Authors: Michael Byrnes (Quantum Economist Wealth Beyond Nations) and Tamara van Halm, (Wealth Beyond Nations)
Here in, we examine the capacity of ideologies (in specific) and philosophies (in general) to effectively facilitate societies to navigate great moments of evolution. Firstly, is human civilization presently in the midst of a fundamental evolution, and if so, what is the cause and nature of this evolution? Secondly, is any specific ideology or philosophy, or group of ideologies or philosophies stimulating or reacting to the process of evolution? Finally, as we progress into some new evolutionary phase of human development, will our existent body of philosophies and ideologies provide us effective tools to explore and develop this new evolution, or will we require a complete reevaluation of the human experiment? Indeed, if we would allow ourselves to momentarily forestall our compulsion to act in the face of the many perceived dangers presently overshadowing the world (thus, wielding the armor of ideology), and thus would allow ourselves to reevaluate where we are in our human journey (thus question and discern various aspects of diverse philosophies and worldviews), we perhaps would discern that the central conflict which underpins almost all other conflicts of the 21st century is this: human beings no longer need each other, en masse, in the production of goods and services, and consequently all conventional and extreme/remodeling forms of institutional or personal governance—no matter the ideology—will be futile in sustaining social order. If this is indeed an accurate and effective discernment of the challenges now facing the human experiment, and before we can act and choose any specific direction to which to journey, we have a great number of questions to ask. Genuine questions, not questions of rhetoric or manipulation. Echoing Emmanuel Kant’s great intercession for human kind: will all of humanity be able to have the courage to think for themselves?
Philosophy, Ideology, Economics, Evolution, Limits to Ideology, Global Interdependence
Author: Daniel Clifford, PhM Candidate in Philosophy and Public Affairs, University College Dublin
Abstract: The main aim of this paper was to make the connection between the political philosophy of Zionism and Israel's contemporary foreign policy in the Middle East. In doing so, it is intended to demonstrate that Israeli foreign policy is an extension of the basic philosophical premises within early Zionist political theory. The philosophical origins of Israel's political Zionism was then carefully retraced in the paper and assessed.
The paper is split into two portions. The first being the explication, and assessment of early political theorists and philosophers like Theodor Herzl and Ze'ev Jabotinsky. It is argued that there is a close connection between political Zionism and colonialism. Although, this alone doesn't demonstrate the fact Israel is continuing its political vision of a unified homogenous State, it is enough to show that the political philosophy underlying Israel's formation is ultimately one of desired homogeny in relation to its population. The second portion of the paper takes the philosophical arguments of the first portion and assesses whether they provide a good theory for the current ongoing actions of the Israeli State.
The significance of this paper is to show that ideological theory still underlay's contingent facts on the ground and provide an explication of what is perceived to be a complicated issue. Political philosophy is also, in this paper, shown to be a critical tool for navigating some of the underlying moral questions of statehood, Nationality, and identity, for instance can colonialism be justified on ethnic or religious grounds? Although this essay doesn’t claim to provide conclusive answers to all these questions, the framework for discussion of these important philosophical questions is touched upon through the interplay of facts on the ground and cross-referencing of Zionist theory.
Key Words: Zionism, Ideology, Philosophy, Colonialism, Human Rights, Politics, Israel, Palestine.
Author: Adam Lovasz (PhM), Co Founder of Absentology, Associate Editor of "Philosophical Views"
*Supported by the ÚNKP-16-1 New National Excellence Program of the Ministry of Human Capacities. Research theme title: „The Deterritorialization of Sense/Az észlelés deterritorializációja”
In his „Notes on Italian History”, Antonio Gramsci reflects upon foundation and first decades of bourgeois Italy. The society that replaced the fragmented, heterogenous structure of small kingdoms was one that was deeply shaped by the fundamental and irreducible social differences and inequalities between Northern and Southern Italy, the „Mezzogiorno.” Northern elites were obsessed with integrating and unifying Italy. For the Northerners, the poverty of the South was an „inexplicable” phenomenon, a circumstance that possibly had something to do with their culture or values, perhaps the relative poverty of their soil. (Gramsci 1992 : 71) It did not occur to the Northerners that, to quote Gramsci’s withering prose, „the North concretely was an ’octopus’ which enriched itself at the expense of the South, and that its economic-industrial increment was in direct proportion to the impoverishment of the economy and the agriculture of the South.” (Gramsci 1992 : 72) The North, a Cthulhuic entity, parasitizes the South, while ceaselessly forgetting the circumstances of this operation. As a matter of fact, the North employed, all the while, a condescending and moralistic tone with regards to Southern alterity. It is as if the South is „a society verging on anomie that is resilient in its feudalism or clientelism.” (Dickie 1999: 1) Indeed, it would seem that Southern Italy is not Italy at all, an embodiment of anomaly and chaotic clientelism, the shadow that haunts the North’s aspirations to civilization, modernity and industrial progress.
