Search

Since the publication of The Metaphysics of Symbolic Forms, scholars have insisted that Cassirer's account of human consciousness can only be found in this posthumous 'fourth volume of the philosophy of symbolic forms.' I will argue, however, that Cassirer's philosophy of culture was already from the beginning essentially also a philosophy of the human being: as I see it, Cassirer consistently holds a 'functional conception of human consciousness' that can serve as a foundational element of his thought precisely by remaining in the background of his writings. In his published works, Cassirer adopts Natorp's reconstructive approach to consciousness within the framework of his philosophy of culture. On this basis, he develops a transcendental, 'functional', conception of subjectivity that forms the exact counterpart of his view of objectivity. Cassirer's metaphysics translates this conception in the language of his contemporaries, but does not substantially alter it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heritage-making can mean many things to different cultures, especially with the advent of multiculturalism and interculturalism. From this perspective, a wide array of cultural items, devices and values can be witnessed, and some of these are significant, yet others are considered in the balance. To argue that heritage-making is an ongoing process brings to light the fact that cultures and the actors involved do not only have a task in the social order, but also the know how to direct the way of their discourses. At its core is the view that one must deal with language games, which effectively engage the active participants in circulating heritage. These games are taken into account as clusters of speech acts rules that are classified as assertives, commissives and directives, which correspond to the three types of rule: hegemony, hierarchy and heteronomy. Nonetheless, heritage-making under the contemporary signs of the times can be appropriated, communicated, substituted or even challenged by partakers of a certain culture and by way of a choice of language employed. It is in the context of the latter that we specifically lay emphasis on the language of auctoritas and potestas as decisive in cultural heritage-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article aims to elucidate on the notion of philosophy of culture, particularly in non-Western societies. This is exemplified by the promotion of philosophy, with its advocates and approaches, in Filipino culture, in addition, it gives an account of a type of alienation that has had a profound influence upon the Filipino experience, philosophical thought and practice; the so-called dealienation of culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses papers in the December 2012 issue of "Cultura: International Journal of Philosophy of Culture & Axiology," including a paper which explored semiotic thought in Greek culture, a study of literary adaptations and the paper on the cognitive basis of value in grammatical form in the Turkish language.

This paper discusses different senses of Hegel;s claim that the individual is "a child of his time." Hegel argues that the individual's mind ("subjective Spirit") is profoundly influenced by its time, i.e., the cultural context that forms its temporal setting ("objective Spirit"). However, Hegel makes somewhat conflicting claims in this regard: (i) that individuals harbor the presuppositions of their cultural context unreflectively; (ii) that philosophy overcomes the form of this unreflectiveness, but that the content of philosophy remains tied to its time since it tries reflectively to justify current presuppositions; (iii) that this reflection occurs when a culture declines, and that reflection, too, therefore is a child of its time; (iv) that an individual may be a minority thinker (despite what claim [i] says), but that even such an individual is a child of his time in the (weaker) sense that he is unable to influence it precisely because he transcends it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For some years now, amongst contemporary Western societies (where capitalism and globalization have a great influence), the presence and development of a well-defined and peculiar emotional culture has become clear. The appropriate use and management of emotions, support a system of relations and codes that draw new limits between public and private life and between people and their actions. Arlie Russell Hochschild has studied the dynamics of emotions, aiming to define their distinctive languages. Interactions between the public and the individual realm and the social sphere gives shape a code which imposes certain meanings and uses that are beyond the intention and perception of emotional subjects. Studies on the recent transformations of feminine roles and the social readjustments, which go along with those changes, are specifically motivated by the insertion of women in the business world, taking a central place in Hochschild's investigations. This paper shows how new emotional codes, as Hochschild defines them, have great influence on modern lifestyles and how the role of women (and here lies the central friction between the family and career consolidation) is at the center of the characteristically modern lifestyle revolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Being part of a culture seems, on the face of it, empirically describable, and verifiable. But in fact that kind of participation is not so easy to characterize. Our existence as members of a culture is given to us fleetingly, and in awarenesses tightly locked to the awareness of the other, who is not our culture. Being part of a culture therefore is part of knowing, yourself as limited. But to what are you limited? You are limited to being a presence other than that of the other that you are defined off against. It is thus worth noting that being of a culture is a fleetingly