This essay concerns the extent to which quantitative research in management and organizational studies is divorced from ethics, as alleged in a recent JBE editorial by Zyphur and Pierides. After carefully examining the criticisms set forth by Zyphur and Pierides and the merits of the alternative they propose, I conclude that the problems with QR and the researchers who conduct it are arguably much less extreme that Zyphur and Pierides claim. This conclusion is informed by a sampling of QR studies (...) recently published in management journals, which could be further corroborated by a more thorough review and evaluation of QR studies using principles drawn from the ethics literature. I believe this assessment would indicate that, despite room for improvement, QR and ethics can and do peacefully coexist, and quantitative researchers are largely aware of the problems and opportunities associated with integrating their work with ethics. (shrink)

Beyond Peaceful Coexistence: The Emergence of Space, Time and Quantum brings together leading academics in mathematics and physics to address going beyond the 'peaceful coexistence' of space-time descriptions (local and continuous ones) and quantum events (discrete and non-commutative ones). Formidable challenges waiting beyond the Standard Model require a new semantic consistency within the theories in order to build new ways of understanding, working and relating to them. The original A. Shimony meaning of the peaceful (...) class='Hi'>coexistence (the collapse postulate and non-locality) appear to be just the tip of the iceberg in relation to more serious fundamental issues across physics as a whole. Chapters in this book present perspectives on emergent, discrete, geometrodynamic and topological approaches, as well as a new interpretative spectrum of quantum theories after Copenhagen, discrete time theories, time-less approaches and 'super-fluid' pictures of space-time. As well as stimulating further research among established theoretical physicists, the book can also be used in courses on the philosophy and mathematics of theoretical physics. (shrink)

Can there be `peaceful coexistence' between quantum theory and special relativity? Thirty years ago, Shimony hoped that isolating the culprit in proofs of Bell inequalities as Outcome Independence would secure such peaceful coexistence: or, if not secure it, at least show a way---maybe the best or only way---to secure it. In this paper, I begin by being sceptical of Shimony's approach, urging that we need a relativistic solution to the quantum measurement problem. Then I analyse Outcome (...) Independence in Kent's realist one-world Lorentz-invariant interpretation of quantum theory. Then I consider Shimony's other condition, Parameter Independence, both in Kent's proposal and more generally, in the light of recent remarkable theorems by Colbeck, Renner and Leegwater. For both Outcome Independence and Parameter Independence, there is a striking analogy with the situation in pilot-wave theory. Finally, I will suggest that these recent theorems make some kind of peaceful coexistence mandatory for someone who, like Shimony, endorses Parameter Independence. (shrink)

In this paper, it is argued that the prima facie conflict between special relativity and the quantum-mechanical collapse postulate is only apparent, and that the seemingly incompatible accounts of entangled systems undergoing collapse yielded by different reference frames can be regarded as no more than differing accounts of the same processes and events. Attention to the transformation properties of quantum-mechanical states undergoing unitary, non-collapse evolution points the way to a treatment of collapse evolution consistent with the demands of relativity. r (...) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. (shrink)

The persistent struggle waged by the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries for peaceful coexistence among states with differing social systems has greatly increased the authority of this humanitarian policy in the eyes of the peoples of the world. Belligerent appeals for an outright rejection of peaceful coexistence are heard less and less frequently, even among the ideologists of imperialism. They are compelled to adapt themselves to the situation and to camouflage themselves with the masks (...) of the peacemaker. Bourgeois professors of social science say they are for peace and peaceful coexistence. However, these concepts are sometimes given such a distorted interpretation that all real content evaporates. "Peaceful coexistence and the cold war," we read, for example, in the words of the British professor, Hugh Seton-Watson, "are literally the same thing." [All quotations from non-Russian sources are retranslated from the Russian.] Thus, a single sentence suffices, by an act of sophistry, to transform peaceful coexistence into a state of international tension and intensive war preparations. The ideologists of imperialism deny, in essence, the possibility of cooperation between the socialist and capitalist countries in the process of peaceful coexistence. (shrink)

