Search results

Saul Newman

understanding of the individual and his place in the world – one that was no longer cemented by a traditional cosmic order based on divine authority. Instead, the individual was seen as autonomous and self-determining, and as having essential moral and rational capacities that would emancipate him from arbitrary political authority and religious mystification. The metaphysical foundationalism that characterised the pre-modern era gave way to a belief in the universality of reason and the unlimited capacities of humanity. Man replaced God, and reason and morality supplanted

in Unstable universalities
Subjectivity and identity
Nadia Kiwan

the sociology of experience The attempt to re-articulate what has become increasingly disassociated (reason and subjectivity) thus involves a return to the idea of modernity.3 The end of the pre-modern era implied the replacement of the divine principle with both the impersonal law of science and the ‘I’ of the subject. The Subject is defined by Touraine as follows: The Subject is the desire of an individual to act and to be recognised as an actor . . . The Subject represents the shift from the Id to I, towards control over one’s life, so that it has a personal sense

in Identities, discourses and experiences
Murray Stewart Leith and Duncan Sim

the Scottish case. Attempts to limit Scotland to a particular theoretical model risk losing sight of the importance of aspects of Scotland itself. Certainly, Scotland can be considered to have seen itself as a nation in the pre-modern era (unquestionably the elites of that nation did; there is less evidence about what the masses thought – no one was asking them). Furthermore, a sense of Scottish national identity was not diminished by the Treaty of Union in 1707 and certainly civic Scotland maintained a strong sense of self throughout the next three hundred or more

in Scotland
Abstract only
A. J. Coates

perspective it is not pacifism but just war theory that appears (hopelessly) contingent: contingent upon a time when the physical and political limits of war made its moral limitation appear feasible. Moral theorists were misled into thinking that war could be subject to moral regulation by the fact that war in a pre-­modern era was, militarily and politically speaking, inclined to be limited. That illusion has been shattered once and for all. Just war theory is not even out of date. Right from the start it misperceived the nature of war, confusing objective or factual

in The ethics of war