Preproceedings 2006 - Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the possibility of defending the cartoons as works of art. Surely, their aesthetic quality is minimal. If it were high, it could outweigh minor moral objections, making them morally tolerable. More to the point, of course, is freedom of the press, partly subsumable under freedom of expression. Yet, it possesses special features and is associated with special obligations, articulaed in the many professional codes of ethics of journalists. I distinguish between the decision to publish the cartoons in the first place and decisions to republish them. Jyllands-Posten published the cartoons after illustrators had refused to contribute to a book on the Koran and Muhammad or at least wanted to remain anonymous, for fear of Muslim retaliation, and after this matter had been reported in the Danish press. Angered by this, the editors of Jyllands-Posten wanted to show courage (required by those codes) and test the exercise of free speech in Denmark. They could not foresee the reactions abroad. Had they known them, they said, they would not have published the cartoons. This concession, surely, is rather prudential than purely moral. Decisions to republish the cartoons form a mixed affair. They might be inspired by the same motives as those of Jyllands-Posten. But they can also be seen as exercises of the right and duty to inform the public truthfully, adequately and comprehensively about a controversy. Muslim circles, of course, have seen them as insult piled on insult. 4. Morality in a Messy World Violence, threat or manipulation has no place or role in morality as such. If someone offended someone else, then, from the moral point of view, the offended one may express his anger in a non-violent form, the offender should offer his sincere excuses, possibly mitigated in the case of an unintentional offense, will often promise not to repeat his misconduct and think of some additional ways of making repair. Yet, in reality, offenses frequently lead to verbal fights and more. The straightforward moral point of view gets obstructed by thoughts and acts of aggression, resentment, revenge, strategic manipulation and also of self-defense and self-protection, depending on the circumstances. It is not that ethics has nothing to say about situations where things get out of hand. For fights of a greater dimension, for example, there after all are the well worked-out Principles of Just War. In all such situations, there is the general moral duty to restore peace and security. Legal systems and international treaties – in the example given, the Geneva Conventions – are meant to bring some order into the messy human world. One, then, has the second-order moral duty to heed the law and agreements. The circumstances that go to explain the reactions in the cartoon controversy are too many and too complex to be detailed here (cf. Bednarz et al. 2006). There is the long history of enmity between Islam and Christianity. The Muslim world and culture lost the superiority they once possessed. Many Muslims now feel exploited, excluded, humiliated, misunderstood or despised by the West. And since 9/11 Muslims have felt subject to a generalized suspicion of being potential terrorists. Given such feelings, it was easy for religious and political leaders to organize mass protests and boycotts, and let violent reactions to the Danish cartoons happen – maybe welcome distractions from their own problems at home. Acts of destruction and incitements to kill the cartoonists, of course, are morally unacceptable. Reflections on Ethics and Cultural Clash - Peter P. Kirschenmann What about the circumstances in Western countries? The invited cartoonists who refused to contribute or wanted to stay anonymous