The paper considers the problem of the level of freedom a scientist enjoys while conducting scientific experiments and choosing scientific theories. The paper analyses the notion of epistemic freedom that refers to the relationship between human beings and the world, and the notion will be expanded and elaborated using the hermeneutic theory. The problem recently surfaced in Anglo-Saxon philosophy, and it is still in a developing phase. In a sense given, the theory of hermeneuticists who studied the problem of interpretation (...) within science is of particular use, for the most part, because they pointed at the ontological limits of human beings. The paper aims at contributing to the theory of science by pointing at the interpretative, and thus hermeneutical nature of science in such a way that it analyses epistemic freedom via the role of scientific tradition and the use of instruments. (shrink)

The Bhagavadgītā is often considered the holiest text of Hinduism. It was commented by a legion of commentators, and a number of philologists, starting with Wilhelm von Humboldt, tried to establish the layers of its text, which shows traces of several redactions. Some scholars noticed some seams in the text correctly, and some came close to a general picture of the text history. On the other hand, many scholars were discouraged by the uncertainties in the investigation of the text history (...) and preferred to interpret the Gītā as an indivisible whole. However, between the 1970s and 2009, it was possible to come to very precise results concerning the textual layers of the Bhagavadgītā, which were internationally largely accepted since ca. 2000. These results imply that, over time, views of several philosophical systems were incorporated into the poem, as well as polemics with different doctrines. The teachings and exhortations conveyed by the poem are very synthetic and innovative because they are derived from a very complex set of premises. These results of text analyses have been, on the one hand, accepted by a number of prominent scholars worldwide, but, on the other hand, fiercely contested by some Western post-modernist scholars of religion and by some scholars of Indian origin sensibilised negatively against Western scholarship. What they lack in their reading of the Bhagavadgītā can best be made clear by means of the comparison with a visitor to an artistic monument of a religious character, which underwent centuries of modifications, like the Split cathedral. If such a visitor considered that the sanctity and artistic credibility of a monument depended on its being completely constructed at one stroke by a single architect with a single conception, he would miss the complex, sometimes even polemical, rich and impressive way in which such a monument conveys its messages. This is the fruit of the long and complex history of the Split cathedral, that was first built as the mausoleum of a Roman emperor, and later turned into the church consecrated to his victims, passing thereafter through many subsequent modifications and ‘reinterpretations’. In the history of art, such prejudices are not as common as they are in the study of sacred texts. That is why a suitable example of a monument having religious character, like the Split cathedral of the Assumption of Virgin Mary, also consecrated to Diocletian’s victims Domnius and Anastasius, can best illustrate how we should understand a literary monument of a religious and philosophical character, like the Bhagavadgītā, which underwent a comparably complex history. (shrink)

The world is a comprehensive concept of the area of external experience in which all objects appear as external to our consciousness. It is also the area of becoming, transience and disappearance, resp. of birth, life and death (physiology, philosophical physics, cosmology). The being itself, on the contrary, is conceived as what is and does not become (ontology, metaphysics). Philosophy investigates what is object of our cognition, but also what should be the object of our activity (ethics, practical philosophy). Philosophy (...) can try to understand the nature of consciousness and reason from the experience of the world, or it can try to assess the truth or the appearance of the world that we experience from the assessment of our cognitive faculties (epistemology). Both approaches have been confirmed in India and West in different periods. Some examples will be considered and compared. (shrink)

