The concept of women-centered care during pregnancy and childbirth has received increasing attention. It addresses the question of the right degree of medical care during pregnancy. Consequently, it further opens a debate about the medicalization of pregnancy, which puts pregnancy into the realm of medicine and treats it as a medical problem. The experience of pregnancy and childbirth plays an essential role in the well-being of both the mother and the future child and is influenced by women’s autonomy and freedom (...) of choice. The aim of this study is to explore the perceptions and perspectives of women on the medicalization of pregnancy and childbirth. The study illuminates the women’s belief about whether pregnancy and childbirth should be a medicalized process to a greater or lesser degree, focusing on their preferred models of care and the implications for healthcare providers. In-depth interviews with 37 women of various backgrounds and experiences were conducted as part of a national qualitative study in Switzerland. A thematic analysis identified key themes and patterns. Two important aspects related to women’s autonomy emerged: the possibility of defining and positioning pregnancy and childbirth according to their own beliefs and life practices, and the freedom to choose the preferred model of care for their pregnancy. The findings suggest that healthcare providers should offer personalized models of care and support women’s specific needs, ensuring genuine choice and integrating authentic informed consent into the decision-making process. (shrink)

Background Prenatal genetic testing, in particular non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), as well as screening for risks associated with pregnancy, and counseling, play pivotal roles in reproductive healthcare, offering valuable information about the health of the fetus to expectant parents. This study aims to delve into the perspectives and experiences of women considering genetic testing and screening during pregnancy, focusing on their decision-making processes and the implications for informed consent. Methods A nationwide qualitative study was conducted in Switzerland, involving in-depth interviews (...) with women who were 1 to 2 years post-partum, covered by basic compulsory Swiss insurance, including women with a migration background. Thematic analysis was employed to identify key themes and patterns in the data. Results The findings underscore the significance of effective communication during prenatal counseling, suggesting that healthcare providers could not only convey technical information but also support women in their decision-making processes. Women need comprehensive information about genetic testing and its implications, as well as the reasons for screening during pregnancy, as there might be a need to bridge knowledge gaps and clarify misconceptions. Furthermore, the study highlights the multifaceted nature of decision-making, with women considering factors such as uncertainty, values, emotional responses, and societal support systems. The concept of acceptance emerged as a crucial theme, with some women expressing their readiness to love and accept their child, regardless of genetic anomalies or disabilities. Conclusion This study offers valuable insights into the perspectives and needs of women regarding prenatal genetic testing, screening, and counseling in Switzerland. It underscores the importance of enhancing the clinical interaction and informed consent process by providing comprehensive information, addressing misconceptions, and supporting women in decision-making about pregnancy management and the management of the child’s health, following prenatal genetic testing, including NIPT. These findings can inform healthcare providers and policymakers in improving the quality of prenatal counseling, ensuring informed consent, and supporting women in making well-informed and meaningful decisions about genetic testing, and on the use of screening during pregnancy. (shrink)

Inhalt: I. Satze der Form A glaubt, dass P. - II. Elementarsatz und phanomenologische Sprache. - III. Die wandelnde Bedeutung der Elementarsatze im Rahmen des Farbeninkompatibilitatsproblems. - IV. Regel und notwendiger Satz. G.E. Moore uber Wittgensteins Auffassung von Necessary Propositions. - V. Wittgensteins Single Lecture on Necessary Propositions. - VI. Eine behaviouristische Fehlinterpretation.".