remembered that all Muslims were called upon to kill Salman Rushdie and knew about the actual murder of Theo van Gogh. The “courage” shown by the editors of Jyllands-Posten could be considered to be misplaced. The substantial issue, also in most of the commentaries, has been whether, or in how much, we should sacrifice freedom of speech to Muslim threats and violent actions. If we did so at all, in a reconciliatory mood, due to non-ethical motives, we would at least lose some of our moral integrity and maybe much more. If we did not, politicians might fear that we would endanger the flow of oil from Arab countries. One commentator (Black 2006) says to be furious about any attempts to placate Muslim demonstrators, “understand” their anger. Her main argument is that they should not complain, since they have been doing the same thing with their anti-Semitic cartoons and their anti-Semitic and anti-American propaganda. Such a very common tu quoque argument has little to do with morality: it does not ask what is right, but denies the opposing party the relevant moral standing for complaining. It is a confrontational strategic move, though, to me, an ethically permissible one. A. Hirsi Ali (2006), who had to go into hiding because of death threats, has, in her political and cinematographic work, been emphatically pleading for abandoning a policy of reconciliation in favor of a policy of confrontation with respect to radical fundamentalist Muslims, from whom more moderate Muslims, in her mind, too little distantiate themselves. She reminds us of Chamberlain’s policy and its consequences, replaced then by Churchill’s. In a confrontational approach, morality will often be moved to the back seat, except for the assessment of the envisioned goal. 5. Concluding Remarks Europe had to go through long periods of atrocious and, in large part, senseless religious wars before the principles of religious freedom and tolerance were formulated and accepted. In many countries, revolutions and violent struggles were needed to establish or enforce civil rights and liberties, among which free speech; at times, nonviolent movements have been successful. It is not predictable which course Islamic countries will take in these respects. Some, like S. P. Huntington (1996), think that world politics is entering a phase in which clashes, not so much between nations, but between cultures, most of which religion-based, will be inevitable. Even if one does not share this view, it is certainly not enough just to hope that conflicts will disappear. No ethical theory tells us to condone oppression or terror. Thus, one should strive, as suggested by Oomen, to realize liveable local arrangements, morally and otherwise acceptable, as much as possible honoring human rights. Historical and current experience, though, warns us that changing a totalitarian religious order too rapidly, may cause more pain than positive results. One should also work towards a global order which incorporates at least minimal moral standards. On both fronts, negotiation and dialogue will be needed. Yet, these cannot get underway in a civilized form, as long as the circumstances, as sketched above, have not suitably changed. For judging cultures and intercultural transactions, H. Procee (1991) formulated two ethical meta-principles, those of non-exclusion and of promotion of interaction. “The first demands respect and some protection of other 145