Muḳātil b. Sulaymān’s (d. 150/767) tafsīr named al-Tafsīr al-kabīr, is accepted as the first completed tafsīr that has reached us from the early sources of tafsīr literature. One of the issues that the mufassir, deals with emphatically by emphasizing the concealment of the Prophet’s tabs̲h̲īr in the Bible. The Mufassir make a connection between the concealment of the Prophet’s tabs̲h̲īr and the falsification of the Bible. When we examine the verses that Muḳātil commented to prove his claim related with falsification (...) of these books, we encounter the phenomenon of takhṣīs in tafsīr. Takhṣīs is a term used in the literature of fiḳh method, in the sense of explaining with a word, with a proof, that some of the individuals it covers are meant. Considering the content of this term, it is understood that Muḳātil’s takhṣīs in tafsīr means limiting the meaning of words with many meanings to only one content. The main issue that prompted Muḳātil to make a takhṣīs in tafsīr is falsification. The issue of falsification of the Bible has been a subject that attracted the attention of Muslim scholars. Because in the Ḳurʾān, the distortion of the Torah is described in the following terms: يحرفون “they distort”, فبدل “altered”, يلون السنتهم “who twist their tongues”, يكتمون “they conceal”, ولا تلبسوا الحق بالباطل “confound not truth with falsehood”, وتكتموا الحق “conceal the truth”, يكتبون الكتاب بِاَيْد۪يهِمْ “They write the book with their hands”. The Ḳurʾān’s statement on this matter encouraged the criticism of the scholars about the Torah. Among the issues criticized there are; tabs̲h̲īr of Muḥammad in previous books, the origin of the Torah, inaccuracy in chronological order, stylistic differences, information errors and contradictions. Among these criticisms directed at the People of the Book, Muḳātil focuses on tabs̲h̲īr. The main source that leads him to argue that Muḥammad was heralded in previous books is the verses of the Ḳurʾān. In addition to this, it is highly probable that the geography where the mufassir lived was also influential in shaping his criticisms. Considering the Jewish population in the neighborhoods where he lived, such as Balk̲h̲ and Marw, it is possible for the commentator to develop a dialogue with the Jews, and it is also possible that his criticisms will be shaped within the framework of these dialogues. Muḳātil’s falsification criticism is expressed in the context of the Prophet’s tabs̲h̲īr. However, the mufassir’s emphasis on tabs̲h̲īr goes beyond the criticism of falsification. The mufessir always keeps the issue alive on the reader’s agenda with short phrases such as “كتم أمر محمد / بكتمان أمر محمد Muḥammad’s subject is hidden in the Torah”, “نعت محمد / صفة محمد / Muḥammad’s qualification”. As far as we can determine, there are fifty-two verses in al-Tafsīr al-kabīr that Muḳātil consider directly related to tabs̲h̲īr. He deals with the issue of distortion in thirty-eight verses. The number of verses that the mufassir associates with both distortion and tabs̲h̲īr is thirty-six. The number of verses that he does not associate with falsification but only about tabs̲h̲īr is twelve. Among them, it has been determined that Muḳātil made takhṣīs in the interpretation of forty-eight verses in total. When we classify his takhṣīs’s, we can form a tidy framework under four main headings: in the interpretation of sila sentences, idioms and idiomatic expressions, determining the content of words, and indicates of pronoun. Since the thought of tabs̲h̲īr is one of the main motifs in the mind of the commentator, his tafsīr’s follow a parallel course to this motif. In the interpretation of many verses, there are examples of interpretations that will legitimize this thought and confirm this claim. As a matter of fact, in the interpretation of the expression يلوون ألسنتهم بالكتاب “While reading the Book, they bend their tongues” in the 78th verse of sūrat āl ʿImrān, it is said that Muḥammad’s qualification in the Torah were deleted and other adjectives were written instead of it. In the tafsīr of the 37th verse of sūrat al-Nisāʾ, there are the expressions like this: “The concealment of Muḥammad’s tabs̲h̲īr and its removal from the Torah (بكتمان أمر محمد و محوه من التوراة)”. Muḳātil narrowed the content of the expression, which has a wide meaning area. This narrowing of the meaning is technically considered an example of takhṣīs. Other examples where takhṣīs made in tafsir are present in the interpretations of the phrases of guidance/aberration, right/false, belief/disbelief, verse, word, stinginess, knowledge, promise, declaration, turning away and the book of Allah. The tafsīr’s extreme loyalty to the context is accompanied by his limiting the meaning of words with broad content to a narrow content. (shrink)

This study investigates the reaction of high school students in an alternative urban secondary school to highly controlling, authoritarian practices. Premised on the published theories, we imagined that students would object to the regime and consider it unduly repressive. Student reactions were elicited through questionnaires and interviews. To our considerable surprise, most respondents approved of the authoritarian regime and disapproved of granting students more self-expression. Most have come to believe that they do not deserve freedom from pervasive rules, for they (...) will indeed abuse it. As one child said approvingly, ?This is a disciplinary school? ? you give up freedom and accept rules. We discuss the implications of such a strong identification with the school's norms and the consequent distrust of personal autonomy. (shrink)

