Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
E. Tory Higgins

What makes us human? Why do humans deal with the world in the ways that we do? The usual answer is that it is our intelligence. When it comes to intelligence, we believe we are special. When it comes to motivation, we believe we are basically the same as other animals. But human motivation is also special. This book describes why human motivation is special and how it makes us who we are. Humans want to experience that their feelings, beliefs, and concerns are shared by others. They want to experience that what matters to them about the world—what objects, events, and issues are worthy of attention—also matters to other people. And what humans share with others is what they experience to be real. It is a shared reality. Our shared reality motivation defines who we are. It is the best of us and the worst of us. On the one hand, our shared realities connect us to close others, create common interests, and make life meaningful. They become the truth about what to feel and what to believe. On the other hand, because of this, we distrust, and even fear, the members of any other group who have different shared realities. For better and worse, our shared realities profoundly affect our everyday lives: how we feel, what we know, our attitudes and opinions, our sense of self, what we strive for and how we strive, and how we get along with others.

Author(s):  
E. Tory Higgins

What makes us human? Why do humans deal with the world in the ways that we do? The usual answer is that it is our intelligence. When it comes to intelligence, we believe we are special. When it comes to motivation, we believe we are basically the same as other animals. But human motivation is also special. This book describes why human motivation is special and how it makes us who we are. Humans want to experience that their feelings, beliefs, and concerns are shared by others. They want to experience that what matters to them about the world, what objects, events, and issues are worthy of attention, also matters to other people. And what humans share with others is what they experience to be real. It is a shared reality. This book tells the story of how our shared reality motivation defines who we are. It makes us strong as individuals and as groups. It can also tear us apart. Different modes of shared reality emerge during human childhood, and emerged during human evolution, that determine our experience of the world around us and how we deal with it. Our motivation to create shared realities determines how we talk to each other and remember the events in our lives. The story of shared reality is the story of how we feel, what we know, our attitudes and opinions, our sense of self, what we strive for and how we strive, and how we get along with others.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg W. Bertram

AbstractThe concept of second nature promises to provide an explanation of how nature and reason can be reconciled. But the concept is laden with ambiguity. On the one hand, second nature is understood as that which binds together all cognitive activities. On the other hand, second nature is conceived of as a kind of nature that can be changed by cognitive activities. The paper tries to investigate this ambiguity by distinguishing a Kantian conception of second nature from a Hegelian conception. It argues that the idea of a transformation from a being of first nature into a being of second nature that stands at the heart of the Kantian conception is mistaken. The Hegelian conception demonstrates that the transformation in question takes place within second nature itself. Thus, the Hegelian conception allows us to understand the way in which second nature is not structurally isomorphic with first nature: It is a process of ongoing selftransformation that is not primarily determined by how the world is, but rather by commitments out of which human beings are bound to the open future.


Author(s):  
Ю. А. Абсалямова

В статье анализируются особенности восприятия лесного пространства башкирами. На основе языковых, фольклорных материалов сделана попытка раскрыть различные аспекты взаимоотношений лес - человек, образ леса в картине мира башкир. Как и в большинстве традиционных культур, в целом мифологический образ леса носит отрицательный характер. В фольклоре он часто описывается как тёмный, мрачный, неизвестный, таящий опасности, противопоставляясь обжитому и освоенному пространству селений. Лесной пандемониум также представлен в основном отрицательными персонажами. В целом образ леса в традиционной картине мира башкир предстаёт довольно неоднозначным. С одной стороны - это категория, связанная с потусторонним миром, неизведанная, «чужая» территория. С другой - лес издавна являлся источником различных благ - в виде строительного материала, пушнины, различных продуктов питания, укрывал от врагов. The article analyzes the features of Bashkirs' perception of the forest space. On the basis of the materials of the epos, folklore, folk ideas, an attempt was made to reveal the various aspects of the relationship between forest and man, the image of the forest in Bashkirs' world view. As in most traditional cultures, the mythological image of the forest as a whole is negative. In folklore, it is often described as dark, gloomy, unknown, fraught with danger, being contrasted with the inhabited and developed space of the villages. The forest pandemonium is also represented mainly by negative characters. On the other hand, in the domestic perception forest is valued for the benefits derived from it: shelter, food, protection from enemies. In addition, Bashkirs, distinguished by a developed aesthetic perception and contemplative thinking, appreciated its beauty, which is also reflected in folklore. In general, the image of forest in the Bashkirs' traditional view of the world appears rather ambiguous. On the one hand, it is the category associated with the other world, unknown, «foreign» territory. On the other hand, the forest has long been a source of various benefits - in the form of construction materials, furs, various food products, and it sheltered them from enemies.