In this paper the author presents two different modes of relationship between phenomenological psychopathology and philosophy. The dominant mode conforms to the medical-psychiatric discourse which takes pathological time experiences as negative deviations from the ‘normal’ and ‘adequate’ equivalent. In this mode phenomenological description of ‘disturbed’ time experiences requires philosophy to provide an insight into the ‘essence’ of time and an essentially adequate experience of time. Only such a philosophical insight can deliver a valid reference point for investigating what is really (...) missing in pathological time experiences. This philosophical reference point can either consist in a metaphysical-normative concept of time and time experiences, or in a transcendental concept of how normal and abnormal time experiences are constituted in the inner consciousness of time. There is another mode of relationship which conforms to Freud’s discovery that pathological symptoms are not just negative alterations of the ‘normal’ but hide an own ‘meaning’. The author makes the case for the use of philosophy to unveil the specific kind of meaning in pathological experiences of time. She refers to existential philosophy in this respect, and in particular to its concept of Angst as a fundamental philosophical experience. This allows for a hermeneutic approach to ‘disturbed’ time experiences. What looks from a pure psychiatric perspective to be a mere ‘disorder’ of the ‘normal’, becomes understandable as a specific form of ‘suffering from one’s own temporality’. She argues that people with disturbed time experiences are especially sensitive to anxiety-laden experiences of what it means to be temporal, whilst ‘normal’ people can screen them out in favor of a ‘mentally undisturbed’ everyday life. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Annual Meeting of the Society for Buddhist-Christian StudiesSandra Costen Kunz and Jonathan A. SeitzThe Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies (SBCS) is one of more than two dozen scholarly societies that have been formally recognized by the American Academy of Religion as Related Scholarly Organizations. The pattern for many years has been for the SBCS to hold its annual meeting in conjunction with the annual meeting of the AAR. (...) On the Friday before the AAR’s Annual Meeting begins, the Society’s board meets in the morning and early afternoon, followed by an AAR-advertised session late that afternoon. On Saturday, another paper session or panel is followed by the Society’s annual members’ meeting.A highlight of the 2012 SBCS annual meeting was the unanimous approval, first by the governing board and later by the membership in attendance, of a major revision of the society’s bylaws. This revision focused largely on updates necessitated by changes in the ways scholars communicate day-to-day and in scholarly publications, and in international banking practices, because of the expanding use of electronic media. This revision was well over a year in the making, with particularly generous input of time and thought by former board member Grace Burford and Treasurer Guy McCloskey, and with efficient guidance by President Terry Muck.Another highlight of this 2012 gathering was the announcement at the board meeting that the SBCS’s reapplication for formal status as a Related Scholarly Organization of the AAR was accepted for another five years. Among other privileges, this status makes it possible for us to communicate our calls for papers, session plans, and annual meeting schedule through AAR’s website and print publications.At the governing board meeting, Treasurer McCloskey noted an increase of more than 7 percent in paying members, but it was agreed that the society could carry [End Page 193] out its purposes more effectively if we were to welcome more new members. One especially notable new member is C. Denise Yarbrough (University of Rochester), who was unanimously approved at the members meeting as the Christian co-editor of this journal, along with Buddhist co-editor Wakoh Shannon Hickey (Notre Dame of Maryland University), who signed on in 2011.Rita Gross, who formerly co-edited the journal and was president of the Society, was elected to the board, replacing Amos Yong, whose term ended in 2012. We are extremely grateful for his leadership in many areas, including the Streng Book Award Committee. Abraham Vélez de Cea was unanimously approved to chair the Streng Book Award Committee, with Mary Jeanne Larabee continuing on the committee and David Gardiner being approved as the third member. Alice Keefe, in her vice presidential role as program chair, took note of the lively discussion about possible topics for next year’s panel sessions.The Friday afternoon seminar was titled “Contemplative Pedagogy: Pitfalls and Potentials.” Panelists included John D. Copenhaver (Shenandoah University), Kristine T. Utterback (University of Wyoming), Andrew O. Fort (Texas Christian University), and Judith Simmer-Brown (Naropa University). The respondent was William H. Green (Tougaloo College), and Wakoh Shannon Hickey (Notre Dame of Maryland University) presided. Versions of the four panelists’ papers are included in this volume of the journal, as well as additional papers on the topic by other authors.In lieu of its customary field trip, this year the SBCS encouraged participants to attend the new film Jesus & Buddha: Practicing across Traditions (Old Dog Documentaries, 2012), screened on Friday night before the AAR Annual Meeting. In the film, three leading figures in Buddhist-Christian dialogue were interviewed: Paul F. Knitter (Union Theological Seminary), Robert Kennedy, SJ (St. Peter’s College), and Chung Hyun Kyung (Union Theological Seminary). A discussion, over which Knitter presided, followed the film.The Saturday panel was “The Ethics of Wealth in a World of Economic Inequality: Buddhist and Christian Perspectives.” Panelists included Joerg Rieger (Southern Methodist University), Alan Jay Richard (Realistic Living, Inc.), and Carol S. Anderson (Kalamazoo College). The respondent was Mark Wood (Virginia Commonwealth University), and Alice A. Keefe (University of Wisconsin) presided. At the end of this session, before the member’s meeting, we enjoyed P. J. Johnston’s... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Annual Meeting of the Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies:San Francisco, California, USA, 19-22 November 2011Sandra Costen Kunz, SBCS SecretaryThe SBCS is one of thirty-two scholarly societies formally recognized by the American Academy of Religion as "Related Scholarly Organizations." The pattern for many years has been for the SBCS to hold its annual meeting in conjunction with the annual meeting of the AAR. On the Friday before the AAR's (...) annual meeting begins, the board meets in the morning and early afternoon, followed by an AAR-advertised session late that afternoon and then a field trip that evening. On Saturday, another paper session or panel is followed by the Society's annual members' meeting.Friday afternoon's 4:00-6:30 session, titled "Constructing Buddhist Identities in the West," was standing room only. The four papers presented at that panel are included in this volume.On Saturday morning, then SBCS president Miriam Levering presided at a well-attended session from 9:00 to 11:30. The topic was "Christian Readings of Buddhist Texts." Catherine Cornille (Boston College), editor of the Christian Commentaries on Non-Christian Sacred Texts series, gave the first presentation, titled "Reading the Religious Other." She discussed the origin and nature of the series and gave examples of the methodologies used in various volumes they had published. Francis X. Clooney (Harvard University) presented "Reading Inter-religiously as a Theologically Necessary Act." Insisting that "reading well has a lot of common factors whether or not a text is from one's own or another tradition," he noted that "saying you read both the same doesn't mean you put them on same doctrinal level.... We defer the apologetics not just to be polite, but because there are many other things to do first." Leo Lefebure (Georgetown University) spoke about "Reading the Dhammapada" in light of his work with Peter Feldmeier in writing The Path of Wisdom: A Christian Commentary on the Dhammapada, published within the Christian Commentaries on Non-Christian Sacred Texts series. The volume was the winner of this year's Frederick J. Streng Book Award, which was presented by Amos Yong (Regent University). Lefebure pointed out that biblical wisdom literature and the Dhammapada both insist [End Page 129] that how we view the world largely shapes our happiness or unhappiness, and that both describe "decidedly unskillful and skillful ways to live."Between the Saturday morning session and the members' meeting that followed, Karen Enriquez presented the graduate student award to Kyeongil Jung, a student of Paul Knitter's at Columbia University-Union Theological Seminary. He gave a brief synopsis of his award-winning paper, "A Buddhist-Christian Story of Peace and Justice," also included in this volume. [End Page 130]Copyright © 2012 University of Hawai'i Press... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Annual Meeting of the Society for Buddhist-Christian StudiesMontreal, Quebec, Canada, 6 –7 November 2009Sandra Costen Kunz and Amos YongThe Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies (SBCS) sponsored two sessions in conjunction with the 2009 annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion. The first session was titled “The Boundaries of Knowledge in Buddhism, Christianity and Science.” The theme for the second session was “Buddhist-Christian Dialogue in an Age of (...) Science.”The first session, a panel discussion of The Boundaries of Knowledge in Buddhism, Christianity and Science, edited by Paul Numrich (Göttingen: Vandenhouek and Rupricht, 2008), considered the epistemological questions raised by Buddhist, Christian, and scientific insights on the inadequacies of conceptualization and language for understanding reality. The project that produced the book was funded by the Templeton Foundation, which also generously supported this panel.After a welcome by moderator Miriam Levering (University of Tennessee), the book’s editor, Paul Numrich (Theological Consortium of Greater Columbus), gave a brief overview of the volume, followed by reflections on their chapters by two contributors: Dennis Hirota (Ryukoku University) and Paul Ingram (Pacific Lutheran University). Amos Yong (Regent University School of Divinity) responded to Hirota’s chapter, and Sandra Costen Kunz (Phillips Theological Seminary) responded to Ingram’s. Hirota and Ingram each made a few remarks on these responses, leading into an open discussion including other contributors to the book: John Albright (Lutheran School of Theology), Roger Blomquist (Argonne National Laboratory), Tom Christenson (Capital University), and David McMahan (Franklin and Marshall College).Hirota’s paper, based on his chapter “Shinran and Heidegger on Truth,” examined the epistemology of Shinran (1173–1263), founder of the Japanese Shin Pure Land Buddhist tradition. Hirota noted that for both Shinran and Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) [End Page 197] truth is less a matter of asserting propositions and more a matter of the recognition and turning away from prior perceptual distortion. This permits the emergence of a new structure of awareness, an emergence that parallels Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm shifts in scientific understanding.In his response, Yong called for a greater role for different “particularistic or even confessional approaches” within “the religion-science discussion.” He thus noted with appreciation the grounding of Hirota’s paper in a Buddhist tradition that is not “broadly Tibetan,” like much work in Buddhist-science dialogue. He compared and contrasted Shinran’s teachings about the corruption and purification of human reason with those of the Council of Dordt’s five-point condensation of Protestant reformer John Calvin’s soteriology, pointing out that both have a salvific intention.Ingram argued that while science has amassed reliable information about physical reality, and Buddhist and Christian practitioners have amassed reliable knowledge about the structures of human experience, all three traditions confront epistemological boundaries imposed by their methods of inquiry. Questions arising at these boundaries form the foundation for a science-Buddhism-Christianity trialogue. Noting that science demonstrates that “nature is rooted in a realm... only half-translated into our phenomenal experience,” Ingram reviewed how scientists and Buddhist and Christian practitioners “work back from relevant experiences on the phenomenal level, and then ask what hypothetical reality might constructively explain these experiences.”Kunz pointed out that in his examples of “working back” from experience toward hypotheses, Ingram cites many reasons for epistemological humility. Noting her research on how methods of Christian spiritual discernment might yield hypotheses for reducing the ecological crisis, she argued that Christians who have ignored the boundaries of human knowledge have contributed to this crisis. She suggested that if Western Christians who teach spiritual discernment took Buddhist and current neuroscience insights about human knowing more seriously, their teaching practices might differ less from those of non-Western Christians.The second session, chaired by Amos Yong (Regent University), was a roundtable discussion of Paul O. Ingram’s book Buddhist-Christian Dialogue in an Age of Science (Rowman and Littlefield, 2008). Respondents included Mark Unno, associate professor of East Asian religions at the University of Oregon; Nancy Howell, professor of theology and philosophy of religion at Saint Paul School of Theology in Kansas City, Missouri; Benjamin Chicka, PhD candidate in the philosophy of religion and theology at Claremont Graduate University; and former... (shrink)

