Science and Superstition: Hume and Conservatism

2018 ◽  
pp. 247-263
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Berry
Keyword(s):  
Substance P ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
The Common

The common argument that Hume is a conservative is interrogated. Its accuracy once subject to further inspection is suspect and fails to capture a key characteristic of Hume’s socio-political thought. After identifying those aspects of Hume’s thought that most securely underwrite attributing the conservative label, it is argued nonetheless that the conservative label is at least insecure. It is further claimed that when his commitment to ‘science’ and his polemics against superstition, and other ‘chimerical’ practices and principles, are taken on board then the stronger case that the label is a distortion can be judged to have substance.

Maṣlaḥa as Sovereignty: Fadlallah and Khomeini Compared

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-112
Author(s):  
Nachman Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Political Thought ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Islamic History ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Islamic Political Thought ◽  
Popular Movement ◽  
The Common ◽  
Definition Of

This article examines how Fadlallah and Khomeini’s respective quests for sovereignty are reflected in their political thought, particularly vis-a-vis their notions of maṣlaḥa, which I define as the “common good.” I argue that if, to an extent, Islamic political thought seeks to maximise maṣlaḥa, then this can also constitute a claim to sovereignty, the definition of which remains multidimensional and contentious. By closely examining Fadlallah and Khomeini’s writings and pronouncements on governance, popular movement, and state, I attempt to reveal how discussions regarding Islamic governance demonstrate a broader claim to authority in Islamic history.

scholarly journals cDNA sequence of human β-preprotachykinin, the common precursor to substance P and neurokinin A

FEBS Letters ◽  
1986 ◽  
Vol 208 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.J. Harmar ◽  
A. Armstrong ◽  
J.C. Pascall ◽  
K. Chapman ◽  
R. Rosie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Substance P ◽  
Cdna Sequence ◽  
Neurokinin A ◽  
Common Precursor ◽  
The Common

scholarly journals Speaking for the People in Early Modern England*

2019 ◽  
Vol 244 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Coast
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Early Modern England ◽  
English Civil War ◽  
Common People ◽  
Wide Audience ◽  
The People ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Voice

Abstract The voice of the people is assumed to have carried little authority in early modern England. Elites often caricatured the common people as an ignorant multitude and demanded their obedience, deference and silence. Hostility to the popular voice was an important element of contemporary political thought. However, evidence for a very different set of views can be found in numerous polemical tracts written between the Reformation and the English Civil War. These tracts claimed to speak for the people, and sought to represent their alleged grievances to the monarch or parliament. They subverted the rules of petitioning by speaking for ‘the people’ as a whole and appealing to a wide audience, making demands for the redress of grievances that left little room for the royal prerogative. In doing so, they contradicted stereotypes about the multitude, arguing that the people were rational, patriotic and potentially better informed about the threats to the kingdom than the monarch themselves. ‘Public opinion’ was used to confer legitimacy on political and religious demands long before the mass subscription petitioning campaigns of the 1640s.

Saeculum–Ecclesia–Caliphate: An Eternal Golden Braid

2019 ◽  
pp. 94-107
Author(s):  
Paul J. Griffiths
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Common Good ◽  
The United States ◽  
Catholic Theology ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Church ◽  
Catholic Perspective ◽  
Secular State

The secular state, the church, and the caliphate are associations that each hold universal aspirations, at least implicitly. While the universal aspirations of the church and caliphate may be obvious enough, every state seeks dominion over the whole world. (“Secular” describes states that limit their vision to this world, as opposed to the transcendence to which both the church and caliphate appeal.) As an essay in Catholic speculative theology, Griffiths asks two questions: Whether Catholic theology supports or discourages the variety of political orders, and whether these orders could be ranked in terms of goodness from a Catholic perspective? In response to these questions, Griffiths appeals to two aspects of St. Augustine’s political thought: Political rivalries serve the common good; and the principal indicator of the degree to which a state serves the common good is its explicit service to the god of Abraham. The United States (a secular state) is compared with ISIS (an attempted caliphate).

The common C-terminal sequences of substance P and neurokinin A contact the same region of the NK-1 receptor

FEBS Letters ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 486 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew A. Bremer ◽  
Susan E. Leeman ◽  
Norman D. Boyd
Keyword(s):  
Substance P ◽  
Neurokinin A ◽  
The Common

Corruption and Partisanship: Rousseau, Ferguson and Two Competing Models of Republican Revival

2016 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert A. Sparling
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Civic Virtue ◽  
Civic Life ◽  
Important Distinction ◽  
Individual Judgment ◽  
Competing Models ◽  
The Common

AbstractPartisanship inspires a degree of ambivalence. There is a widespread tendency—which has a long history in republican political thought—to decry division and partisanship as corrupting, undermining individual judgment, and promoting clientelism, dependencies and loyalties antithetical to the common good. Yet there is an equally widespread intuition that excessive unity is corrupting, undermining the vigour of civic life. Contemporary political theory remains divided on the normative implications of division and unity—witness the battles between agonistic and consensus-oriented schools of democratic theory. In this article I examine the thought of two eighteenth-century writers who, while often treated as contributing to a common intellectual project of reinvigorating classical civic virtue, took opposite positions on the desirability of division. Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Adam Ferguson offered competing accounts of what corrupts civic virtue, one decrying party divisions and the other lauding them. The article examines the underlying philosophical presuppositions of Rousseau and Ferguson's competing claims and suggests, ultimately, that both positions suffer from neglecting to attend to an important distinction between salutary and harmful divisions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document