tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1612867235894979409.post4925576083131052675..comments2024-03-27T08:38:29.990+01:00Comments on artefactphil: Individual, Egoism, DemocracyMichael Eldredhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15312973352124078686noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1612867235894979409.post-45978491278795374182017-03-21T04:04:42.253+01:002017-03-21T04:04:42.253+01:00As a young woman I viewed myself as selfless and o...As a young woman I viewed myself as selfless and only interested in the pursuit of the common good of humanity. However now, much older, I've noticed that people have very different ideas on what constitutes the 'common good of humanity'. Society is made of people with different interests, different ideals, different aims and different ways to be in the world, and my ideas of what constitutes the 'common good' are just that: 'my' ideas. To use January's words (or James Luther Adams' words) my 'general' interest in fact stems from self-interest.<b>Rachel Eldred</b>https://www.blogger.com/profile/16055155326905164567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1612867235894979409.post-70703071708986112302017-03-16T03:47:14.331+01:002017-03-16T03:47:14.331+01:00Social ethics writer James Luther Adams distinguis...Social ethics writer James Luther Adams distinguishes between two kinds of voluntary organizations: self-interest and general interest. One works for only the interests of its members. The other works for the interests of society. The motivation for the latter is what Adams calls "vocation," as in religion. I call it the difference between power and strength, as currently illustrated by the statues of the bull and the young girl on Wall Street.Januaryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13649626766802972984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1612867235894979409.post-74139908804314234552017-03-14T17:02:21.997+01:002017-03-14T17:02:21.997+01:00Marx "egoistic independent individulal" ...Marx "egoistic independent individulal" is the isolated and worldless'ego' of modernity no the 'self'that arises from the human free interplay once such an interplay is seen as sharing an openness of possibilities sharing a common world. The same happens with 'mass egoisms' of whatever kind, beginning with 'America first'. Within which horizon can we think the 'self' (i.e. the plurality of human beings re-cognizing themselves / their 'selves') in processes of mutual estimation (with a lot of possibilities ending with mutual desestimation and destruction)? How do we redefine (or 'recast') democracy in the 21st century beyond the nationalist project of mmodernity? what is the role of the internet (or, more broadly, the digital casting of being) in this re-casting of democracy? how can we imagine democratic processes of self-recognition in the digital age? Kant couldn't foresee that republics would be bellicistic nor that a free exchange of messages would turn into information monopolies and wars. This structural changes two hundred years after Kant were identified by Habermas in 1966 See: http://www.capurro.de/graz.html<br />But Habermas could also not foresee at that time (1966) the Internet.<br />Rafael CapurroAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14205359388768395797noreply@blogger.com