We defend a realistic attitude towards biological species. We argue that two species are not different species because they differ in intrinsic features, be they phenotypic or genomic, but because they are separated with regard to gene flow. There are no intrinsic species essences. However, there are relational ones. We argue that bearing a gene flow relation to conspecifics may serve as the essence of a species. Our view of the species as a Gene-Flow Community differs from Mayr’s definition of (...) the species as a reproductive community. In a reproductive community, each organism is able to successfully reproduce with each other. However, there are species in which geographically distant organisms lost their ability to successfully reproduce, due to strong genetic adaptations to the respective local environmental conditions. Despite this loss of the ability to mutually reproduce, they are still bound by gene flow via continuous intermediate populations. This replacement of Mayr’s notion of an interbreeding potential as a criterion for species membership has important implications for the treatment of populations in allopatry and sympatry. (shrink)

Bemerkenswert an der Gerechtigkeitstheorie der amerikanischen Philosophin Martha Nussbaum ist ihre Entscheidung für einen emanzipatorischen Essentialismus, der für Differenzen und Unterschiede sensibel ist. Die von ihr vorgenommene Synthese zwischen einer material orientierten Gerechtigkeitstheorie und Elementen liberal orientierter Ethikkonzeptionen versucht, das Verhältnis zwischen Universalismus und Partikularismus in der Moralphilosophie neu auszubalancieren. Der Anspruch, die Frage nach einem guten Leben vor dem Horizont dieser Spannungsfelder zu bearbeiten, macht Nussbaums Ansatz für die Christliche Sozialethik, die essentialistischem Denken traditionell sehr nahe steht, zu einem (...) interessanten Gesprächspartner. Für ein solches Gespräch nimmt der Band wichtige Vorklärungen vor. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Annual Meeting of the Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies:Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 29-30 October 2010Sandra Costen KunzThis past fall the Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies (SBCS) presented two sessions at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion (AAR) in Atlanta, Georgia. On Friday afternoon, 29 October, an extremely well-attended and in many ways inspiring session titled "The Scholarly Contributions of Rita M. Gross" was presented. The second panel, titled (...) "Can/Should Buddhists and Christians Do Theology/ Buddhology Together?" was presented on Saturday morning, 30 October. It also drew a considerable crowd.Each of the six members of Friday's panel addressed a different aspect of the work of Rita Gross, longtime SBCS leader and now professor emerita of comparative studies in religion, University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. She is also a senior teacher (lopon) in Jetsun Khandro Rinpoche's U.S. Lotus Garden center. The session was organized and moderated by current SBCS president Miriam M. Levering, professor of religious studies and Asian studies at University of Tennessee, Knoxville, and an international advisor at Rissho Ko-Sekei in Tokyo. I will give highlights from the panelists' presentations in the order in which they spoke.Kathleen Erndl, associate professor of religion at Florida State University, focused on Gross's work as teacher and mentor. Although she taught primarily undergraduates, Gross, in her writing, speaking, and generous conversation with rising scholars, not only moved the field toward taking religious practices and women's religious experience more seriously but also had a huge influence on how "women in religion" is taught. Gross was one of the first scholars to use the term "androcentric." Nancy Auer Falk, professor emerita of comparative religion at Western Michigan University, coedited Unspoken Worlds: Women's Religious Lives (1981) with Gross. Now in its third edition, this groundbreaking collection of case studies watered the flowering of cross-cultural studies in the lived religion of women. Falk reminded us of Gross's role in the election of the first female member of the AAR's board and the establishment of its working group on women and religion. Judith Simmer-Brown, professor of religious [End Page 221] studies at Naropa University, focused on Gross's work in Tibetan Buddhist studies, especially her pointing out the discrepancy between the prophetic voices about women's roles in early Buddhist texts and Tibetan monasticism's institutionalized androcentrism. Simmer-Brown emphasized the importance of Gross's work in Buddhist theology—for example, her deconstructing "Theravada/Mahayana/Vajrayana put-downs" and "incipient fundamentalisms" in Western Buddhism.The fourth panelist, Paul F. Knitter, professor of theology, world religions, and culture at Union Theological Seminary, described Gross's contributions to Buddhist-Christian dialogue, recounting that they met at the Society's founding conference in 1980. He said, "Rita is the Christian theologians' friendly gadfly, always asking questions that make us very uncomfortable." Particularly provocative has been her insistence that claims on the part of religious communities to religious superiority or exclusive truth are incompatible