According to Abrahamic religions, namely Judaism, Christianity and Islam, human beings exist on the earth for a common purpose, and they have patrilineally and matrilineally descended from a single couple, namely Adam and Hawa (Eve). The Qur’an unambiguously mentions: “O mankind! reverence your Guardian-Lord, who created you from a single person, created, of like nature, His mate, and from them twain scattered (like seeds) countless men and women; reverence Allah, through whom ye demand your mutual (rights), and (reverence) the wombs (...) (That bore you): for Allah ever watches over you.” Thus, it is incumbent upon human beings to live together in peace rather than constant hostility to fulfil the purpose of their existence on the earth. This paper endeavours to contribute to the understanding of the concept of ‘peaceful coexistence’ from the Islamic perspective. It specifically answers the following research questions: What is peaceful coexistence? What is necessary for peaceful coexistence? What are the fundamental principles that we must adhere to in order to coexist peacefully? The paper is structured into eight sections, beginning with introduction on the concept of ‘peace’ in Islam. The second section focuses on the main objectives of Islam. The third section is on the meaning of peaceful coexistence. The fourth and fifth sections are on the need for peaceful coexistence, and the necessary requirements and tools for peaceful coexistence respectively. The sixth section is on categorization of peaceful coexistence into: peaceful coexistence in marriage, peaceful coexistence of mankind, peaceful coexistence of the members of the Muslim ummah and peaceful coexistence of mankind and the environment. The seventh section is a summary of the Islamic principles of peaceful coexistence. The final section sums up the main conclusions drawn from this study. The translation of the ayat (verses) of the Qur’an related to this study is extracted from the work of Abdullah Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur’an: Text and Translation unless stated otherwise. At the end of this paper, it is hoped that the readers will: first, appreciate the message of Islam as a universal religion and the need for mutual care, mutual respect, and mutual cooperation; and second, explore the methodology of the Qur’an and the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) in managing human diversity. It is also hoped that this study will lead to a better understanding of peaceful coexistence as an integral part of Islam and one of the characteristics of the Muslim ummah. The findings of this study highlight the role of Islam in promoting peace and security. The study reveals that peaceful coexistence is a key factor in the success of human beings and it requires nurturing love, respect, care, and salam (a greeting of peace) in one’s relationship with others. (shrink)

In this paper, it is argued that the prima facie conflict between special relativity and the quantum-mechanical collapse postulate is only apparent, and that the seemingly incompatible accounts of entangled systems undergoing collapse yielded by different reference frames can be regarded as no more than differing accounts of the same processes and events. Attention to the transformation properties of quantum-mechanical states undergoing unitary, non-collapse evolution points the way to a treatment of collapse evolution consistent with the demands of relativity.

이 논문의 목적은 한반도에서 평화와 통일은 서로 모순이기 때문에 평화통일 대신에 평 화공존을 추구해야 한다고 주장하는 것이다. 이러한 주장을 입증하기 위해 통일에 대한 남 한과 북한의 통일 정책을 비교하면서, 남한과 북한은 자신의 처지가 우위에 있을 때 상대 방에게 교류와 협력을 요구해 왔다는 것을 밝힐 것이다. 남한과 북한은 평화적 통일을 표 방하면서, 자신의 체제로 흡수통일하려는 숨은 의도를 가지고 있었기 때문에 통일은 진전 되지 않고 오히려 갈등과 대립이 증폭되었다. 경제적으로 절대적 우위를 점한 남한은 북한 붕괴와 흡수통일을 기대하거나 평화공존을 앞세워 북한의 개혁개방을 주장하였다. (...) 이것을 알고 있는 북한은 군사적 우위를 점하기 위해 핵무장을 하였다. 남한과 북한은 헌법과 노 동당 규약에 명시된 국가정체성을 포기할 수 없기 때문에, 특히 북한 김정은은 자신의 권 력을 포기할 수 없기 때문에 개혁개방은 가능하지 않으며, 통일도 가능하지 않다. 이 논문 은 이러한 상황에서 우리가 추구해야 할 것은 평화통일이 아니라 평화공존이라고 주장한 다. ‘평화통일론’을 버리고 ‘평화공존론’으로 나아가야 한다고 주장한다. (shrink)

