Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  nonviolence
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

A Revitalization of Revolutionary Love: A Dialogue between Martin Luther King and Kim Chi-Ha

100%
Considine K. P.
Open Theology
|
2016
|
vol. 2
|
issue 1
EN
This essay investigates the power and limits of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s theology of revolutionary love through a dialogue with Kim Chi-Ha. I will argue that King’s theology of revolutionary love may be revitalized within a globalized context through a dialogue with Kim’s philosophy of dan, that includes an “agonized violence of love”, in order to offer a continuing praxis of love of enemy and love of neighbor, salvation for sinner and sinned-against. I show how in King’s theology, love subsists in justice and then how it is illustrated by and is challenged by the grotesque image at the conclusion of Kim’s poem, Chang Il-Dam-a mutual beheading in which the heads of the sinner and sinned-against are switched in a new creation. I argue this because Kim envisions this violence as eschatological and salvific, leading to social transformation also based upon a kind of revolutionary love. As the global influence of King’s theology continues to be studied, this particular dialogue shows how King’s theology of nonviolent revolutionary love, as a “global flow”, can be revitalized to highlight the costliness of justice and the nonviolent transformative nature of love that are embedded in salvation for sinned-against and sinner, oppressed and oppressor.
2

Striving to Moral Policy

72%
Nizhnikov S.
Dialogue and Universalism
|
2018
|
issue 2
119-131
EN
The author investigates possible variants of the correlation between violence and nonviolence in politics. He bases on the scrupulous perusal of primary sources, and aspires to place accents on the concept of a humanistic policy. He asserts that the decision of modern global international and internal problems can be reached only on the basis on a humanistic policy of non-violence: nonresistance to the evil by violence that does not except, but sometimes need resistance to the evil by force. Principles of humanistic policy were opened in “axial time” by world religions and philosophy, advanced by Immanuel Kant, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, etc.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Ideové východiská zelenej politiky

58%
Varga R.
Społeczeństwo i Edukacja. Międzynarodowe Studia Humanistyczne
|
2012
|
issue 2
593-609
EN
This article provides insight at so-called view green (environmental) policy and its various ideological backgrounds, as they were during the development of environmental policy since its inception settled and subsequently formulated historically one of the world's most successful political parties based on environmental policy, the German Die Grünen (Greens) in the '70s 20th century and then extended at the Green Committees of Correspondence in the USA in 1984. For the ideological assumptions are considered Ecological thinking, Social justice, Participatory democracy, Nonviolence, Decentralization, Community-oriented economy, Post-patriarchal values (feminism), Respect for diversity, Global responsibility and Focus on the future.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Heidegger, Gandhi, and the paradoxical search for a metaphysics of nonviolence

51%
Montesano M.
Studia Philosophiae Christianae
|
2014
|
vol. 50
|
issue 1
51-77
EN
Gandhi’s philosophy and practice of nonviolence was undergirded by his own interpretation of Hinduism. As the interest in his work has moved to the West, certain questions have arisen about its applicability to Western culture and thought. Martin Luther King, Jr. used his version of Christianity, for instance, to import Gandhi into a powerful movement in mid-20th century America. American philosopher, Gene Sharp, has written about Gandhi’s influence in terms of methods that work, with or without a metaphysical or religious foundation. This paper contends that some sort of metaphysical foundation is necessary for nonviolent movements to be effective with large groups of people over time. In service of finding a Western metaphysics that would support nonviolence, the writings of Martin Heidegger are employed. First, Gandhi’s metaphysics is discussed. In light of this discussion, Heidegger’s insights into the relationship of beings to Being are compared to some of Gandhi’s interpretations of Hinduism, especially with regard to nonviolence (ahimsa), Sat (truth) and the active confrontation of violence (satyagraha). In the work of both these thinkers there lies an apparent paradox of boldly confronting the truth that violence and injustice exists while holding to a belief in the impossibility of possessing truth totally. At the heart of this paradox is the danger that a self-righteous “holding to truth” (satyagraha) itself may be a source of much violence, both physical and structural and therefore is the antithesis of nonviolence. It is precisely at this point of contradiction that Gandhi’s and Heidegger’s metaphysical insights converge and transcend this paradox and can be employed as a metaphysical foundation for nonviolence as an ongoing, active struggle with violence.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Filary i sfery bezpieczeństwa transregionalnego Polski w ujęciu filozoficznym