Kur’an tefsirleri muhteva, metot, yararlandığı malzeme, odaklandığı meseleler, hitap ettiği okur kitlesi ve dil kullanımı gibi çeşitli açılardan benzerlik ve farklılık göstermektedir. Tefsirler bu kesişim ve ayrışım noktaları göz önünde bulundurularak sınıflandırılmıştır. Tefsirleri tasnif etme işinde kronolojik seyre tabi olmak diğerlerine nispetle daha az riskli bir çaba olarak görülebilir. Zira tefsirleri tematik başlıklar halinde kategorize etmek yahut tefsirlerin metodunu merkeze alarak sınıflandırmak öznel değerlendirmelerden hareket eden yapısı hasebiyle tenkitleri ve spekülatif yorumları da beraberinde getirebilir. Tasnif, basit bir kategorize işinden ziyade (...) zihinsel öncüllerin devreye girdiği bir süreçtir. Bu makalede John Wansbrough’un (öl. 2002) Kur’an tefsirlerine yönelik tasnifi incelenmektedir. İslam tefsir geleneğinde üretilen kavramları kullanmaktan ısrarla kaçınan yazarın, Kutsal Kitap tefsir literatüründen adlandırmalara yer vermesi tenkide açık bir meseledir. Rivâyet ve dirâyet kavramlarının yerine haggadic ve halakhic terimlerinin kullanımı, tefsir türlerinin tasnifinde etkileşim yahut intihal olgusunu ihsas ettirmesi bakımından araştırılmaya değer bir konudur. Her iki gelenekte tefsirin teşekkülüne dair tarihsel verilerin ortaya konması ve kültürel alışverişlerde hâkim unsurun tespiti sayesinde, İslam tefsir türlerinin tasnifinde orijinallik iddiası yahut intihal söylemi açığa çıkacaktır. Bu yazı, iki kültür arasında etkileşimin yaşandığı çeşitli sahalardan veriler sunmak suretiyle Wansbrough’un İslam tefsir geleneğine dair iddiasındaki çelişkileri ortaya koymayı hedeflemektedir. (shrink)

With regards to its origin, foundation and development, bioethics is a relatively new discipline, scientific and theoretical field, where different and even contradicting definition models and methodological patterns of its formation and application meet. In some philosophical orientations, bioethics is considered to be a sub-discipline of applied ethics as a traditional philosophical discipline. Yet in biomedical and other sciences, bioethics is designated as a specialist scientific discipline, or a sort of a new medical ethics. The concept of integrative bioethics as (...) an interdisciplinary scholarly and pluriperspectivistic area goes beyond such one-sided determinations, both philosophical and scientistic, and intends to integrate the philosophical approach to bioethics with its particular scientific contents, as well as different cultural dimensions and perspectives. This concept of integrative bioethics has gradually developed at philosophical and interdisciplinary conferences and institutions on the “bioethical islands” of the Croatian Mediterranean. In this paper, the author follows the formation, development and prospects of integrative bioethics in the wider region of the Mediterranean and Southeast Europe. (shrink)

У статті досліджено світові тенденції розвитку морських портів за останні роки. Визначено напрямки розвитку, які демонструють взаємодію морського транспорту і світової економіки. Виділено чинники макросередовища, які суттєво впливають на діяльність підприємств морської галузі України. По кожній групі висвітлена проблема та рекомендовані напрями дій. На думку авторів, утілення в життя запропонованих заходів сприятиме підвищенню конкурентоспроможності українських портів на світовому ринку за рахунок збільшення обсягів перевалки вантажів, залучення нових вантажопотоків, розширення асортименту робіт та послуг.