This article examines the extent to which ethno-religious conflicts have affected sustainable development in Nigeria. The destruction of lives and property by reckless ethnic and religious extremists has been a challenging key factor to sustainable development in Nigeria. This article aims to reflect on the ethno-religious conflicts in Nigeria from an epistemological point of view, ascertain the major causes of these conflicts and seek solutions to address the root causes. The article concludes that religious intolerance among Nigerians from different religious (...) groups is the result of the misinterpretation of religious teachings of the leaders of terrorist groups to their followers and that ethno-religious conflicts in Nigeria affect sustainable development as they lead to loss of lives and destruction of property, among others. It is also indicated that the effects of ethno-religious conflicts in Nigeria lead to an increase in the unemployment rate, withdrawal of foreign investments and education imbalance. The article concludes by arguing that ethnicity and religious crises are unhealthy for the nation’s sustainable development and that no price paid in the direction of resolving these conflicts can be considered to be too much. It is recommended that religious leaders form the minds of Nigerians with the teaching of love and peace, as it is proclaimed in their various religious books and beliefs.Contribution: This article brought to light the major factors instigating continuous ethno-religious conflict in Nigeria that has led to much social unrest. Theological reflection of the influence of religion in promoting peaceful coexisting environment was analysed. This work would be of immense benefit to religious bodies, government, civil society and students. (shrink)

I present a thought experiment in quantum mechanics and tease out some of its implications for the doctrine of “peaceful coexistence”, which, following Shimony, I take to be the proposition that quantum mechanics does not force us to revise or abandon the relativistic picture of causality. I criticize the standard arguments in favour of peaceful coexistence on the grounds that they are question-begging, and suggest that the breakdown of Lorentz-invariant relativity as a principle theory would be (...) a natural development, given the general trend of physics in this century. (shrink)

Decolonisation discourse has gained significant momentum in South Africa with the rise of the various #MustFall movements that strive to rid South Africa of its colonial vestiges. But does South Africa need another national metanarrative that envisions an ideal South Africa and champions utopian social ideals? Following the logic of Johan Degenaar and Dirkie Smit, this contribution argues that we should refrain from developing social meta-narratives that seek to frame a single South African identity and social ethos. However, we do (...) need a grammar for peaceful coexistence that goes beyond legal and procedural considerations to establish basic parameters for a constructive social discourse that promotes peaceful coexistence. Such a grammar cannot be imposed unilaterally on social groupings but should be framed by a public discussion aimed at reaching a consensus among social imaginaries on the rules of discourse. Drawing on Reformed thinkers such as John Calvin and John Althusius, the essay continues to discuss the contribution that the Reformed tradition can make to such a grammar. The last part of the essay proceeds to apply the proposed grammar as a benchmark to evaluate the validity of decolonisation discourse. (shrink)

This white paper aims to identify an open problem in 'Quantum Physics and the Nature of Reality' -namely whether quantum theory and special relativity are formally compatible-, to indicate what the underlying issues are, and put forward ideas about how the problem might be addressed.

According to Relational Quantum Mechanics the wave function \ is considered neither a concrete physical item evolving in spacetime, nor an object representing the absolute state of a certain quantum system. In this interpretative framework, \ is defined as a computational device encoding observers’ information; hence, RQM offers a somewhat epistemic view of the wave function. This perspective seems to be at odds with the PBR theorem, a formal result excluding that wave functions represent knowledge of an underlying reality described (...) by some ontic state. In this paper we argue that RQM is not affected by the conclusions of PBR’s argument; consequently, the alleged inconsistency can be dissolved. To do that, we will thoroughly discuss the very foundations of the PBR theorem, i.e. Harrigan and Spekkens’ categorization of ontological models, showing that their implicit assumptions about the nature of the ontic state are incompatible with the main tenets of RQM. Then, we will ask whether it is possible to derive a relational PBR-type result, answering in the negative. This conclusion shows some limitations of this theorem not yet discussed in the literature. (shrink)

Our societies are marked not only by disagreements on the good life, but also by disagreements on justice. This motivates philosophers as divergent as John Gray and Chandran Kukathas to focus their normative political theories on peace instead of justice. In this article, I discuss how peace should be conceived if peace is to be a more realistic goal than justice, not presupposing any moral consensus. I distinguish two conceptions of peace to be found in the literature. One, ordinary peace, (...) conceives of peace as non-violent coexistence based on modus vivendi arrangements. Modus vivendi arrangements, in turn, are explained as a special kind of compromise. Ordinary peace does not presuppose any moral consensus and is therefore realistic, but at the same time it is too minimalist and undemanding to be satisfying. The other conception of peace, ambitious peace, can be found in Kukathas’s work. It is a conception of peace ‘beyond compromise’, not minimalist and undemanding, but, I will argue, not realistic because presupposing at least a second-order moral consensus. In the end, I advocate a division of labour between both conceptions of peace under the umbrella of an overarching ideal of peace. (shrink)

Any attempt to find one's way in the intricacies of contemporary international life, particularly in such a complex problem as that of war and peace, requires, above all, deciphering the basic notions by means of which the essence of the dominant processes in the world arena is more or less adequately expressed. Today these are, above all, peaceful coexistence, the "cold war," and relaxation of international tensions [detente - Translator].