cultures, unless they fail to heed these principles themselves. Globally, it can mean that no [such] culture should be excluded in giving shape to the world community. The second principle says that they should actively, interactively, take part in this process.” (Kirschenmann 1998: 348; also 2001). The second encourages dialogue and negotiation. Unfortunately, the first one, its prerequisite, can hardly be said to be complied with by present circumstances. Think of the fact that everywhere in Christian Europe ever more mosques are being built, whereas in Saudi Arabia catholic services are forbidden to be held in embassies, and he who brings a Bible into the country runs the risk of imprisonment (Bednarz 2006, 100f.). Mere ethical appeals appear to be too feeble to change such a situation. References Bednarz, D. et al. 2006 “Tage des Zorns”, Spiegel Nr. 6: 88-105. Black, E. 2006 “The ‘Offended’ Offenders”, under http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/02/12/043758.php. Hirsi Ali, A. 2006 “Confrontatie, geen verzoening”, Volkskrant 8 april. Huntington, S.P. 1996 The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kirschenmann, P.P. 1998 “Preparatory Education for Foreign Students and the Ethics of Multiculturalism”, in P. Kampits et al. (eds.), Applied Ethics, Papers (1), Kirchberg am Wechsel: Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society, 345-350. Kirschenmann, P.P. 2001 “Science and Multiculturalism: Some Questions Still Remain”, Annals of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science, Vol. 10, 91-108. Oomen, B. 2006 “Mensenrechten zijn nog veel te westers”, Volkskrant 18 februari. Procee, H. 1991 Over de grenzen van culturen: Voorbij universalisme en relativisme. Amsterdam, Meppel: Boom. Zeeman, M. 2006 “The nieuwe wereld vraagt om nieuwe omgangsvormen”, Volkskrant 11 februari. 146 Reflections on Ethics and Cultural Clash - Peter P. Kirschenmann
Page 2 and 3:
Kulturen: Konflikt-Analyse-Dialog C
Page 4 and 5:
Cultures: Conflict-Analysis-Dialogu
Page 6 and 7:
Inhalt / Contents Inhalt / Contents
Page 8 and 9:
Inhalt / Contents Zar'a-Jacob und W
Page 10:
Inhalt / Contents A Complicated For
Page 13 and 14:
12 Egoism, Coexistence, and the Pos
Page 15 and 16:
A Naturalistic Method for Therapy n
Page 17 and 18:
«views from nowhere»“ (Geertz 2
Page 19 and 20:
Our thesis is that the dichotomy be
Page 21 and 22:
Der Vorrang der Logik vor der Metap
Page 23 and 24:
sein [muss]“(TB 24.7.16), so wie
Page 25 and 26:
24 Jenseits des nichtzweifelnden Be
Page 27 and 28:
Intercultural Dialog and Mathematic
Page 29 and 30:
References 28 Intercultural Dialog
Page 31 and 32:
While half a muffin is still a piec
Page 33 and 34:
References Abrahams, Gerald 1952 Th
Page 35 and 36:
Hence Wittgenstein states: “Not,
Page 37 and 38:
About “die letzte Zusammenfassung
Page 39 and 40:
Groag remembers to have had in wint
Page 41 and 42:
Surprisingly enough, the late Wittg
Page 43 and 44:
Wittgenstein and Kripke’s Skeptic
Page 45 and 46:
5. Concluding remarks For Wittgenst
Page 47 and 48:
Here something strange happens, how
Page 49 and 50:
attribution of beliefs and the inte
Page 51 and 52:
Ist meine eigene Weltanschuung thir
Page 53 and 54:
Literatur: 52 Ist meine eigene Welt
Page 55 and 56:
54 An economist’s reflections on
Page 57 and 58:
56 An economist’s reflections on
Page 59 and 60:
How to Make Opposite Ends Meet? Ays
Page 61 and 62:
Intercultural Dialogue in Philosoph
Page 63 and 64:
62 Intercultural Dialogue in Philos
Page 65 and 66:
64 On Siamese Twins and Philosophic
Page 67 and 68:
Wittgenstein on Frege on Connective
Page 69 and 70:
Where to seek for the ‘Uniquely I
Page 71 and 72:
Searles Naturalismus: Eine seiner S
Page 73 and 74:
72 Searles Naturalismus: Eine seine
Page 75 and 76:
structures that tend to shade off i
Page 77 and 78:
Probleme der interkulturellen Philo
Page 79 and 80:
Literatur 78 Probleme der interkult
Page 81 and 82:
group theory for obtaining the basi
Page 83 and 84:
Radical Interpretation and Intercul
Page 85 and 86:
References Davidson, Donald 1984 In
Page 87 and 88:
86 Indeterminismus freier Willensen
Page 89 and 90:
Is naturalism progressive? A natura
Page 91 and 92:
References 90 Is naturalism progres
Page 93 and 94:
practice with the philosophers’ (
Page 95 and 96: Against Their Own Intention: Proble
Page 97 and 98: 96 Against Their Own Intention: Pro
Page 99 and 100: Recognising Beauty : On The Intercu
Page 101 and 102: 100 Recognising Beauty : On The Int
Page 103 and 104: 102 Trendwende in der Evolution? Ni
Page 105 and 106: Postmodernismus als Argumentationst
Page 107 and 108: 106 Postmodernismus als Argumentati
Page 109 and 110: Freud-Jung controversy: a failed in
Page 111 and 112: wishes, anxiety, guilt and hatred,
Page 113 and 114: References Freud, Sigmund (1912-13)
Page 115 and 116: of water beneath a glacier and any
Page 117 and 118: given physical world and our repres
Page 119 and 120: would be a further substratum on wh
Page 121 and 122: Wittgenstein and the Language of Re
Page 123 and 124: The fact that religious attitude is
Page 125 and 126: 3. Potentials and limitations of de
Page 127 and 128: Es gibt keinen Dissens, es gibt nur
Page 129 and 130: 128 Es gibt keinen Dissens, es gibt
Page 131 and 132: akademischem Charakter, natürlich
Page 133 and 134: 132 Wittgenstein's Paperwork. An Ex
Page 135 and 136: Substance and Attribute in the Cont
Page 137 and 138: 136 Substance and Attribute in the
Page 143 and 144: understands the patient's worldview
Page 145: Reflections on Ethics and Cultural
Page 149 and 150: identisch ist. Charakteristischerwe
Page 151 and 152: Nachdenken über Gewissheit - Zur A
Page 153 and 154: 152 Nachdenken über Gewissheit - Z
Page 155 and 156: 154 Zar'a-Jacob und Walda-Heiwat ü
Page 157 and 158: Wittgenstein on consciousness in
Page 159 and 160: 158 Wittgenstein on consciousness i
Page 161 and 162: Normalität vs. Naturalität Das er
Page 163 and 164: Did you do something wrong if you c
Page 165 and 166: References 164 Did you do something
Page 167 and 168: zustandekommt. Der Pyrrhoneer ist g
Page 169 and 170: Wittgenstein’s “notorious parag
Page 171 and 172: Instead, Gödel always gives a redu
Page 173 and 174: our view, this plurality of remarks
Page 175 and 176: Designation and Ontological Commitm
Page 177 and 178: 176 Designation and Ontological Com
Page 179 and 180: For one thing, those who appeal to
Page 181 and 182: On the Impossibility of Solitary Pe
Page 183 and 184: For instance, it takes creative mor
Page 185 and 186: 184 Wittgensteins Philosophieren f
Page 187 and 188: Derivativeness, production and reac
Page 189 and 190: 4. Conclusion To conclude, Anscombe
Page 191 and 192: Our concept of non-compositionality
Page 193 and 194: „Patamou“ oder „El poder de l
Page 195 and 196: Literatur Breinbauer, Ines Maria 19
Page 197 and 198:
Persons can also have beliefs about
Page 199 and 200:
Wittgenstein, Cavell, and the Fall
Page 201 and 202:
culture in which laws of the intell
Page 203 and 204:
elated in a world-picture. This I d
Page 205 and 206:
Reservations to Human Rights Treati
Page 207 and 208:
legal jargon calls its “objective
Page 209 and 210:
Worin besteht nun dieser Zusammenha
Page 211 and 212:
Do We Really Need Relativism About
Page 213 and 214:
MacFarlane’s and Kölbel’s view
Page 215 and 216:
It follows from this approach that
Page 217 and 218:
Die Relativität von Gewißheiten K
Page 219 and 220:
egierig aufgegriffen werden, insbes
Page 221 and 222:
220 Natural Language and its Speake
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Der Beitrag einer „Logik der Phil
Page 231 and 232:
230 Der Beitrag einer „Logik der
Page 233 and 234:
einer ausgesprochen lockeren Sprach
Page 235 and 236:
Wittgenstein, Waismann and Non-Eucl
Page 237 and 238:
importance, since it appears no les
Page 239 and 240:
238 Cultural Alterity and Unilatera
Page 241 and 242:
Die Opazität der Oberfläche: Witt
Page 243 and 244:
unserer Sprachspiele durch unsere R
Page 245 and 246:
244 A Perspective of Dialogical Eng
Page 247 and 248:
Double Meant is not Double Good: A
Page 249 and 250:
The Analytic Theory of the A Priori
Page 251 and 252:
not white, so the fact that “snow
Page 253 and 254:
252 Experience and social norms in
Page 255 and 256:
Can there be such thing as a “hop
Page 257 and 258:
feeling that was both thought or fe
Page 259 and 260:
258 Regaining the Sense of the Trac
Page 261 and 262:
Brandom on Holism, Communication, a
Page 263 and 264:
interpersonal communication is real
Page 265 and 266:
264 Action and Morality: A Reflecti
Page 267 and 268:
Peter Singer’s Utilitarianism ver
Page 269 and 270:
References 268 Peter Singer’s Uti
Page 271 and 272:
Wittgenstein affirms that what ‘g
Page 273 and 274:
Spiel der Sprache und Sprachspiel -
Page 275 and 276:
274 Spiel der Sprache und Sprachspi
Page 277 and 278:
276 ‘The riddle does not exist’
Page 279 and 280:
Zur dringend notwendigen Revision d
Page 281 and 282:
280 Zur dringend notwendigen Revisi
Page 283 and 284:
282 • dass einem die Ressourcen z
Page 285 and 286:
Deuten - Missverstehen - ‚Blasphe
Page 287 and 288:
286 Deuten - Missverstehen - ‚Bla
Page 289 and 290:
If we can learn a social practice,
Page 291 and 292:
Keine Anschauungsgrade besitzt hing
Page 293 and 294:
Life’s Infinite Variations: Wittg
Page 295 and 296:
another culture is also the sign of
Page 297 and 298:
296 Against cultural identity: a fa
Page 299 and 300:
Kann eine Person als Urheber ihrer
Page 301 and 302:
300 Kann eine Person als Urheber ih
Page 303 and 304:
Substanz, Kausalität und Freiheit
Page 305 and 306:
Im abschließenden Teil des Vortrag
Page 307 and 308:
verstehen). D.h.: das Verstehen ein
Page 309 and 310:
Towards an Intercultural Phenomenol
Page 311 and 312:
310 Towards an Intercultural Phenom
Page 313 and 314:
feel envy towards his brother witho
Page 315 and 316:
idges chronological distances; for
Page 317 and 318:
Sprache im interkulturellen Dialog
Page 319 and 320:
Abweichung in seinem Sprachgebrauch
Page 321 and 322:
kind of mythology (cf. Wittgenstein
Page 323 and 324:
Social Criticism through Internal a
Page 325 and 326:
Interkulturelle Philosophie in Russ
Page 327 and 328:
326 Interkulturelle Philosophie in
Page 329 and 330:
Wissenschaft begnügen und daher nu
Page 331 and 332:
Das, was er in seinem Brief an Herm
Page 333 and 334:
Essence/Attribute in Islamic Philos
Page 335 and 336:
Konvergenzen in grundlegenden Prinz
Page 337 and 338:
individuellen Freiheit (Stelzer 200
Page 339 and 340:
experience gives an epistemological
Page 341 and 342:
The Fraissè Theorem and Goodman’
Page 343 and 344:
3.5) i) Sentences satisfied by elem
Page 345 and 346:
Outline of Arguments against Natura
Page 347 and 348:
346 Outline of Arguments against Na
Page 349 and 350:
Reason, red in tooth and claw: natu
Page 351 and 352:
Importantly, where Pascal saw in hu
Page 353 and 354:
352 The Significance of Intercultur
Page 355 and 356:
354 Wittgenstein, the artistic way
Page 357 and 358:
A Neo-pragmatist Approach to Interc
Page 359 and 360:
358 A Neo-pragmatist Approach to In
Page 361 and 362:
360 A Neo-pragmatist Approach to In
Page 363 and 364:
Aber der Löwe spricht eben nicht!
Page 365 and 366:
364 Aber der Löwe spricht eben nic
Page 367 and 368:
366 From Anti-Metaphysics to Non-Py
Page 369 and 370:
Respective Justice through Thick an
Page 371 and 372:
Normativity and Novelty Tine Wilde,
Page 373 and 374:
References Baz, Avnar: 2000, ‘Wha
Page 375 and 376:
374 Towards an Intercultural Phenom
Page 377 and 378:
Das Problem des metaphysischen Subj
Page 379 and 380:
378 Das Problem des metaphysischen
Page 381:
380 Das Problem des metaphysischen
show all

Preproceedings 2006 - Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?