with support of religious diversity. SBCS vice president Terry Muck, dean of the E. Stanley Jones School of World Mission and Evangelism at Asbury Theological Seminary, spoke about Gross's contributions to the society, noting that she has held every office except treasurer. He and Gross coedited Buddhist-Christian Studies from 1995-2005, in part because the society had decided— after founding editor David Chappell retired—that the ideal would be one male and one female editor and one Buddhist and one Christian editor. He usually handled the work with the publisher while she usually worked with article selection along with the reviewers. Rosemary Radford Ruether, professor emerita at the Pacific School of Religion, reviewed Gross's contributions to feminist scholarship. She reminded us that while still a student at the University of Chicago, Gross crafted a fundamental methodology for studying women and religion and insisted that turning a blind eye to 80 percent of the religious practice in various cultures is simply bad empiricism. Gross has consistently pointed out that colonialism is connected with privileging males and texts, Reuther claimed, and that no one studies religion with "objectivity."Gross's response to these presentations focused on... (shrink)

The pregnancy compensation hypothesis provides a mechanistic explanation for the evolution of sex differences in immune system functioning, the excess of women experiencing autoimmune disease, and why this is observed only in industrialized nations; none of which can be explained by the staying alive theory, as proposed by the authors of the target article.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Annual Meeting of the Society for Buddhist-Christian StudiesSan Diego, California, USA November 21–23, 2014Sandra Costen Kunz, SBCS Secretary and Jonathan A. Seitz, Newsletter EditorThe annual meeting is an opportunity to meet, to reconnect, and to share our work. As a “Related Scholarly Organization” of the American Academy of Religion, the Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies holds its meetings concurrently with the AAR’s national conference. The SBCS normally organizes (...) two panels and holds board and members meetings. This year’s panels were “Liberation Theology and Engaged Buddhism: Challenging Each Other, Learning from Each Other,” and “Old Buddhist Texts: New Womanist Thought.” The papers from panels are often published in this journal.board meetings (officer and committee reports)The society’s annual board meeting was held on Friday, November 21, and its members meeting Sunday, Nov. 23. The board approved officer reports submitted by the treasurer, Denise Yarbrough, the interim journal editors, Terry Muck and Rita Gross, and the newsletter editor, Jonathan Seitz and the minutes submitted by secretary Sandra Kunz. An extended discussion treated the history of the relationship between the society, the journal, and the University of Hawai’i Press. The board voted to continue publishing with UHP while working out a new memorandum of understanding.We reviewed reports from the Nominating Committee, Streng Book Award Committee, Graduate Student Award Committee, Membership Committee, Social Media and Website Committee, and Program Committee.Nominating CommitteeThe Nominating Committee reported that the governing board terms of Yifa and John Makransky end with this board meeting. John remains on the board as vice president. We discussed nominees for these two board positions.Streng Book Award CommitteeThe Streng Book Award Committee noted that it would be helpful to receive nominations. Thomas Hastings joined the committee and J. Abraham Vélez de Cea was elected to another term. [End Page 207]Graduate Student Award CommitteeKaren Enriquez reported for the Graduate Student Award Committee, noting that although a good paper was selected this year, the problem of paper quality remains. Rita Gross suggested that members with students working in Buddhist-Christian studies should encourage them to present papers at regional AAR meetings and submit these to the award committee. Judith Simmer-Brown suggested we start a subsidiary online journal that would publish, among other things, commentaries on BCS articles, including grad student commentaries. John Makransky suggested that we also post important articles from past issues we see as classics in the field. In light of the board’s enthusiasm about this idea for publishing grad student papers online, and in light of the difficulties of scheduling graduate student award papers within our sessions, John moved that we discontinue the oral presentation of graduate student award papers. Judith seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. John later moved, and Judith seconded the motion, that the board charge Karen, Glenn Willis, and Sarah Swenson to develop a proposal by March for a website