Although the accelerated globalization of recent decades has flourished in tandem with a notable growth of liberal democracy in many states where it was previously absent, it would be hard to say that the prevailed processes of neo-liberal globalization foster development of global democracy. On the contrary, globalization has undercut traditional liberal democracy and created the need for supplementary democratic mechanisms. But, suprastate democracy of regional and transworld regimes as well as potential unofficial channels, such as global marketplace, global communications, (...) and global civil society, have shown many democratic deficits rather than democratic credentials. The most serious problem in the relationship between democracy and globalization is, however, related to differences among the global cultures and/or civilizations. (shrink)

Obwohl die beschleunigte Globalisierung der letzten Jahrzehnte in vielen ehemals undemokratischen Ländern im Gleichschritt mit der liberalen Demokratie vorankam, lässt sich nicht behaupten, dass die neoliberalen Globalisierungsprozesse die Entwicklung einer globalen Demokratie fördern. Im Gegenteil, die Globalisierung gefährdet die traditionelle liberale Demokratie, indem sie ein Bedürfnis nach zusätzlichen demokratischen Mechanismen aufkommen lässt. Denn die überstaatliche Demokratie regionaler und globaler Systeme sowie ihre inoffiziellen Instrumente und Akteure, wie der globale Markt, die globale Kommunikation und die globale Zivilgesellschaft, weisen viel mehr demokratische (...) Defizite als demokratische Potenziale auf. Das ernstzunehmendste Problem im Spannungsfeld zwischen Demokratie und Globalisierung liegt jedoch im Bereich der Unterschiede zwischen den globalen Kulturen und/oder Zivilisationen. (shrink)

Iz samog pojma filozofije - koja kao "mudroljublje" označuje nikada do kraja ozbiljenu težnju za dohvaćanjem istine, a ne modrost i istinu samu - proizlazi njezino nužno prihvaćanje kulturnog, teorijskog i svjetonazornog pluralizma, kako bi se filozofskim dijalogom međusobno različitih orijentacija pristupilo nikad do kraja završenom konvergentnom traganju za istinom. No, suprotno etimologijskom značenju njezina pojma, teško bi se moglo kazati da povijest filozofije obilježuje tako značajnu dijalošku spremnost i toleranciju spram različitih misaonih orijentacija. Dapače, u određenom smislu, sama povijest (...) filozofije ne predstavlja ništa drugo do sukcesivno negiranje i polemičko pobijanje prethodno uspostavljenih filozofskih pozicija.U suvremenim uvjetima globalizacije, kada svijet postaje globalno selo, na čijoj se agori susreću ne samo zastupnici različitih misaonih i svjetonazornih orijentacija nego u prvom redu pronositelji različitih kulturnih i civilizacijskih tradicija i načina mišljenja, kulturni pluralizam iskazuje se kao conditio sine qua non ravnopravnog dijaloga i međusobnog uvažavanja sviju onih koji čine jedinstvenu globalnu zajednicu. No, kako se u ovom prilogu nastoji pokazati, pri pokušaju uspostave konsenzusa oko zajedničkih, to jest univerzalnih vrijednosti, često dolazi do nepremostivih poteškoća koje se mogu prevladati samo i isključivo trajnim priznavanjem kulturnih, svjetonazornih, filozofijskih, epistemologijskih različitosti, bez pretenzija na dohvaćanje i posjedovanje jedne i jedinstvene univerzalne apsolutne istine.From the very notion of philosophy – that, as a ‘love for wisdom’ stands for never fulfilled tendencyto reach the truth, and not the wisdom or truth themselves – emerges its necessary acceptance ofcultural, theoretical and world-view pluralism, so that the philosophical dialogue between differentorientations could approach never ended convergent search for the truth. Despite its etymologicalmeaning, it would be hard to say that the history of philosophy represents such a dialogical readinessand tolerance towards different orientations of thoughts. Quite the contrary, in a particularsense, the very history of philosophy represent successive negation and polemical refutation of thepreviously established philosophical positions. In actual conditions of the globalization, when theworld becomes a global village, at whose agora meet not only advocates of the different reflectiveand world-view orientations but, in the first place, holders of different cultural and civilization traditionsand ways of thinking – cultural pluralism functions as conditio sine qua non of the equaldialogue and mutual respect of all the members of the global community. This paper tries to showthat in an attempt to establish the consensus on common, i.e. universal values, we often come toinsuperable difficulties that can be overcome only by continuous recognition of cultural, worldview,philosophical, epistemological differences and without pretensions on reaching and possessionof the one and only universal absolute truth. (shrink)

