This study is the first examination of the works and lives of the women of the St. Louis philosophical movement and Concord School of Philosophy , two branches of the same idealist movement in America that introduced German thinkers to the American reading public, particularly G. W. F. Hegel. The St. Louis branch of the movement focused primarily on education as a civilizing force in society. The concepts of "self-activity" and self-estrangement were seen as integral to the educative (...) process and therefore became predominant themes of the movement. ;Many of the women in this study were contributors to The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, America's first philosophy journal, edited by William Torrey Harris, the recognized leader of the St. Louis and Concord circles. Figures studied include Susan Elizabeth Blow , kindergarten education theorist; Anna Callender Brackett , proponent of higher education for women; Grace C. Bibb , feminist and educator, Ellen M. Mitchell , feminist and Concord School lecturer; and Marietta Kies , a political theorist who posited altruism as a valid ethical principle for use in public life. A number of less prominent women educators and thinkers of the St. Louis movement and Concord School are also discussed. ;All the women in this study were associates of Harris or his colleagues: Thomas Davidson , John Dewey , George H. Howison , George S. Morris , Denton J. Snider , and Louis Soldan. (shrink)

One of the nation's leading military ethicists, Louis P. Pojman argues that globalism and cosmopolitanism motivate the need for greater international cooperation based on enforceable international law. The best way to realize the promises of globalism and cogent moral arguments for cosmopolitanism, Pojman contends, is through the establishment of a World Government.

Capturing the inimitable enthusiasm of Louis Pojman's much acclaimed teaching, PHILOSOPHY: THE PURSUIT OF WISDOM introduces students to all the core topics in philosophy. Beginning with an inquiry into the nature and purpose of philosophy, this text moves through many traditional discussions--such as the existence of God, the problems of knowledge, the freewill/determinism debate, and the foundations of ethics--concluding with an exploration into existentialism and the meaning of life.

L'exposé cartésien de l'argument ontologique s'écarte radicalement de l'esprit originaire de la preuve, chez Saint Anselme. Le Dieu de Descartes, parfait parce que tout-puissant, est bien différent du Dieu du Proslogion, Celui qui est tel que rien de plus grand ne puisse être pensé, fin de la pensée et du désir humains. La preuve d'Anselme conceptualise une expérience humaine qui se pense comme l'expérience chrétienne orthodoxe, décrivant, de ce fait, l'homme en sa vérité. Mais on n'entrera pleinement dans la pensée (...) spéculative que si l'aspiration à Dieu en l'homme est considérée comme l'envers dialectique de l'amour, créateur de l'homme, en Dieu. Chez Hegel, ce n'est pas l'esprit fini qui accomplit la preuve ontologique, mais l'Esprit dans sa totalité. Ce mouvement de l'Esprit vers soi à travers sa division d'avec soi n'est pas un simple processus logique; en sa profondeur, il est le mouvement de réconciliation de la liberté humaine avec la liberté divine, créatrice et rédemptrice. La vérité de la Totalité, et donc, aussi, de l'histoire, dans le Concept, dit également la libre unification de l'homme et de Dieu dans et par la figure historique du Christ. Hegel pense le christianisme sans le réduire, parce qu'il le pense à partir de l'acte préalable de la foi, par lequel la liberté humaine s'ouvre à l'amour divin, posant ainsi l'unité dialectique du Tout. Que la foi puisse être rationnellement exposée ne l'empêche pas d'être la foi, c'est-à-dire la vie en union au Christ, Logos éternel et homme crucifié. On a dit: Un Dieu compris n'est plus un Dieu. Cela n'est vrai que des faux dieux. (shrink)

The Good Rebel is a philosophical work, the methodology of which is nonetheless literary and historical. The book provides an original but historically informed and socially relevant commentary on modern conceptions of personal autonomy. Communitarian authors provide effective critiques of a liberal preoccupation with individualistic personal autonomy. Groarke does not contest the liberal emphasis on autonomy: instead he contests the way in which contemporary liberals define the concept of autonomy.