that would host a subsidiary peer-reviewed online journal, being sure to articulate how this could promote the society among younger scholars. It passed unanimously.Membership CommitteeReminding us of Jonathan Seitz’s list of past members, John Makransky suggested we send out a membership mailing to them. Sarah Swenson and Alice Keefe were charged with creating a comprehensive distribution list and sending out a mailing asking everyone to join, rejoin, or renew their membership.Social Media and Website CommitteeIn light of our proposal to start a subsidiary online journal, Judith Simmer-Brown was gratefully charged with chairing a new committee with David Gardiner and Glenn Willis, who has been handling Facebook publicity. They will get bids for hiring a professional website designer who can configure it in such a way that we could maintain it ourselves.Program CommitteeJohn Makransky reported briefly on the potential session topics suggested at the lunch meeting. We discussed pros and cons of forming panels of known experts and using AAR’s blind submission process. The discussion ended with general exhortation to scout out scholars with pertinent work to enlarge our pool of presenters.We briefly discussed the pros and cons of organizing an international conference and reviving and regularizing the... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Honoring, Listening, and Fostering Peace through Friendship:SBCS Annual Meeting November 17–18, 2023, San AntonioSandra Costen KunzThe Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies (SBCS) held its annual meeting the weekend before Thanksgiving in conjunction with the annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion (AAR) as one of its "related scholarly organizations." Three important decisions that the board of directors made are:1. the approval of a new publication agreement with the University (...) of Hawai'i Press (UHP) that journal co-editors Thomas Cattoi and Kristin Largen and treasurer John Sheveland spent many hours working out with UHP's staff,2. the creation of a new standing committee: Oral History and Archives. It will record long-time members's memories of their involvement with society and collect photos and documents pertinent to the society's history,3. the decision to hold an online board meeting before AAR's annual meeting to complete as much routine annual business as possible so that our once-a-year, face-to-face time together can be devoted to more in-depth planning and problem-solving and spending more time listening to, and learning from, each other.Three other highlights of this year's meeting were: (i) honoring long-time interreligious peacemaker Thich Nhat Hahn at our Saturday morning session, (ii) listening to Won Buddhists describe their interreligious peacemaking practices at our Saturday afternoon session, and (iii) committing ourselves as a board to be more faithful in following the practices of the founders of the society by setting aside more time to foster interreligious peace not only through careful scholarship but also through caring friendships.In its early decades, the society spent much of its time and income hosting multiday international conferences that provided much more time for developing friendships and learning from each other than our board meetings and paper sessions at AAR have provided. We have sometimes planned field trips to local temples or churches or dinners at restaurants, but these "extra programs" were always an ad hoc add-on. This year, the board committed itself to reviving the friendship-building and learning-from-each-other priorities of our predecessors in the society and to discerning how to embody them in SBCS programming. [End Page 219]Since I see this year's meeting as something of a watershed moment for the society, I've devoted more pages to this annual meeting article than usual to share more fully with our members and other readers of Buddhist-Christian Studies the work that we did and the possibilities that we discussed.friday board of directors meetingPresident's Opening RemarksPresident Mark Unno called the meeting to order with these words: "The main thing I want to say is: 'Thank you to all our board members for an amazing year!'" Noting how many AAR-related societies struggled through the digital transition and then the pandemic, he expressed gratitude that the SBCS sustained robust activity through the heavy lifting by many board members.After welcoming at-large members Gloria Chien from Gonzago University and Trent Pomplum from Notre Dame to their first in-person board meeting, Mark relayed at-large board member Victor Gabriel's regrets for being unable to attend. After each person had updated everyone with whatever seemed most pertinent, we moved to the international advisors's, officers's, and committees's reports.International Advisor ReportsElizabeth Harris from