Jedna od njenih bezbrojnih definicija globalizaciju određuje kao dinamičan proces kojim su socijalne strukture modernizacije, poput kapitalizma, birokracije, visokorazvijene tehnologije i filozofije racionalizma i liberalizma ovladale svijetom. Uistinu u tome smislu liberalizam općenito prevladava kao zadani politički obrazac suvremene globalizacije. Vlade većine država promoviraju neoliberalnu politiku u odnosu na učinke globalizacije jednako kao što i utjecajne svjetske multilateralne ustanove redovito povezuju globalizaciju s liberalizacijom. Prvaci neoliberalne globalizacije ovladavaju također i trgovačkim krugovima, poglavito na novčanim tržištima te se množe među upravljačima (...) prekograničnih tvrtki. Poduzetničke udruge, kao i burzovni mas-mediji isto tako postaju tvrđave neoliberalizma koji općenito smatraju ortodoksnim pravcem globalizacijske politike. Drugim riječima, tako shvaćeni neoliberalni svjetonazor u posljednje se vrijeme bezpogovorno prihvaća kao neupitna istina koju »zdravi razum« nalaže. U tekstu se elaborira teza da neoliberalizam – vrsta filozofske, političke i ekonomske teorije znane i kao libertarijanizam, nametnuta kao prevladavajući teorijski pristup u suvremenoj globalizaciji – nema mnogo toga zajedničkog s idealom liberalne demokracije dobro uređena društva, koji izrasta iz dijametralno suprotnih ideja, aspekata i dimenzija liberalne filozofije. Socijalna filozofija liberalizma, razvijena u djelima Kanta, Hayeka, Dworkina i Rawlsa, promišlja koncepciju moderne liberalne demokracije, utemeljene na vladavini zakona, zaštiti ljudskih i građanskih prava, na idejama jednakosti, pravde i čestitosti. U tome smislu, programi »pozitivne diskriminacije« najnižih društvenih slojeva u potpunosti su sukladni s navedenom liberalnom filozofijom koja štiti individualna prava. S navedenih polazišta ekonomska i kulturna globalizacija trebaju biti podvrgnute jasnoj konceptualnoj analizi s normativnim zahtjevom za globalizaciju odgovornosti sa svrhom zaštite globalne budućnosti čovječanstva. Neka vrsta demokratske kontrole kao i vladavina prava jednako su tako nužni u našem globaliziranom svijetu. Središnja zadaća globalne politike – da zapriječi globalni kaos koji prijeti kao neizbježni učinak nekontrolirane globalizacije – implicira, među inima, i ustroj međunarodnog pravnog poretka s nekom vrsti globalne demokratske vladavine. No, glede izgradnje globalne demokracije i vladavine prava nadaje se odsudno pitanje na koje je teško dati odgovor: Kako ustrojiti politiku globalne vladavine u našem podijeljenom globaliziranom svijetu? (shrink)

Bien que la globalisation des dernières décennies se soit développée en parallèle avec les démocraties libérales dans beaucoup de pays jusqu’alors non démocratiques, il aurait été difficile de dire que les processus prédominants de la globalisation néolibérale favorisent le développement de la démocratie globale. Bien au contraire, la globalisation menace la démocratie traditionnelle libérale en créant la nécessité des mécanismes démocratiques supplémentaires. Or, la démocratie supra-étatique des régimes régionaux et globaux, de même que ses instruments et moyens non officiels, tels (...) que le marché global, la communication globale et la société civile globale ont démontré plutôt un déficit qu’un potentiel démocratique. Toutefois, le plus grand problème du rapport entre la démocratie et la globalisation réside dans les différences de cultures et de civilisations. (shrink)