Cadaveric transplantation and living transplantation exist side by side. Both practices help to alleviate organ need. They provide us with two separate moral schemes. Is it rational to keep them apart? The cadaveric system is organised along strict, impartial lines, while the living system is inherently partial and local. The ethical justification for this partial scheme seems to be that it merely supplements the cadaveric scheme: partial transplants do not come at the expense of cadaveric impartiality, but in fact significantly (...) reduce the waiting time for patients on the list for a cadaveric transplant.This seemingly peaceful coexistence is challenged by new initiatives, among them living donation list exchange, and also the LifeSharers initiative, leading to practices that undermine cadaveric impartiality. Should we bemoan this fact, or should we move on towards a new balance in the relationship between cadaveric and living transplantation practices, towards a new moral weighing of impartial and partial values? I argue, against the background of a rapid growth of living donations, that we have good, ethical reasons—not only utilitarian ones—for giving the value of partiality a more prominent place in our policies. (shrink)

Between the affirmative and the negative, the compositional and the oppositional, we need to rethink the difference between difference and contradiction. In this regard, the concept of ‘diplomacy’, as developed by Isabelle Stengers, is of particular significance. Whereas many adherents of an affirmative ontology of difference reduce contradiction to a caveat – ‘of course, antagonism is inevitable, but …’ – diplomacy makes contradiction its fundamental concern. This article explicates the significance of such a conception, via close readings of Stengers’ work (...) in relation to that of Gilles Deleuze, and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. However, it also develops diplomacy in new directions, particularly relating the diplomatic ‘fold’ to the sovereign ‘cut’. The fold of coexistence, then, is achieved through diplomacy as a ‘labour of difference’, against ‘facile pluralism’, which takes worldly cohabitation as given. A diplomatic political ontology is neither bellicose nor pacific; rather, it dramatizes the possibility of peace from within a coercive historical reality. (shrink)

Philosophy and peace is a subject uncommonly rich and diverse in the problems it involves. Here I want to deal with three questions that appear to me to be particularly significant and intimately interrelated. I will briefly consider the current understanding of questions of war and peace and peaceful coexistence; I will attempt to provide a concise analysis of the philosophical category "change" and point to some practical conclusions that derive from it; and I will touch on the (...) question of the mutual connection between science and politics in the era of the revolution in science and technology. (shrink)

Dinh, Hoa Trung Every war is sustained by a narrative that explains the conflict and the necessity of the use of force. A war narrative gives the assembly a common identity, a sense of solidarity, and a mandate for action. This paper examines the ethical significance of war narratives, with particular reference to the Vietnam War, and how war narratives can continue to foster enmity for decades after the fighting. The paper discusses two war narratives that played vital roles in (...) the Vietnam conflict: the Revolution narrative, and the Republic narrative. Drawing from the works of Jon Sobrino and Jurgen Moltmann, who identify the crucified Christ with the victims of violence, this paper demonstrates that the cross can offer a new vision for peaceful coexistence beyond war and animosity. (shrink)

In our pursuit of a good life (eubios), both individuals and societies, need to educate themselves on the pursuit of love of life in all domains, self-love, love of others, loving good and love of life. In this paper I reflect on my own journey through growing up in Christchurch, and experiences around the world, that are the basis for that conclusion. In our efforts to pursuit bioethics education we can enhance peaceful and harmonius coexistence in our world, (...) through nurturing good decisions that we should all make. (shrink)

