The paper proposes two ideas: (1) The wilderness preservation movement has failed to identify key elements involved in situations of environmental conflict. (2) The same movement seems unaware of its location within a tradition which is both elitist and Puritan. Holmes Rolston's recent work on the apparent conflict between feeding people and saving nature appears to exemplify the two points. With respect to point (1), Rolston's treatment fails to address the institutional and structural features which set the agenda for individual (...) human lives. The human ecology of environmental destruction cannot ignore the role of corporate actors such as banks, national governments, transnational corporations, trade unions and so on. These agents interact with each other in various ways and also have an internal structure – perhaps akin to Arthur Koestler's conception of the holarchy - which enables people working within them to avoid taking responsibility for policies that have damaging environmental consequences. As far as thesis (2) is concerned, Rolston's work shares common features with Arne Naess's deep ecology and Aldo Leopold's land ethic. All of these writers draw, perhaps unconsciously, on a tradition of sporting elitism associated with the Great White Hunter. One variety of this tradition combines elitism with a form of Puritanism. (shrink)

Ottoman Puritanism and its Discontents: Aḥmad al-Rūmī al-Āqḥiṣārī and the Qāḍīzādelīs By SheikhMustapha, ix + 191 pp. Price HB £65.00. EAN 978–0198790761.

Marxists misunderstand not only religous thought and artistic creativity, but even revolutionary ideology itself, since their narrow economic categories fit post-revolutionary periods. English Puritanism has often been distorted by a false identification with capitalism, though basically it was incompatible with capitalism or liberalism. Its covenant was unlike a contract because it expected sinful behavior, not good faith, and it institutionalized mutual surveillance. Puritan discipline is crucial. It tended to transform repression into self-control; only when reliable behavior could be taken (...) for granted was Puritan fanaticism relaxed and Lockean liberalism born. We must understand the real concerns of Puritans They experienced exile, alienation, and social mobility, and chose Puritanism because it helped them organize these experiences into effective lives. (shrink)

The moral disciplining theory proposes that people moralize excessive innocent behavior to discipline others to behave in ways that facilitate cooperation. However, such disciplining might not always be effective. To solve this puzzle of ineffective moralization we should think of puritanism in terms of moral advertisement aimed at reputation management rather than the manipulation of others.

Max Weber examined Chinese society and European Puritanism at the beginning of the Twentieth Century in order to find out why capitalism did not develop in China. He found that Confucianism and Puritanism are mutually exclusive, which enabled him to oppose both in the form of two different kinds of rationalism. I attempt neither to refute nor to confirm the Weberian thought model. Instead I show that a similar model applies to Jean Baudrillard’s vision of American culture, a (...) culture that he determined in terms of hyperreality. Instead of rejecting Weber’s thoughts right away, I give Weber’s model a further push and show that through a further twist that “Western culture” has received within particular American constellations, Weber’s understanding of Confucianism and Baudrillard’s understanding of American civilization manifest amazing similarities. (shrink)

Against the contemporary view which portrays the roots of modern political philosophy as fundamentally areligious, Peddle's essay shows how Puritanism and Enlightenment converge in the U.S. Constitution. In light of reflections on the logic of this convergence, an interpretation of the religious clauses of the first amendment is advanced.

The research of Professor J. D. Roberts has interested me for several years. It has interested me because he has been working in a really rich area of intellectual history. Even before Professor Whitehead taught us to speak of the seventeenth century as the "century of genius," many of us looked with wonder on the creativity of the men who produced religious and philosophical literature in that period of contro versy and of power. It was, in a most unusual way, (...) a flowering time of the human spirit. The present volume is devoted to one fascinating chapter in the history of ideas. We know now, far better than we knew a generation ago, how incendiary Puritan ideas really were. They had tremendous consequences, many of which continue to this day, in spite of the absurd caricature of Puritanism, which is popularly accepted. The best of Milton's contemporaries were great thinkers as well as great doers. (shrink)

The English Puritan Richard Baxter (1615-1691) developed an account of forgiveness that resonates with twentieth-century virtue ethics. He understood forgiveness as one component of a larger disposition of character developed in community as human beings recognize themselves as sinful creatures engaged in complex relationships of dependency and responsibility, with both God and one another. In the midst of these relationships, persons experience divine and human forgiveness and discover opportunities to practice forgiveness in return. Baxter thus negotiated a distinctive relationship between (...) Christian hope for reconciliation and more stereotypical Puritan emphases on punishment, civil order, and justice. At the same time that recent moral reflection allows us to raise questions about some features of Baxter's argument (such as his treatment of anger), his work provides important resources for correlating dispositions with concrete obligations, establishing a place for forgiveness in the public realm, and counterbalancing the modern emphasis on individual rights. (shrink)

The puritanism of this text is that of mid-seventeenth century England which, faced with the opportunity and awesome responsibility of establishing a new social order, struggled with practical and theoretical difficulties of political life in open debates and published tracts. Questions about political liberty were particularly difficult for them since their shared theological convictions led to no unanimity about how to provide for both social unity and individuality in one political structure. Alternative positions were vigorously supported, and the documents (...) of the struggle are provided here in a fashion that enables a modern reader to experience the dynamism of the struggle without the interference of summaries provided by commentators. (shrink)

This account of puritanical morality is useful and innovative, but makes two errors. First, it mischaracterizes the purity foundation as being unrelated to cooperation. Second, it makes the leap from cooperation (broadly construed) to a monist account of moral cognition (as harm or fairness). We show how this leap is both conceptually incoherent and inconsistent with empirical evidence about self-control moralization.