44%
Świniarski J.
Studia Administracji i Bezpieczeństwa
|
2019
|
issue 7
163-194
PL
Autor po przedstawieniu filozoficznego ujęcia bezpieczeństwa jako własności bytu, jego genezy, struktury i funkcjonowania oraz przyszłości osadzonych w Warunkach Początkowych Wszechświata (masie, energii i przestrzeni oraz czasu), pierwszych przyczynach wskazywanych przez Arystotelesa (materialnej, sprawczej i formalnej oraz celowej) i elementach systemu wyróżnianych przez cybernetykę społeczną (socjomasę, socjoenergie, socjostrukturę i socjokulturę) stara się argumentować, że filarami holistycznie ujętego bezpieczeństwa jest: (1) Prokreacja i Edukacja, (2) Dostatek i Dobrobyt, (3) Prawo i Ustrój, (4) Wolność, Równość i Braterstwo oraz Odpowiedzialność. Jednocześnie przekonuje, odwołując się do Arystotelesa, że metodami i instrumentami kształtowania tych filarów i, tym samym, bezpieczeństwa są rzeczy konieczne (wojna i praca) oraz rzeczy pożyteczne (pokój i spoczynek). Rzeczy te i filary holistycznie pojętego bezpieczeństwa podmiotowego Autor stara się analizować przez dyferencjację takich podstawowych sfer bezpieczeństwa przedmiotowego jak: demograficzna, ekonomiczna i polityczno-społeczne oraz kulturowo-cywilizacyjna. Związki między bezpieczeństwem podmiotowym (jego filarami) a przedmiotowym (jego sferami, narzędziami i instrumentami) przedstawia jako tendencję, która występuje w badaniach bezpieczeństwa tzw. Szkoły Kopenhaskiej do jego pogłębiania (podmiotowego), poszerzania (przedmiotowego) i pogrubiania (preferencji dla określonych związków podmiotowo-przedmiotowych). Przyjmując podział na bezpieczeństwo, z jednej strony, pozytywne identyfikowane raczej z tzw. bezpieczeństwem niemilitarnym za Johanem Galtungiem (przez pracę, pokój i wyrzekanie się przemocy), z drugiej zaś na bezpieczeństwo negatywne identyfikowane często z bezpieczeństwem militarnym (przez wojnę, destrukcję i przemoc) skupia się na relatywnie wartościowanym bezpieczeństwie (w stosunku do kogoś lub czegoś). To relatywnie wartościowane bezpieczeństwo próbuje analizować w perspektywie pogłębiania i pogrubiania bezpieczeństwa transregionalnego Polski, po kilku krytycznych uwagach dotyczących pojmowania tego bezpieczeństwa i tzw. regionalnych i transregionalnych kompleksów bezpieczeństwa. W analizie tej przyjmuje, że wśród filarów, elementów i sektorów oraz kompleksów bezpieczeństwa najbardziej dynamiczną i uzależniającą zdaje się być sfera demograficzna i ekonomiczna, zaś sfera polityczna (prawno-ustrojowa) i kulturowa należy, w stosunku do tych pierwszych do bardziej statycznych (mniej dynamicznych). Odwołując się do rozróżnienia J.J. Rousseau dotyczącego tej sfery (między innymi na państwa małe, średnie i wielkie) Autor hipotetycznie konstatuje, że Polska państwem wielkim i monarchicznym już była w czasach I Rzeczypospolitej, zaś średnim w czasach II Rzeczypospolitej i może również III Rzeczypospolitej, przyszłość należy do Polski jako państwa małego złożonego z państw-miast (wg antycypacji A. Tofflera) o ustroju demokratycznym i być może o modelu deliberatywnym (lansowanym przez m.in. J. Habermasa) – strukturą kompetentnie komunikujących się Obywateli bardziej demokratyczną niż jakakolwiek ze znanych nam obecnie wspomaganą sztuczną inteligencją.
EN
After a philosophical presentation of security as a property of being, its origin, structure, functioning and future, as stemming from the Initial Conditions of the Universe (mass, energy, space, and time), from the primary identified by Aristotle (material, effective, formal and teleological), and from the elements of the system distinguished by social cybernetics (sociomass, socioenergy, sociostructure and socioculture),the author attempts to argue that the pillars of a holistically analyzed security are: (1) Procreation and Education; (2) Affluence and Welfare; (3) Law and System; (4) Freedom, Equality, Fraternity and Responsibility. At the same time, the author asserts, invoking Aristotle, that the methods and ways of shaping those pillars and thus security are: necessary things (war and work) and beneficial things (peace and rest). The author tries to analyze those things and the holistically understood pillars of subjective security by differentiating such fundamental spheres of subjective security as the demographic, economic, political-social and cultural-civilizational spheres. Relations between subjective security (its pillars) and objective security (its spheres, tools and instruments), are presented as atendency that appears in the research of the so-called Kopenhagen School with the intent to deepen (subjective) security, expand (objective) security and thicken security (preferences for certain subjective-objective relations). Accepting the division of security into, on the one hand, positive security identified rather with the so-called nonmilitary security, following Johan Galtung (security through work, peace and renouncement of violence), and, on the other hand, negative security often identified with military security (security through war, destruction and violence), the author focuses on relatively evaluated security (in relation to somebody or something). This relative evaluation of security is analyzed in the perspective of the deepening and thickening of the transregional security of Poland, after several critical remarks about the understanding of such security and the so-called regional and transregional security complexes. The author assumes that, among the pillars, elements, sectors and complexes of security, the most dynamic and binding seems to be the demographic and economic sphere, whereas the political (legal-systemic) sphere and the cultural sphere belong, in comparison, to the more static (less dynamic) ones. Invoking J.J. Rousseau’s distinctionspertaining to this sphere (among others, the distinction between small, medium-size and big states), the author hypothetically concludes that Poland already was a big and monarchic state at the time of the First Commonwealth, a medium-size state at the time of the Second Republic and maybe also the Third Republic, and that Poland has a future as a small state composed of city-states (as anticipated by A. Toffler) of a democratic and perhaps a deliberative model (promoted by, among other, J. Habermas) – a structure of citizens competently communicated with each other, more democratic than any structure known from today, and also assisted by Artificial Intelligence.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.