Cadaveric transplantation and living transplantation exist side by side. Both practices help to alleviate organ need. They provide us with two separate moral schemes. Is it rational to keep them apart? The cadaveric system is organised along strict, impartial lines, while the living system is inherently partial and local. The ethical justification for this partial scheme seems to be that it merely supplements the cadaveric scheme: partial transplants do not come at the expense of cadaveric impartiality, but in fact significantly (...) reduce the waiting time for patients on the list for a cadaveric transplant.This seemingly peaceful coexistence is challenged by new initiatives, among them living donation list exchange, and also the LifeSharers initiative, leading to practices that undermine cadaveric impartiality. Should we bemoan this fact, or should we move on towards a new balance in the relationship between cadaveric and living transplantation practices, towards a new moral weighing of impartial and partial values? I argue, against the background of a rapid growth of living donations, that we have good, ethical reasons—not only utilitarian ones—for giving the value of partiality a more prominent place in our policies. (shrink)

Zionism needs a fundamental overhaul given both the collapse of the Oslo-initiated peace process and the erosion of liberal values in Israeli society. There is no better guide than Hannah Arendt for such an undertaking. On the one hand, she provided a searing diagnosis of mainstream Zionism’s foundational shortcomings, which persist to the present. One is a creed that assumes an eternal anti-Semitism. Two is a corresponding insular nationalism, which rejects affirmative engagement with the outside. On the other hand, Arendt (...) articulated an affirmative humanist Zionism based on three elements. First, is a Jewish self-determination aimed at cultural enrichment and emancipation. Second, is an outward-oriented Zionism that embraces internationalism. Third, is substantive coexistence with Palestinians based on an innovative alternative to the homogenous nation-state model. This article retrieves and updates Arendt’s humanist Zionism. I emphasize her plea to confront Zionism’s pathologies, break from an insular nationalist mindset, and foster new political channels for attaining genuine reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians. (shrink)

Have humans evolved as violent and warlike? Studies of peaceful societies, historical trends of warfare and violence, and cooperation say otherwise. Evolution is not destiny; human choices are important interventions in the process. A science of intentional change, using alternative learning techniques that support human interactions based on nonviolence and peaceful coexistence, might help to evolve a culture of peace.

As a natural result of globalization and migration from village to city, peace, ease, and happiness of people who have to coexist in cities are extremely important. Beliefs, systems, ideologies, and institutions aim to achieve this. This situation forces individuals and groups who live together, whether they want to or not, to get to know and communicate with each other within a trust environment. The most important factor that makes recognizing segments of society with different characteristics and communicate with them (...) in a healthy way is to develop a culture of coexistence among the community members. Coexistence means that people with different identities and affiliations are united around the citizenship denominator and contributing to the continuation of social life in unity and solidarity. This understanding must be transformed into a cultural consciousness in the community members. Because, polarization, marginalization, discrimination, and violence become common among individuals who live in societies where the culture of living together and the awareness of citizenship are not developed. It is not possible to ensure coexistence only by law. In societies where a culture of cohabitation develops, differences are not seen as a cause of separation, but as a richness that diversifies society and gives dynamism to social life. In societies dealing with political, social, economic, and moral problems, religion, language, race, ethnic identity, and regional sense of belonging might be more likely used as terrorization tools. The self-confidence that accurrate religious knowledge gives to individuals might weaken such a possibility. Islam anticipates a social system that facilitates a pecaful and easeful life for the people. Giving importance to principles such as love, respect, tolerance, justice, consultation, assistance, and solidarity in the Qur'an is an indication of the need for this system. The Prophet Mohammad had the opportunity to apply an example of this system in Madinah anticipatedin the Qur'an in Madinah. After the migration, some principles related to the basic rules of coexistence were included in the Madinah agreement, which the Prophet signed with representatives of different segments living in Madinah. It is very important that these principles are able to shed light on the issues happenin in the recent world. The experience of living together in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) should be introduced to the next generations with correct information. Because, The Medina Agreement, which has an important place in the history of Muslims, is an important example of the ability to live together in peace and ease by maintaining differences in society. The Medina Agreement is the first written document that allows different groups of people residing in Medina to live together. The main purpose of this agreement, which the Prophet made with the Jewish, Christian, and polytheistic tribes in Medina after the migration, is to protect the fundamental rights stemming from the citizenship of people who live in the same city by having different faiths and cultural values. If so, the Madinah Agreement might be an example for many societies that recently experience discord and unrest due to their characteristics such as religion, language, race, political thought, and etc. In this regard, this article focuses on the importance of the culture of coexistence in the context of the Madinah Agreement and the process of formation of this culture and offers some suggestionsthat will facilitate peace and ease for different groups living in the same society. Some of these suggestions are as follows: Differences such as language, religion, race, culture, and political thought among the realities of social life should not be seen as an element of discrimination, everyone should contribute to the peace and well-being of society by combining in the common denominator of citizenship. In educational institutions, it should be taken into account values such as human love, respect for the other, tolerance, freedom of thought, empathy, and peace. In addition to educational institutions, all segments operating in the field of law, politics, economics, religion, and media should unite, and thus, should develop a consciousness of citizenship in society, where differences in race, religion, language, culture and political views are seen as richness. (shrink)

