza dell’Internationale Gesellschaft  Hegel-Marx e dirige la rivista scientifica “Materialismo Storico”. Il  suo lavoro si concentra sul confronto tra le grandi tradizioni  filosofiche e politiche degli ultimi due secoli: conservatorismo,  liberalismo, marxismo. Ha pubblicato diverse monografie e numerosi  articoli su riviste italiane e internazionali.

http://mimesisedizioni.it/il-virus-dell-occidente.html

INDICE

Capitolo primo
I.1. Crisi storiche e naturalismo capitalistico
I.2. Lo spettro del «totalmente altro»: la Cina e  l’Occidente
I.3. Circoscrivere il contagio o procurarsi da  soli un rischio?
I.4. Costruzione e criminalizzazione del nemico
I.5. Democrazie liberali e “regimi autoritari”  nello stato d’eccezione
I.6.  Democrazia o democrazie?
I.7. Democrazia liberale e democrazia socialista
Appendice.  Universalismo concreto e dialettica dell’inclusione nel Tianxia, la  «via del Cielo»

Capitolo secondo
II.1. Il virus dei filosofi 1. Eccezione e  repressione
II.2. Il virus dei filosofi 2. Immunizzazione e  esclusione
II.3. Il virus dei filosofi 3. L’individuo e  l’altro
II.4. Il  virus dei filosofi 4. Liberalismo e «anarchismo da Gran Signore»
II.5. Miseria della critica della biopolitica
II.6. Nihil sub sole novum?
II.7. Perché tutto cambi
II.8. Perché non cambi nulla nell’essenziale. Un  nuovo saccheggio economico?
II.9. Perché non cambi nulla nell’essenziale.  Un’ulteriore concentrazione del potere?

Capitolo terzo
III.1. Quale ritorno dello Stato?
III.2. Jones e Brennan: critica della democrazia  moderna, fine del suffragio universale e monopolio epistocratico del potere
III.3. Ripristino del liberalismo  particolaristico e capitalismo organizzato: verso uno «statalismo  autoritario»
III.3.a.  Milanović: «capitalismo meritocratico liberale» contro «capitalismo politico»
III.3.b. Mearsheimer: fine  dell’illusione dell’universalismo liberale dirittumanista e revival  del realismo particolaristico
III.3.c. Aresu: «capitalismo  politico» o trasfigurazione della riscossa delle classi dominanti?
III.4.  Sovranismo e comunitarismo
III.5.  Il “socialismo” comunitarista
III.6.  Esternalizzazione del conflitto. “Oltre destra e sinistra”
III.7. Liberalismo e sovranismo, universalismo e  particolarismo
III.8. Ricostruire la democrazia moderna

This paper aims at exploring whether the American poet laureate Robert Lee Frost (1874 - 1963) was a regional poet, regionalism being the inclination to employ local colors and elements that focus on a certain locality which could be an indication of ethnic or local pride on one hand, or a criticism of certain regional features or situations on the other.
          Frost mainly wrote poems of rural settings and characters, this could mislead the casual reader to take him as a nature poet. Through his American voice, New-England setting, and tendency to extend his vision beyond the local, he expresses an attitude that let his natives see him as a national poet; in spite of the regionality of his setting, style, and characters, while others could touch the humanitarian and universal tendencies in his poetry.
The paper opens with an introduction in which the definition of regionalism is discussed with reference to the literary implications of the term; the discussion is supported by various literary examples from world literature in general and American literature in particular. Then the regional features of the poet's writings are explained; they include, but are not limited to, the regional setting of New-England, the Puritan heritage, and the influences of American historical events on his attitude; especially the indictment of the Native American-Indian. The paper ends with a conclusion that summarizes the final findings of the paper.

Herders und Kants Reaktionen auf die Herausforderung der kopernikanischen Wende jeweils mit einer Geschichtsphilosophie und einem transzendentalen Projekt sollen hier im Hinblick auf ihre jeweiligen philosophisch-anthropologischen Überlegungen. Aber die Möglichkeit von wissenschaftlicher Menschen- und Welterkenntnis untersucht werden. Nach Herder soll die Geschichtsschreibung von der Pluralität der Welten ausgehen und komparativistisch soll sie die Singularität jeder Welt untersuchen. Geschichtsphilosophie setzt die ontologische Annahme einer Totalität der Welt voraus, und insofern  untersucht sie die genetische Evolution des Kulturen-Universums. Im ersteren sehe ich Herders entschiedenen Beitrag zur Herausbildung der modernen Kulturwissenschaften; im letzteren das kritisch-universalistische Potential seiner Philosophie. Kant lokalisiert den Forschungsbereich der Anthropologie, deren Sache Menschen- und Weltkenntnis ist, innerhalb der transzendentalen Systemarchitektonik, insofern sie nur aufgrund der Einheit der Subjektivität als Wissenschaft möglich ist. Das schränkt den Bereich jener Erscheinungen ein, die als Gegenstände wissenschaftlicher Erfahrungen gelten können. Dies erklärt auch z.T. Kants Polemik gegen Herders Geschichtsphilosophie. Dementsprechend verfährt Kant bei seiner musterhaften Beschreibung der Tischgesellschaft – anders als Herders Methoden, indem er Merkmale dieser Situation benennt, von ihnen abstrahiert, um herauszuarbeiten, was den Menschen zu einem solchen macht.