given awareness of a condition in which your not being something else is what defines you. The logical consequence of this structural situation is that you, or I, exist foremost as a site, rather than as a substance, in our occupying a post within culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This an attempt to present, in analytic-descriptive terms, the complex and multi-layered legacy of the way philosophy has been done in Korea throughout history. It is panoramic and selective, largely intended for colleagues who are encountering philosophy in Korea for the first time. This presentation will be carded out in four parts. First, I examine how Korea's geographical location on the periphery of the Asian continent has made it imperative to make use of philosophical influences coming from the continent to solve the existential and political problematique laced by Korea. Second, I describe the encounter of Korea with the West, and particularly with Westernized Japan, as a clash of civilizations that has led to a century-long total rejection of the tradition in Korea. Third, I describe the present day philosophical scene in Korea, as it attempts to deal with direct exposure to Western philosophy and revival and renewal of the traditional philosophy. Finally, I advance the thesis that it is philosophy's task to forge a cultural synthesis adequate to deal with the problems facing humanity that will engage philosophy in Korea in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the issue of the meaning to be attributed to our talk of Korean philosophy. Of course, the answer to all the questions that can be raised concerning this issue depends on our conception of philosophy. I start by claiming that philosophy should be an ars vivendi aiming at making our life worth living. Drawing on Socrates's saying that the unexamined life is not worth living, I try to show that philosophical inquiry has to start with the reflection upon tile belief-system underpinning our way of life. Through this reflective activity we are inevitably led to tackle the problem of cultural identity constituted by such belief system; there is no belief-system that is not culturally conditioned. Korean philosophy is an ongoing endeavor of the Korean people to renew their cultural identity--by way of philosophical reflection upon their cultural identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will begin by clarifying the kind of context, which requires toleration. My point of departure is a characterization of modernity that both departs from the classical modem theory of secularization and draws from the current research on multiple modernities. Because of the more or less recent resurgence of religion we can no longer characterize toleration on the basis of a theory of secularization. This will lead to the definition of conflict and tolerance within the confines of a post-secular society. The philosophical component of the concept of toleration will be taken from both Aristotle and Kant in the sense that toleration is not only a necessary virtue in modern society, it is also a normative notion based on respect for the law. Finally, the paper concludes that toleration must be conceived of as a principle of justice in a society that requires respect not only for the rights of others but for their cultures as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues the following points: (1) It is necessary to affirm that humanity has always sought to address certain "core universal problems" that are present in all cultures. (2) The rational responses to these "core problems" first appear as mythical narratives. (3) The formulation of categorical philosophical discourses is a subsequent development in human rationality, which does not however negate all mythical narratives. (4) Modern European philosophy confused its economic, political, and cultural domination, and the resulting crises in other philosophical traditions, with a Eurocentric universality claim, which must be questioned. (5)There are universal aspects in which all regional philosophies coincide, and which respond to the "core problems" at an level. (6) All of this impels entry into a new age of inter-philosophical dialogue, respectful of differences and open to learning from other traditions. (7) A new philosophical project must be developed that is capable of going beyond Eurocentric philosophical modernity, by shaping a global transmodern pluriverse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article looks at the past, present, and future of the study of aesthetics. The early modern period, during which aesthetics came into being, was a great historical turning point for civilization. So, too, is our own day. Looked at this way, aesthetics should show a different face than the one we are used to. Aesthetics is generally considered to be the philosophy of art, yet, with art regarded as an autonomous cultural field, aesthetics commonly gives the impression of being isolated from philosophy in general. This article explores a completely different aesthetics. When it was coming into existence, aesthetics was charged with the real and urgent philosophical problem of its time: how to construct a new world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A close analysis of truth and freedom in Heidegger's Beiträge zur Philosophie is offered, demonstrating that an engagement with Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling is decisive in bringing Heidegger to an understanding of Dasein in terms of freedom, community, culture, and history. The controversial claim that a reconsideration of German Idealism can provide a new way of accessing Heidegger's later work is strongly supported in this essay, demonstrating that the payoff of this approach is vast as well as highly coherent with many recent developments in Heidegger scholarship which focus on practical philosophy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]