For hundreds of years, Muslim Spain was the most tolerant place in Europe. Christians, Muslims, and Jews were able to live together there more or less peacefully. The three religious groups maintained a tolerant convivencia, or coexistence, thanks partly to a twofold distinction among kinds of people that was essential to the particularist doctrine of Islam influential in Spain. Islamic doctrine distinguishes first between Muslim and non-Muslim peoples and second between those non-Muslims who are, like Muslims themselves, “Peoples of (...) the Book” and those non-Muslims who are “pagan.” These two distinctions, taken together, could amount to the difference between life and death. For example, Muslim courts ruled on the basis of the Koran that those “others” who were Peoples of the Book could not legally be put to the sword for refusing to convert to Islam while those “others” who were pagan could be. Christians and Jews had to be put up with, and usually were.2 1. Henry Kamen, Inquisition and Society in Spain in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries , p. 264; my emphasis; hereafter abbreviated I.2. The Koran grounds the series of divisions outlined and is consistent with the well-known Pact of Umar I, which established special regulations for Christians and Jews living in Muslim lands: “’There is to be no compulsion in religion. Rectitude has been clearly distinguished from error. So whoever disbelieves in idols and believes in Allah has taken hold of the firmest handle. It cannot split. Allah is All-hearing and All-knowing’” . See also Sura 109:6: “To you your religion, to me my religion.” Marc Shell, a John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Fellow for 1990-95, is head of the department of comparative literature at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst. His books include The Economy of Literature , Money, Language, and Thought: Literary and Philosophical Economies from the Medieval to the Modern Era , and The End of Kinship: “Measure for Measure,” Incest, and the Ideal of Universal Siblinghood . Children of the Earth is forthcoming. (shrink)

The contemporary Chinese intellectual Kang Xiaoguang has argued that Chinese soft power should be based on Confucian culture, the most influential Chinese political tradition. But which Confucian values should form the core of China’s soft power? This paper first explores the coexistence of state sovereignty and utopian cosmopolitanism through an analysis of Confucian tradition up to contemporary Chinese nationalism. It insists on the exogenous roots of the cosmopolitan ideal and its relations with the ideal of a harmonious political order (...) and a global peace. Then, it compares the philosophy of ‘all-under-heaven’ in its classical and contemporary forms, with Mencius’ theory of a ‘hegemon’, a theory that still informs the moral language that Chinese intellectuals use to evaluate foreign policy, especially regarding morally-justified warfare. It ends on a reflection on the role that Mencius’s theory of just and unjust war can play in the contemporary Chinese context and to help understanding and defining the stance of China in the international geo-political context. (shrink)

While some species have affiliative and even cooperative interactions between individuals of different social groups, humans are alone in having durable, positive-sum, interdependent relationships across unrelated social groups. Our capacity to have harmonious relationships that cross group boundaries is an important aspect of our species' success, allowing for the exchange of ideas, materials, and ultimately enabling cumulative cultural evolution. Knowledge about the conditions required for peaceful intergroup relationships is critical for understanding the success of our species and building a (...) more peaceful world. How do humans create harmonious relationships across group boundaries and when did this capacity emerge in the human lineage? Answering these questions involves considering the costs and benefits of intergroup cooperation and aggression, for oneself, one's group, and one's neighbor. Taking a game theoretical perspective provides new insights into the difficulties of removing the threat of war and reveals an ironic logic to peace – the factors that enable peace also facilitate the increased scale and destructiveness of conflict. In what follows, I explore the conditions required for peace, why they are so difficult to achieve, and when we expect peace to have emerged in the human lineage. I argue that intergroup cooperation was an important component of human relationships and a selective force in our species history beginning at least 300 thousand years. But the preconditions for peace only emerged in the past 100 thousand years and likely coexisted with intermittent intergroup violence which would have also been an important and selective force in our species' history. (shrink)