"Corruption has become one of the most popular topics in the social scientific disciplines. However, there is a lack of interdisciplinary communication about corruption. Models developed by different
academic disciplines are often isolated from each other. The purpose of this paper is to review several major approaches to corruption and draw them closer to each other. Most studies of corruption fall
into three major categories: (i) rational-actor models where corruption is viewed as resulting from cost/benefit analysis of individual actors; (ii) structural models that focus on external forces that determine corruption; and (iii) relational models that emphasize social interactions and networks among corrupt actors. Focusing on actors’ behavior and the social context, this article explains corruption concepts taken from sociology, economics, organization studies, political science, social anthropology, and social psychology."

A shorter version of the introduction to my new book, Jewish Cryptotheologies of Late Modernity. Philosophical Marranos. I explain a 'Marrano approach' to  modern Jewish philosophy: the game of concealment and revealment, the openness and the secret. It focuses mostly on Derrida who is presented here as a paradigmatic philosophical Marrano.

According to the doctrine of unlimited atonement in the Reformed tradition, Christ's atonement is sufficient for the salvation of all human persons but efficient only for the elect. This claim is brought out in the following words of Moïse Amyraut,

"Since the misery of men is equal and universal […] and since they are equally still His creatures, the grace of redemption which He has offered and procured for them ought also to be equal and universal, provided that they are also found to be equally disposed to receive it […] The sacrifice that He offered for the propitiation of their offenses was equally for all; and the salvation that He received from His Father to communicate to men […] is ordained equally for all, provided-I say-that the necessary disposition to receive it (in men) is equal in the same way."

Bishop John Davenant, in his comments on Colossians 1:22, articulates this same claim with more directness,

"We gather from this place that a twofold reconciliation is to be seen in the Scriptures: The one general, accomplished by the sacrifice upon the cross […] But besides this reconciliation accomplished upon the cross, and generally applicable to all, the Scripture also shews us a particular and applied reconciliation, effected in the heart and conscience of individuals; that is to say, when that sacrifice of Christ, which hath in itself an universal power of reconciling all, is actually applied to reconcile this or that man […] by the exhibition of faith in the Gospel."

This claim of unlimited atonement is to be understood in strict contrast with the colloquially more familiar Reformed position of limited atonement, which claims that the class of individuals for whom Christ's atonement is sufficient for salvation is one and the same as the class of individuals for whom it is efficient; namely, the elect. It is the goal of this essay to provide a framework from which one can more easily evaluate or discern the appeal of a doctrine of unlimited atonement. In order to achieve this goal, we begin with a concept bound up with discussions of atonement but which is importantly different from it at the same time. This concept is forgiveness, and recent insights on questions about forgiveness-i.e., its unilateral nature and sometimes bilateral justification in particular—can help us better understand how to evaluate the claims of the proponents of unlimited atonement.

O presente trabalho tem por intenção identificar e discutir os elementos nacionalistas e universalistas presentes no discurso e na prática do Esperanto. Para iss o, tomamos como ponto de partida uma descrição do Esperanto, em seus principais aspectos: enquanto idioma internacional, filosofia e cultura. A partir daí, mostrarmos que, em muitos casos, seu caráter internacional toma por base argumentos similares aos de movimentos nacionalistas, além de mesclar ideais humanistas com outros típicos do atual relativismo cultural. É a partir desses discursos, aparentemente conflitantes, que o Esperanto busca se afirmar como língua internacional auxiliar, seguindo a concepção de que seus falantes são cidadãos do mundo.

De Saint-Etienne de Baïgorri à Bordeaux en passant par Pau, puis élargissant son rayon d’action aux pays de l’Europe de l’Est ainsi qu’en Algérie, l’anthropologue Pierre Bidart a accompli un cheminement biographique et intellectuel entre particularismes culturels et universalisme républicain. Nous voudrions ici essayer de comprendre comment il a tenté de résoudre la tension entre ces deux pôles. Nous le ferons principalement à travers deux sources inédites : les cours d’anthropologie du patrimoine que nous avons reçu de lui en 2004-2005, et le texte de son intervention en Préfecture de Bayonne intitulé « Comment être français aujourd’hui », daté du 14 décembre 2009, qui se veut contribution au débat sur ladite « Identité nationale » (et rectification des termes dans lesquels il a été posé). Nous chercherons par là à éclairer la tension à l’œuvre entre ces deux pôles qui se manifestent derrière la cohérence d’ensemble du parcours de Pierre Bidart, et in fine une voie possible, au plan de la philosophie politique, entre un relativisme affaiblissant la cohésion et un universalisme totalement aveugle aux particularismes.