Humanities ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Annabelle Dufourcq

This article investigates the meaning of Merleau-Ponty’s concept of the flesh of the world. This concept brings a cosmological tone to existentialist phenomenology and challenges the grim and gnostic approach that prevails in Heidegger’s and Sartre’s works in particular. Is horror the key mood in ontology as argued by Malabou? This article contends that bright metaphors and magic realism are at least as fundamental, but under one condition: ontology must come to terms with what the author has coined as the “Chandos complex”, namely a form of ambivalence and oscillation between Gnosticism and holism that makes both positions fake and hollow. Dreaming of being one with the world and fantasizing an estrangement from nature work hand in hand and are equally staged. Merleau-Ponty’s philosophy occasionally falls prey to the Chandos complex, which makes his concept of the flesh of the world vulnerable to criticism. This article examines the claim put forward by Renaud Barbaras that “the flesh of the world” is a failed metaphor. It argues that this blissful metaphor is ontologically fundamental as soon as its intrinsic paradoxes are recognized and accepted: the Chandos complex then becomes the key to an ontology that recognizes the imaginary as an essential dimension of being. At stake is an essential link between ontology on the one hand and, on the other hand, metaphors as well as myth-building and narrative-building processes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-52
Author(s):  
Nashuddin Nashuddin

True education makes people more respectful of differences and understanding diversity. Schools offer openness, moderation, and peace, not closure, extremism, and violence. But in reality on the ground, schools are actually not sterile from the outbreak of intolerance and the virus of radicalism. A number of studies show at one conclusion - which is almost agreed on - that intolerance in the world of education is increasing. Starting from rejecting leaders of different religions, do not want to respect the flag, the veil obligation, to those who openly support the khilafah. The entry of intolerance is assessed entering from three doors. First, teacher. Teacher understanding often determines how students behave and act. Second, the curriculum which is still dogmatic-doctrinaire does not provide space for dialogue and imagination. Third, extra activities are loaded with certain ideologies. In this context, it is necessary to return to voice moderation in schools. Attitudes that are not extreme right, always negate everything; nor extreme left, accommodating anything from outside; but rather be selective-accommodating. Teaching selective-accommodative attitude to students, has its own challenges. Not to mention the tendency of religious ways that are practical, instant, and do not want to be complicated, on the one hand; plus the penetration of social media - borrowing the language of Tom Nicholas (Death of Expertise, 2017) - there is a democratization of information, everyone is equal in it, on the other hand. Making moderation mainstreaming projects in schools has its challenges. Pendidikan sejatinya membuat manusia lebih menghargai perbedaaan dan memahami keragaman.Sekolah mengarjakan keterbukaan, moderasi, dan kedamaian, bukan ketertutupan, ekstrim, dan kekerasan.Akan tetapi fakta di lapangan, sekolah justru tidak streril dari wabah intoleransi dan virus radikalisme. Sejumlah penelitian menunjukkan pada satu kesimpulan –yang hampir disepakati—bahwa intoleransi dalam dunia pendidikan semakian meningkat. Mulai dari menolak pemimpin beda agama, tidak mau menghormat bendera, pewajiban jilbab, sampai yang terang-terangan mendukung khilafah. Masuknya intoleransi dinilai masuk dari tiga pintu. Pertama, guru. Pemahaman guru sering menentukan cara bersikap dan bertindak siswa. Kedua, kurikulum yang masih dogmatis-doktriner, tidak memberikan ruang untuk berdialetika dan berimajinasi. Ketiga, kegiatan ekstra yang sarat dengan ideologi tertentu. Dalam konteks inilah, perlu kembali menyuarakan moderasi di sekolah. Sikap yang tidak ekstrim kanan, selalu menegasikan semuanya; juga tidak ekstrim kiri, menampung apapun dari luar; melainkan bersikap selektif-akomodatif. Mengajarkan sikap selektif-akomodatif kepada peserta didik, mendapat tantangan tersendiri. Belum lagi adanya  kecenderungan cara beragama yang praktis, instan, dan tidak mau ribet, di satu sisi; di tambah penetrasi media sosial –meminjam bahasa Tom Nicholas (Matinya Kepakaran, 2017) – terjadi demokratisasi infomasi, semua orang setara di dalamnya, di sisi lain. Membuat proyek pengarusutamaan moderasi di sekolah mendapat tantangannya tersendiri.