The problem of threat to international politics and global peace has undermined the effectiveness of the power of dialogue. The world seems to be in the condition of will to power derivable from the mutually assured destructive tendencies. Is it possible to extend global peace? How can this be achieved? In this paper, we posit that dialogue is a fundamental medium for conflict resolution and peaceful coexistence in a diverse world. We contend that monologue in international politics understood (...) in terms of might is right undermines the effectiveness of dialogue and often leads to violent conflicts within and between countries. Our world today is at a crossroads. Dialogue, however, foregrounds the medium of conflict resolution and the social consciousness of human communication. We present a hermeneutic understanding of dialogue that follows from relevant works of Hans Georg Gadamer and Jűrgen Habermas. This paper espouses the power of dialogue as a basis for the normative foundation of an emancipated social global order. The dialogical sequence has a cobweb of social interconnectedness and the ethics of global peace. We present a literal and philosophical understanding of dialogue and a contextual understanding of dialogue within the hermeneutic tradition. (shrink)

The present paper deals with the notion of complementarity associated with Salmon’s proposal of peaceful coexistence between scientific explanation models. The relation between the coexistence of such models and theoretical reduction is studied. Finally a way of understanding peaceful coexistence is proposed which does not rely on pragmatic factors and also allows us to return to the use of the explanatory capacity of theories as a value of relevance in the rational choice between scientific theories.

In 1989, the age of power political realism ended. The conditions were set to replace the prevailing Hobbesian model of peace by deterrence with the considerably more challenging Kantian model of peace by right. If, however, Huntington's paradigm of fighting civilizations were right, we would have to forget Kant and remember Hobbes. Sober rationality, healthy distrust, striving for power accumulation and all the other instruments from the realist's toolbox of political prudence are very well suited to facilitate political self-assertion in (...) an age of violently clashing cultures. However, this helplessness is not well grounded. Considering that from the very beginning liberalism is a theory of religious and ethical pluralism and well-experienced in dealing with problems of multiculturalism, it is at least possible to argue for a weak liberal universalism which provides normative foundations for a global order of peacefully living together. Of course, conceptual and moral modesty is crucial. If the human rights doctrine wants to defend its universal claim in the face of cultural diversity , it has to restrict itself to the conditions of esse: the pre-cultural and sheer natural conditions of human being and human coexistence. However, the formulation of the conditions of bene esse has to be left to culture and its authorities and belief systems which buttress a cultural constitution of meaning, both theologically and metaphysically. Traditional natural rights theory knew that both have to go together, and that the esse-enabling duties necessarily enjoy priority. No cultural conception of thriving life and existential significance can be accepted which contradicts the fundamental imperatives and conditions of pure human existence and coexistence. (shrink)

This book explores Hobbes's ideas about the internal pacification of states, the prospect of a peaceful international order, and the connections between civil and international peace. It questions the notion of a negative Hobbesian peace, which is based on the mere suppression of violence, and emphasises his positive vision of everlasting peace in a well-governed commonwealth. The book also highlights Hobbes's ideas about international coexistence and cooperation, which he considers integral to good government. In examining Hobbes's conception of (...) peace, it provides a fresh perspective on his international political thought. The findings also have wider implications for the ways in which we think about Hobbes's relationship to the realist and liberal traditions of international thought, and will appeal to students and scholars of political theory and international relations. (shrink)

Hegelian‐Marxian doctrines of dialectic progress through war and conflict are traced to Christian theosophy of historical necessity and “imperialistic missionarism.” Jewish fossilized existence is traced to its antiproselytizing “kibbutz” ideology of dialogic coexistence. Tolerance is possible either through an ideological balance of terror between equal opposing powers or through mutual volitionary space evacuating Cabalic style contraction. According to the Biblical definition of covenant, brit, a coexisting shalom (peace) is possible only through separating and rebinding which comprises the shalem (complete). (...) Japanese Makuya Christianity is presented as an anti‐imperialistic model for mutual contraction facilitating the coexisting shalom‐shalem between equals who are different but not indifferent to each other. (shrink)