the European Network of Buddhist-Christian Studies began by announcing that the papers from their 2022 conference, "Euro-Buddhism and the Role of Christianity," will be published in 2024 by EOS Verlag. Our journal coeditor, Thomas Cattoi, contributed. Their next conference, titled "A Buddhist-Christian Dialogue on the Body," will be at St. Otillien Benedictine Abbey in Bavaria on June 27–July 1, 2024. She reminded us that they issue an open call for papers that supplement their invited keynote addresses, in part to help scholars get travel funding. The network's conference in 2026 will be held at the Protestant Academy for Mission Studies (EMW) at the University of Hamburg to celebrate the thirtieth anniversary of the network's founding there by Rev. Gerhard Köberlin.She noted that, in the UK... (shrink)

Psyche, the daughter of a Greek king, was so beautiful that people stopped worshipping Aphrodite; instead they turned their adoration to the girl who modestly rejected any divine honours. Aphrodite, enraged, sent her son Eros to contrive a spell to make this beautiful maiden fall in love with an ugly creature. Seeing her, however, Eros fell in love and could not obey his mother. Short version: Aphrodite, jealous, tried to sabotage Psyche with impossible tasks. After great struggle, Psyche escaped the (...) traps with the help not of the gods but of the creatures of nature. Finally, Eros appealed to Zeus to set her free. With his consent the happy couple married on Mount Olympus celebrated by all the gods including Aphrodite. Psyche bore a daughter, Voluptas (better known as Pleasure), and so goes this great myth. Weary of the mainstream’s claim that only it is scientific, and its dismissal of phenomenology as “conjecture”, this paper is an effort to return to the origins of the study of the fascinating and frustrating old psyche. To conserve (a) its most fundamental approach, (b) most empirical method, and (c) most lived psychological content, the author urges students to ask first the persistent – since the Greeks – and necessary philosophical questions (ontological, epistemological, ethical, and so forth). He proceeds from there to show that phenomenology can (a) resurrect the psyche and its neglected meanings both experienced and expressed in action, (b) rescue behaviour from the Procrustean bed of “the scientific method” and resuscitate it as lived, (c) expose the myth of objective consciousness, and (d) reaffirm that freedom makes the psyche not less but more available to science by letting human reality show itself. Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Emmanuel Levinas have inspired over forty years of classroom rebellion and conservation of a psychology of incarnate humankind. These philosophers have provoked an alternative understanding of the characteristics of science (empirical, objective, reductive, and so forth). Finally, this paper reasserts a moral science with attention to the “psychology for the Other” over a “psychology for the self” with the paradoxical content: we can sabotage ourselves with selfinterested power and discover ourselves in the service of the weakness of others. The call to responsibility is the most fundamental characteristic of the psyche. (shrink)

As possibilidades de diálogo pedagógico entre os campos da Educação Ambiental e Formação Humana nos cursos de Educação Física é objeto deste estudo. Buscando revisar e evidenciar os princípios e objetivos construídos historicamente da Educação Ambiental e a atual realidade da formação de professores, identificando os limites e possibilidades para a construção de uma proposta crítica pedagógica que altera a lógica na Formação de Professores em Educação Física a partir do tripé ensino, pesquisa e extensão e a Educação Ambiental.The possibilities (...) pedagogical of the dialogue between the fields of Human Environmental Education and Training courses in Physical Education is an object of this study. The objective is review and clear the principles and objectives of environmental education, identifying the limits and possibilities for building critical pedagogical proposal amending the logic in the courses of the physical education from the triad education, research and outreach and environmental education. (shrink)

The phenomenological ethics of Emmanuel Levinas challenges fundamental assumptions regarding the ethical and ontological nature of interpersonal relationships. Although Levinas did not address the specific ethical realities of enduring intimacy, the existential anthropology of Martin Buber is used to explore the implications of Levinas' ethic for enduring intimate relationships. These philosophers call for a reexamination of some of our basic assumptions about being a couple, and challenges us to articulate a more meaningful description of what it means to be a (...) couple. 2012 APA, all rights reserved). (shrink)