Four important and influential policy statements on hunger that have served as national and international standards and guides for action have been reprinted here as a resource. They are (1) the Bellagio Declaration, which was produced by 24 international experts meeting to address the problem of world hunger in 1989 at the Rockefeller Foundation Conference Center in Bellagio, Italy; (2) the Medford Declaration to End Hunger in the U. S., which was designed to be a domestic equivalent of the Bellagio (...) Declaration, was produced in April of 1990 at Tufts University by U. S. organizations concerned with domestic hunger; (3) the position statement of the American Dietetic Association (ADA) that was approved by the House of Delegates in 1990; and (4) the position statement of the Canadian Dietetic Association (CDA) that was approved by the executive of the CDA in 1991. Aiken's brief introduction to these four statements critically examines them to draw attention to some of their strengths and weaknesses and to help clarify some of their implicit normative assumptions and implications. (shrink)
The theory of Deep Ecology is characterized as having two essential features: the belief that nature is inherently valuable, and the belief that one’s self is truly realized by identification with nature. Four common but different meanings of the term “radical” are presented. Whether the theory of Deep Ecology is “too radical” depends upon which of these meanings one is using.
The purpose of this paper is to explore an hypothesis rather than draw any unassailable conclusions. I argue that there is a fundamental tension between the sub-Christian account of the “Three Stages” presented in the earlier pseudonymous writings and the explicitly Christian account presented in the Anti-Climacean and later acknowledged writings. The earlier version is that of a progress from spiritless “immediacy” toward more complete integrations of the self, culminating in authentic religious faith; while the later is that of a (...) regress from lesser to ever greater forms of spiritual peril, culminating in a disordered religiosity that vainly seeks to overthrow the established ecclesiastical order. Tracing the conflict between these two perspectives also enhances our understanding of the purpose underlying Kierkegaard’s project by suggesting the possibility that the authorship constitutes a literary confession of Kierkegaard’s own spiritual regress. (shrink)