Author: Jose Mario Dolor De Vega, Master’s in Philosophy at the University of the Philippines, political scientist, a radical philosopher.
Professor Zizek in a video, on Think Big, “The Purpose of Philosophy is to Ask the Right Questions”, May 28, 2013 stated that:
“I’m not saying -- I’m not a philosophical megalomaniac -- that philosophy can provide answers, but it can do something which maybe is even more important, you know? As important as providing answers and a condition for it, maybe even the condition, is to ask the right question.”
I have a very serious issue with this utterly controversial and myopic contention of the said person.
If philosophy cannot provide all the answers and its only purpose is for people engage in philosophy or in philosophizing is/are merely to ask the correct questions or to pose the right query, then what kind of purpose or use is that?
I can detect a certain degree of contradiction to the contention of the said professor. To restate: if philosophy cannot provide all the answers and its purpose is only to reduce those people engage in philosophy to ask the right questions, then how the hell those ‘philosophers’ arrive at the right questions if they did not subjected themselves to a vigorous philosophical reflections and rigid mental exercises?
Hence, this paper is not merely a brutal rebuttal of the viewpoint expressed by Professor Zizek, but also an honest to goodness attempt to explicate and adumbrate on the true and liberating use, purpose and function of Philosophy.
Lastly, the writer will combat said professor’s stand by contradistinguishing him to that of the revolutionary and emancipatory Philosophy of Action of Karl Marx.
Karl Marx, Zizek, Philosophy, Question, Action
Autor: Spomenka Martić, (PhM), stalni član redakcije "Filozofskih pogleda", urednik bloga "Filozofska bilježnica"
ABSTRAKT: U radu se pokušavaju utvrditi osnovne sličnosti i razlike između nekih od prepoznatljivih formi misaonosti, kako bi se na tom tragu pronašao put ili više njih ka razrješenju jaza među njima. Odnos filozofije i ideologije ima zajedničku genezu, ali i suprotno značenje već u svakodnevnom jeziku, a često se poistovjećuju i zamjenjuju. Zato je nužno uvidjeti sprege njihovih poveznica, međusobne utjecaje i saobraćanja na tom kanalu, a na čijoj polovini stoji njihov zajednički imenitelj ili medijator – pogled na svijet ili svjetonazor. Pozicija koju on zauzima u tom triu ima elemente i filozofije i ideologije, te predstavlja značajan predmet istraživanja.
KLJUČNE RIJEČI: Filozofija, ideologija, pogled na svijet, stav, -izmi, metafilozofija, istraživanja, postupak, epistemologija.
Author: Giuseppe Gagliano, President of the Carlo De Cristoforis Strategic Studies Centre (Cestudec)
Without posing the objective of providing an exhaustive interpretation of Aron’s thought on Marx and totalitarianism, we intend to identify several key concepts that emerge from an analysis of Aron’s acclaimed work on the role played by Marxist-Leninist ideology in the development of the 20th century philosophic thought.
Keywords: Marx, Lenin, totalitarianism, Aron, Messianism, revolution, Bolshevism
A new philosophy of man as the basis for a humanist ideology (1), with its roots in America: its origins and where it now stands (James Joseph Dagenais 1923-1981)
Author: Hans Dassen, Anthroopos Foundation Amsterdam, Dutch Philosopher
“The only claims which philosophy can make to leadership in the total enterprise of understanding man is its capacity to explicitate its own presuppositions … if the necessary presuppositions of a philosophy of man can be clarified and justified, its claim to be basic can be validated….. The presuppositions of any philosophy, I maintain, involve a fundamental attitude towards myself, the other, and the world. The most fundamental evidence here is that the universe is not a thing, nor even a system of things, not an object or a system of objects, but primordially an interpersonal world, a world of and for persons. Philosophy can then be defined as a reflection upon the pre-reflexive, pre-philosophical, pre-scientific experiencing of being, that is, upon experiencing before any kind of conscious thematization. If philosophy is a radical and transcendental thinking, that is, a thinking upon the a priori conditions of possibility of all thinking and all experiencing, then the experiencing which is reflected upon must be experiencing in the largest sense. It is the experiencing in my insertion of being – concretely, the experiencing of myself and the other in the world.”
(James Joseph Dagenais 1923-1981) (2)