scholarly journals The Alevis, or Deifiers of Ali

1909 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 340-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Van Rensselaer Trowbridge

A religion different from Islam, centring about the person and teaching of Ali, the adopted son of Muhammed, is steadily gaining ground in certain sections of the Turkish Empire. The believers are called Alevis both by themselves and by the Muslims. The name Kuzul Bash (u as in “cut”), which means “Red Head” and is often used as a term of reproach, is said to have originated at the battle of Siffin. Ali said, “Tie red upon your heads, so that ye slay not your own comrades in the thick of the battle.” In Persia the community is known by the name of Ali Ilāhi, and has commonly been regarded as a sect of Muhammedanism.The object of this study is to investigate the true nature of this faith with as much accuracy as an oriental religion permits, and to consider the relations of the Alevi brotherhood with Islam and Christianity.

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 100-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth F. Desnoyers-Colas

The road a predominantly white institution (PWI) takes to maximize diversity, inclusion, and equity can be fraught with challenges. One midsize institution learned through an assessment of its campus climate that its institutional practices and arrangements impeded diversity, inclusion, and equity despite white administrators' beliefs to the contrary. To help quell systemic racism habits, monthly campus-wide workshops focused on several key racial injustice habits and hurtful microaggressions generated from white privilege. A faux social justice allure to white allies who considered themselves advocates of nondominant people is one that should ultimately call into question the genuineness and true nature of their support. This semi-autoethnographic essay is a plaintive call to white colleagues in the academy to earnestly acknowledge white privilege and to use it to actively fight the destructive force of racial battle fatigue and institutional racism.


Author(s):  
Sloane Speakman

In examining the strikingly high prevalence rates of HIV in many parts of Africa, reaching as high as 5% in some areas, how does the discourse promoted by the predominant religions across the continent, Islam and Christianity, affect the outlook of their followers on the epidemic? This question becomes even more intriguing after discovering the dramatic difference in rate of HIV prevalence between Muslims and Christians in Africa, confirmed by studies that have found a negative relationship to exist between HIV prevalence and being Muslim in Africa, even in Sub-Saharan African nations. Why does this gap in prevalence rates exist? Does Islam advocate participating in less risky behavior more so than Christianity? By comparing the social construction, epidemiological understanding and public responses among Muslim populations in Africa with Christian ones, it becomes apparent that many similarities exist between the two regarding discourse and that, rather than religious discourse itself, other social factors, such as circumcision practices, contribute more to the disparity in HIV prevalence than originally thought.


Author(s):  
Philip J. Ivanhoe

The primary claim of this study is that when we come to understand the true nature of what we are as individuals and as a species, we cannot fail to acknowledge our connections and interdependencies with the rest of the world, and this can, does, and should incline us toward greater care for other people, creatures, and things. The conclusion warns us about some potentially bad forms of oneness and recalls earlier arguments showing how such mistaken conceptions violate established imperatives to present metaphysically, psychologically, and socially plausible views that can serve as the basis for integrated, sustainable, and happy lives in community with others. The new conceptions of oneness this study recommends differ from traditional view in being open-ended ideals; we can find support for such ideals in the world, but we can and must continue to build and innovate upon them.


Dreyfus argues that there is a basic methodological difference between the natural sciences and the social sciences, a difference that derives from the different goals and practices of each. He goes on to argue that being a realist about natural entities is compatible with pluralism or, as he calls it, “plural realism.” If intelligibility is always grounded in our practices, Dreyfus points out, then there is no point of view from which one can ask about or provide an answer to the one true nature of ultimate reality. But that is consistent with believing that the natural sciences can still reveal the way the world is independent of our theories and practices.


Author(s):  
Karel Schrijver

This chapter briefly reviews some the challenges encountered in the search for extraterrestrial life. So far, no signs of extraterrestrial life have been found. The search started with radio telescopes, looking for technology-based civilizations, but new strategies have emerged that take on the primary challenges in this search: the enormous distances to exoplanets and the question of the true nature of life. The author outlines the development of new tools for the search, and why the present focus is on Earth-sized exoplanets with a potential for liquid water on their surfaces. Not having been visited by an alien civilization presents us with a paradox: if life develops as quickly elsewhere as on Earth, then why have we not been contacted? Is the speed of light too slow to cross interstellar distances, is life intrinsically rare, or should we conclude that civilizations are intrinsically short-lived?


Author(s):  
Chris Lorenz

This introductory chapter assesses the role of theory in history and traces the developments in the discipline of history. Theoretical reflection about the ‘true nature’ of history fulfils three interrelated practical functions. First, theory legitimizes a specific historical practice—a specific way of ‘doing history’—as the best one from an epistemological and a methodological point of view. Second, theory sketches a specific programme of doing history. Third, theoretical reflections demarcate a specific way of ‘doing history’ from other ways of ‘doing history’, which are excluded or degraded. The chapter then considers three phases of theoretical changes from analytical to narrative philosophy of history, and then on to ‘history from below’ and the ‘presence’ of history, ultimately leading to the current return of fundamental ontological and normative questions concerning the status of history and history-writing.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document