This paper explores the relationship between early modern English Puritanism and Reformed orthodoxy through a fresh examination of three ministers who have been described as Puritans: John Owen, Richard Baxter, and John Goodwin. By assessing their attitudes toward the Bible and specifically the doctrine of justification, this paper uncovers an evolving consensus of orthodox thought in the period. Their attitudes and approaches to doctrine and church tradition led to diverse interpretations and directions in the codification of their religion. Their (...) theological interpretations reflect an inherent pattern of diversity within English Puritanism, especially in its attitudes towards the formation of orthodoxy. The relation of Reformed orthodoxy to Puritanism, then, is more complex than older modes of scholarship have allowed. For the Puritan mainstream, Reformed orthodoxy served as a theological compass and thermostat that tested ideas and was to govern both the direction and temperament of Reformed doctrine. For those outside the pale, such orthodoxy and their alleged disloyalty to the Bible and Reformed church tradition was vehemently contested. (shrink)

The pragmatist epistemologist is supposed to defend the idea that there is no pure epistemic activity and, thereby, that the way we form our beliefs does not have to be assessed according to aims, or norms that rest on the illusory denial of the pragmatic encroachment of any inquiry. According to the pragmatist, the kind of epistemic purism that is widely endorsed in contemporary epistemology has in fact no other raison d’être than the doxastic puritanism that appears in W. (...) K. Clifford’s ethical principle. But a belief being defective has in fact nothing to do neither with the kind of practical factors that pragmatism so conceived, considers as relevant nor with the rules or values that epistemic puritanism reveres. Between believing that P and believing that E establishes that P, there is no such thing as the distance there is between practical reasons to φ and φ-ing. The position I defend is closer to Peirce’s pragmatism than to any other pragmatist approach. Among other things, it explains why C. S. Peirce’s thesis that: 1) The “real man of science” does not give any weight to practical stakes in his inquiries not only goes hand in hand with the thesis that 2) He never believes of any hypothesis that it is true, but also with the thesis that 3) The inquiry to which such a man devotes is infinite. Peirce is right from an epistemic point of view to praise men, whose life is devoted to the disinterested search for truth. (shrink)

Puritanism may evolve into a technological variant based on norms of delegation of actions and perceptions to artificial intelligence. Instead of training self-control, people may be expected to cede their agency to self-controlled machines. The cost–benefit balance of this machine puritanism may be less aversive to wealthy individualistic democracies than the old puritanism they have abandoned.

This Is A New Release Of The Original 1915 Edition.

The article examines the construction of ‘Puritanism’ in Max Weber's famous essays on the Protestant Ethic, and finds that the principal, empirical source for this lies in a set of neglected writings deriving from the religious margins of Britain: Scotland, Ireland and English Unitarianism. However, the impulse to construct “Puritanism” was not simply empirical, but conceptual. Historical ‘Puritanism’ would never have aroused so much of Weber's attention except as a close approximation to ‘ascetic Protestantism’—the avowed subject of (...) the Protestant Ethic and an undeniably new and modern idea. The nature of Weberian asceticism and its relationship to Puritanism is thus the article's second major concern. Besides exploring the intellectual world of Max Weber, the article also offers a more general, theoretical finding: that “empirical sources” are not tablets of stone, eternally available to the truth-seeking historian; rather they have a history of their own. They rise into prominence in much the same way as “secondary” literature, because they can hardly be understood independently of organizing concepts, and so seldom are. (shrink)

In the writings of the New Left are several images and a moral intensity which unwittingly have as their foundation various New England Puritan traditions.

Recent findings in evolutionary psychology explain how moral disciplining is connected to the need for collective action. Morals are strict in societies affected by war or perceived collective danger, but loose where peace and security prevail. This theory supplements the moral disciplining theory by providing an evolutionary explanation for the postulated link between puritanism and the need for cooperation.

This paper challenges historians’ portrayal of Elizabethan puritanism as rooted in the Marian exile of 1553-1558, through a fresh examination of three exiles who have been described as early puritans: James Pilkington, John Jewel, and Laurence Humphrey. By studying the value they placed on church unity, this paper brings out the fundamental differences between the early reformers and the later puritans. It also demonstrates that the religious selfidentity of these men pre-dated the accession of Mary. Thus, their exile was (...) a means of strengthening their faith, not finding it, and their return meant that there was more continuity between the Edwardian and Elizabethan churches than is often allowed in current scholarship. (shrink)

On this occasion, I shall try to respond to the suggestions that I report what it was like to be a graduate student at Harvard in the early 1930s engaged in writing a dissertation which took the shape in print of the monograph, Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth-Century England. This, quite some time before the sociology of science had emerged with a cognitive and social identity. I shall not attempt an account – let alone an explanatory account – of (...) the micro-environment at Harvard back then that provided local context for that study. Indeed, I suspect that the Gerald Holton, Everett Mendelsohn and Arnold Thackray reconstructions come closer to the intellectual and social reality of that time and place than anything I might reconstruct. (shrink)

Covering nearly 300 years of American religious writing, this anthology compiles selections from thirteen notable thinkers--including Thomas Hooker, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Hodge, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Josiah Royce, William James and H. Richard Niebuhr--to reveal the vital and creative history of Protestant theology in America. In his substantial Introduction, Sydney Ahlstrom relates the history of American theology in broad and accessible terms, tackling his subject with characteristic clarity, passion, and intellectual rectitude.