REFLEXE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (60) ◽  
pp. 29-63
Author(s):  
Martin Rabas

The present article has two objectives. One is to elucidate the philosophical approach presented in the so-called Strahov Systematic Manuscripts of Jan Patočka in terms of consciousness and nature. The other is to compare this philosophical approach with Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s theses on nature, as elaborated in 1956–1961, and to point out some advantages and limitations of both approaches. In our opinion, Patočka’s philosophical approach consists, on the one hand, in a descriptive analysis of human experience, which he understands as a pre-reflective self-relationship pointing towards the consciousness of the world. On the other hand, on the basis of this descriptive analysis Patočka consequently explicates all non-human life, inorganic matter, and finally the whole of nature as life in its own right, the essence of which is also a certain self-relation with a tendency towards consciousness. The article then briefly presents Merleau-Ponty’s theses on nature, and finally compares them with Patočka’s overall theses on nature. The advantage of Patočka’s notion of nature as against Merleau-Ponty’s is that, in Patočka’s view, nature encompasses both the principle of unity and individuality. On the other hand, the advantage of Merleau-Ponty’s understanding of nature as against Patočka’s lies in the consistent interconnectedness of the infinite life of nature and the finite life of individual beings.


Poligrafi ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 107-127
Author(s):  
Victoria Dos Santos

This article aims to explore the affinities between contemporary Paganism and the posthuman project in how they approach the non-human natural world. On the one hand, posthumanism explores new ways of considering the notion of humans and how they are linked with the non-human world. On the other hand, Neopaganism expands this reflection to the spiritual domain through its animistic relational sensibility. Both perspectives challenge the modern paradigm where nature and humans are opposed and mutually disconnected. They instead propose a relational ontology that welcomes the “different other.” This integrated relationship between humans and the “other than human” can be understood through the semiotic Chora, a notion belonging to Julia Kristeva that addresses how the subject is not symbolically separated from the world in which it is contained.


Author(s):  
Joshua C. Gellers

Could robots have rights? On the one hand, robots are becoming increasingly human-like in appearance and behavior. On the other hand, legal systems around the world are increasingly recognizing the rights of nonhuman entities. Observing these macro-level trends, in this paper I present an ecological framework for evaluating the conditions under which some robots might be considered eligible for certain rights. I argue that a critical, materialist, and broadly ecological interpretation of the environment, along with decisions by jurists establishing or upholding the rights of nature, support extension of rights to nonhuman entities like robots.


Author(s):  
Françoise Dastur ◽  
Robert Vallier

This chapter brings Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger, whose different phenomenological styles are normally opposed, into dialogue with Maurice Merleau-Ponty's claim that temporality is not a contingent attribute of existence. According to Merleau-Ponty, consciousness and the world, the inside and the outside, sense and non-sense, are interdependent beings. For Merleau-Ponty, the problem of time is the problem of the subject's relation to time. The chapter examines how Merleau-Ponty's position in Phenomenology of Perception becomes the intermediary position between, on the one hand, the completion of the tradition and the fulfillment of modernity represented by Husserl's transcendental phenomenology and, on the other hand, the “new beginning for thought” that Heidegger wants to promote, insofar as he attempts to assume or take on metaphysics.


Love Divine ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 76-113
Author(s):  
Jordan Wessling

There are two prominent and opposing Christian views about why God created, and consequently governs, the world. On the one hand, there is the view that God’s creative and providential activity is fundamentally motivated by God’s desire for self-glorification. God creates not ultimately for the creature, but for Himself, specifically for the enjoyment of the ad extra expression of His attributes. On the other hand, a rival theological group contends that God’s creative activity and care for the world is fundamentally motivated by love. God creates not primarily for Himself, but out of a self-giving love for the creature. Chapter 3 contains an exposition and defence of the second of these views as the more plausible of the two Christian views on why God created, and thereby governs, the world.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document