Abstract:
Contrary to the relevant traditional historiography, this paper argues that early modern Sino-Western conflicts were to a great extent attributable to the sustained contestation between China and the Western empires (particularly Britain) over their competing claims to sovereignty in China. It shows that the Western empires’ demand for extraterritoriality and natural rights to freely trade, travel, and/or proselytize in China originated in their assumption of universal sovereignty in the non-Christian world. The early Sino-Western encounter illustrates how the discourses of sovereign equality and universal justice, as two origin myths of modern international law and diplomacy, were constructed, deployed, challenged, and adapted in the course of Western expansion in the age of empire. Lack of critical reexamination of these historical contingencies and contradictions has caused a lot of misrepresentations and problematic narratives in the traditional historiography of Sino-Western relations in particular and in the historiography of modern international law and diplomacy in general.

After several decades in which it became a prime target for critique, universalism remains one of the most important issues in social and political thought. Daniel Chernilo reassesses social theory's universalistic orientation and explains its origins in natural law theory, using an impressive array of classical and contemporary sources that include, among others, Habermas, Leo Strauss, Weber, Marx, Hegel, Rousseau and Hobbes. The Natural Law Foundations of Modern Social Theory challenges previous accounts of the rise of social theory, recovers a strong idea of humanity, and revisits conventional arguments on sociology's relationship to modernity, the enlightenment and natural law. It reconnects social theory to its scientific and philosophical roots, its descriptive and normative tasks and its historical and systematic planes. Chernilo’s defense of universalism for contemporary social theory will surely engage students of sociology, political theory and moral philosophy alike.

"Introduction

1: The underside of difference and the limits of particularism
• Semiotics and some programmatic consequences of the culture wars
• A postmodern society? Vattimo’s wager
• A more cautious optimism
• The underside of disorientation
• The underside of multiplicity
• Universals, the discourse of rights and liberalism

2. Populism as a spectre of democracy
• Populism and democracy
• The gap between faith and scepticism and the elusiveness of populism
•Spectral recurrences

3. Populism as an internal periphery of democratic politics
• The verbal smoke surrounding populism
• Populism as a mode of representation
• Populism as a symptom of democracy
• Populism as an underside of democracy

4. Stirred and shaken. From ‘the art of the possible’ to emancipatory politics
• The realist coding of the impossible
• The impossible as supplement
• Agitation as unveiling/translation
• Emancipation, revolutionising and the interstitial region of politics

5. Talkin’ bout a revolution: The end of mourning
• The mourning after
• Polemicizing the limit: how radical does a radical change have to be?
• The play between the promise and the figure
• Revolutionary realism as enthusiasm for the impossible
• Figures of the promise and the iterability of revolution
• Postcards of a socialist imaginary
Bibliography"

Artykuł stanowi propozycję trzech politycznych interpretacji kryzysu migracyjnego w Europie inspirowanych dekonstrukcją Jacquesa Derridy. Z owych interpretacji wynikają trzy pozytywne propozycje: polityka gościnności, polityka reframingu granic i polityka pluriwersalizmu.

This article discusses the temporalization of space central to the mainstream discourse of European modernity: a discourse which hierarchized all cultural spaces into a temporal narrative enabling Europe's self-portrayal as the emancipatory future of humanity. This discourse created a gap between the perceived particularism of non-European cultures (seen as traditional) and the universalism of a modernity associated with the contemporary cultures of Europe and North America, while portraying modernization as a passage from the former to the latter. Chinese intellectuals who adopted this metanarrative therefore faced the following challenge: how can Chinese particularism be adapted to a culture of modernity regarded as universal? While May Fourth iconoclasts answered this question by simply rejecting the idea that an accommodation between Chinese particularism and modern universalism was possible, other intellectuals attempted to argue that at least some aspects of Chinese culture could still be of value within the context of modern universalism. This article discusses an interesting instance of such an attempt at negotiating the perceived tension between the modern discourse of universalism and the particularism of Chinese culture, as provided by Liang Shuming in Eastern and Western Cultures and Their Philosophies. This work attempted to show that Chinese culture could still be of value within the context of modernity by providing a new metanarrative which peripherized the role of Western culture in the process of modernization. This article suggests, however, that by adopting a portrayal of modernization as a passage from particularism to universalism, Chinese culture could be reauthorized, within Liang's metanarrative, only at the cost of being de-complexified, homogenized, and de-historicized; only at the cost of being no longer Chinese.