Cet article s’appuie sur la thèse de Galien formulée dans le titre de son traité Que le meilleur médecin est aussi philosophe, afin de mieux appréhender les situations de pandémies, passées et présentes. On abordera la relation entre la philosophie antique et la médecine à la lumière des propos sarcastiques et sévères de Galien à l’égard des médecins cupides et immoraux de son temps, ainsi que dans le contexte plus large des relations socio-philosophiques de la société antique et médiévale, où (...) la théorie philosophique et la médecine comme praxis appartiennent à différents domaines aristotéliciens : le loisir ( sholé ) et le travail ( asholía ). Plus largement, c’est en adoptant une approche à la fois médicale et philosophique sur les maux auxquels l’humanité est confrontée que l’on peut espérer les surmonter avec une conscience éclairée. (shrink)

Although the accelerated globalization of recent decades has flourished in tandem with a notable growth of liberal democracy in many states where it was previously absent, it would be hard to say that the prevailed processes of neo-liberal globalization foster development of global democracy and the rule of law. On the contrary, globalization has undercut traditional liberal democracy and created the need for supplementary democratic mechanisms. In fact, neo-liberalism i.e.libertarianism, which has generally prevailed as the authoritative policy framework in contemporary (...) globalization, does not have much in common with the ideal of liberal democracy of well-ordered society. The serious problem in the relationship between democracy and globalization is, however, related to differences among the global cultures and/or civilizations. Democratic rule of law and the problem of human rights are unquestionable values of the Western civilization. Do they have the same significance in each culture/civilization, in every part of the globalized world? Democratic control of globalization can be completed only through a sort of global governance, but who can realize it in our divided world? (shrink)

One of numerous definitions of globalization describes it as a dynamic process whereby the social structures of modernity, such as capitalism, bureaucracy, high technology, and philosophy of rationalism and liberalism are spread the world over. Indeed, in that sense, liberalism has in general prevailed as the authoritative policy framework in present-day globalization. Most governments have promoted neoliberal policies toward globalization, as well as influential multilateral agencies have continually linked globalization with liberalization. Champions of neoliberal globalization have also abounded in commercial (...) circles, particularly in the financial markets and among managers of transborder firms. Business associations and business-oriented mass media have likewise figured as bastions of neoliberalism which has overall ranked as policy orthodoxy in respect of globalization. Generally speaking, neoliberal ideas recently gained widespread unquestioned acceptance as “common sense”. On the other hand, neoliberalism as a sort of philosophical, political and economic theory known as libertarianism, which has generally prevailed as theoretical approach in contemporary globalization, does not have much in common with the ideal of liberal democracy of well-ordered society, which arises from quite different ideas, aspects and dimensions of liberal philosophy. Social philosophy of liberalism, developed by Kant, Hayek, Dworkin and Rawls, has promoted the idea of modern liberal democracy which is generally based on the rule of law, protection of human and civil rights, ideas of equality and justice as fairness. In that sense “affirmative action” programmes in favour of the least advantaged groups are fully consonant with a general liberal philosophy that protects individual rights. Economic and cultural globalization should be accompanied by a clear conceptual analysis and a normative requirement of a globalization of responsibility in order to protect the global future of humankind. A democratic control as well as the rule of law in our globalized world is necessary, too. Central tasks of global policy to prevent global chaos as a consequence of uncontrolled globalization include, among other things, a legalized international order with a sort of global democratic governance. Concerning the improvement of global democracy and global rule of law the genuine question is: who can realize a policy of global governance in our divided world? (shrink)

Za razliku od Platona, koji stvara projekt savršenog poretka kao paradigmu mediteranske utopije s nakanom da popravi postojeće države, Aristotel svoju socijalnofilozofijsku teoriju temelji na iscrpnoj analizi opstojećih državnih uređenja. Budući da ulazi u analizu zbiljskih odnosa u konkretnim državama te svoju teoriju polisa utemeljuje na iskustvenim činjenicama, Aristotel na isti način pristupa i ideji najbolje gradodržave. On, naime, prema uvjetima i okolnostima u konkretnim i pojedinim polisima, relativizira pitanje najboljeg državnog poretka. Unatoč takvim relativističkim odgovorima, Aristotel ipak daje skicu (...) za model optimalnog državnog poretka koji hrvatski renesansni filozof Frane Petrić uzima za paradigmu svojega »sretnoga grada«.While Plato created the project of the perfect rule as the paradigm of the Mediterranean Utopia with the intention to improve existing states, Aristotle’s social philosophical theory is founded on the comprehensive analysis of the existing regimes. Since Aristotle started the analysis of the real relationships in concrete states and based his theory of the polis on empirical facts, he used the same approach with the idea of the best city-state. That is, in relation to conditions and circumstances in concrete poleis, he relativized the question of the best state organization. Despite such relativistic answers, Aristotle however provided a draft of an optimal state governance, which Frane Petrić, Croatian Renaissance philosopher, used for the paradigm of his “Happy city”. (shrink)

Eine von zahlreichen Definitionen bestimmt die Globalisierung als einen dynamischen Prozess, bei dem soziale Strukturen der Modernisierung wie Kapitalismus, Bürokratie, Hightech sowie die Philosophie des Rationalismus und Liberalismus die Herrschaft über die Welt übernommen haben. In diesem Sinne hat der Liberalismus als das vorgezeichnete politische Muster der zeitgenössischen Globalisierung tatsächlich die allgemeine Vorherrschaft inne. Vor dem Hintergrund der Resultate der Globalisierung propagieren die Regierungen der meisten Staaten eine neoliberale Politik, ebenso wie einflussreiche internationale und multilaterale Einrichtungen die Globalisierung regelmäßig mit (...) Liberalisierung in Verbindung bringen. Die führenden Akteure der neoliberalen Globalisierung erweisen sich auch in Handelskreisen als ausschlaggebend, zumal an den Finanzmärkten, und ihre Zahl mehrt sich unter den Managern internationaler Unternehmen. Ebenso werden Unternehmensvereinigungen und Börsenpflichtblätter zu Hochburgen des Neoliberalismus, der generell als orthodoxe Richtung der Globalisierungspolitik betrachtet wird. Mit anderen Worten, eine solchermaßen verstandene neoliberale Weltanschauung wird in letzter Zeit widerspruchslos als offenkundige Wahrheit akzeptiert, die einem der „gesunde Menschenverstand” auferlege. Im Text wird die These elaboriert, dass der Neoliberalismus – eine Art philosophischer, politischer und wirtschaftswissenschaftlicher Theorie, bekannt auch unter dem Namen Libertarismus, die sich als vorherrschender theoretischer Ansatz in der zeitgenössischen Globalisierung aufdrängt – nicht sehr viel gemein habe mit dem Ideal der liberalen Demokratie einer gut eingerichteten Gesellschaft, das aus den diametral entgegengesetzten Ideen, Aspekten und Dimensionen der liberalen Philosophie erwachse. Die soziale Philosophie des Liberalismus, die in den Schriften von Kant, Hayek, Dworkin und Rawls entwickelt wurde, reflektiert die Konzeption der modernen liberalen Demokratie, die begründet ist auf der Getzesherrschaft, dem Schutz von Menschen- und Bürgerrechten sowie auf den Ideen von Gleichheit, Gerechtigkeit und Rechtschaffenheit. In diesem Sinne sind Programme zur „positiven Diskriminierung“ sozialer Unterschichten vollkommen in Übereinstimmung mit der angeführten liberalen Philosophie, die sich für den Schutz individueller Rechte einsetzt. Die wirtschaftliche und kulturelle Globalisierung muss ausgehend von den genannten Standpunkten einer klaren konzeptuellen Analyse unterzogen werden, die der normativen Forderung nach einer globalisierten Verantwortung zum Schutz der globalen Zukunft der Menschheit Rechnung trägt. Eine Art demokratischer Kontrolle sowie Gesetzesherrschaft sind in unserer globalisierten Welt gleichermaßen notwendig. Die zentrale Aufgabe der globalen Politik – ein globales Chaos zu verhindern, das unweigerlich auf eine unkontrollierte Globalisierung folgen würde – impliziert unter anderem auch die Etablierung einer globalen Demokratie, die mit einer internationalen Rechtsordnung ausgestattet wäre. Doch hinsichtlich der Errichtung einer globalen Demokratie und Rechtsherrschaft ergibt sich die entscheidende Frage, die sich nur sehr schwer beantworten lässt: Wie soll man in unserer geteilten, globalisierten Welt eine Politik globaler Demokratie auf die Beine stellen? (shrink)