This article is concerned with contemporary theories of epistemological uncertainty and their ramifications for our moral lives, and more specifically with how this uncertainty undermines the ...possibilities for conceiving of, and finding assurance in, humanistic morality. First, the uncertainties brought into knowledge by poststructuralism and Luhmann’s theory of observation are examined, particularly as they relate to the issue of reconciling the double moment of morality as an at once subjective and social phenomena. Next, Habermas’s important and influential work in this area is taken as exemplifying the limits of humanistic morality; it is argued that despite his interest and importance, Habermas’s work cannot support the weight of its own moral orientation, and that this is a direct consequence of the humanist structure of his thought, which cannot be reconciled with the paradoxical nature of the relationship between the subject and the social. Finally, some possibilities for maintaining humanism’s moral orientations through uncertainty are offered, primarily through the preservation of paradox, the acceptance of partiality, and the acknowledgement of the definitively incomplete nature of moral experience.
Straipsnyje svarstoma, kaip epistemologinis neužtikrintumas, persmelkiantis mūsų dorovinį gyvenimą, užkardo galimybę suprasti humanistinę dorovę ir atrasti joje pasitikėjimo garantą. Pirmiausia analizuojama, kaip neužtikrintumo problema nušviečiama poststruktūralizmo ir Niklaso Luhmanno stebėjimo teorijose ir kaip ji sprendžiama atsižvelgiant į dvilypę dorovės – kaip subjektyvaus ir kaip socialinio fenomeno – prigimtį. Vėliau pasitelkiami Jürgeno Habermaso darbai, iliustruojantys humanistinės dorovės ribotumą.Straipsnyje teigiama, kad, nepaisant Habermaso ketinimų ir pateikiamų argumentų svarbos, jo svarstymai visgi negali pagrįsti jo asmeninės moralinės pozicijos. Taip nutinka dėl jo minčiai būdingos humanistinio mąstymo struktūros, neleidžiančios išnarplioti paradoksalaus subjekto ir socialumo santykio problemos. Straipsnio pabaigoje siūlomi keli sprendiniai, kurie, nesant užtikrintumo, įgalintų humanizmo dorovinę nuostatą. Tai galima padaryti tik pripažįstant paradoksalią dorovės prigimtį, kuri neredukuojama tik į vieną ar kitą dėmenį ir atsiskleidžia tik kaip netobula patirtis, kuriai visada bus būdingas šališkumas.
This article is concerned with contemporary theories of epistemological uncertainty and their ramifications for our moral lives, and more specifically with how this uncertainty undermines the ...possibilities for conceiving of, and finding assurance in, humanistic morality. First, the uncertainties brought into knowledge by poststructuralism and Luhmann’s theory of observation are examined, particularly as they relate to the issue of reconciling the double moment of morality as an at once subjective and social phenomena. Next, Habermas’s important and influential work in this area is taken as exemplifying the limits of humanistic morality; it is argued that despite his interest and importance, Habermas’s work cannot support the weight of its own moral orientation, and that this is a direct consequence of the humanist structure of his thought, which cannot be reconciled with the paradoxical nature of the relationship between the subject and the social. Finally, some possibilities for maintaining humanism’s moral orientations through uncertainty are offered, primarily through the preservation of paradox, the acceptance of partiality, and the acknowledgement of the definitively incomplete nature of moral experience.
How far have universities in post-Communist states adopted the practices and habits of their branded and consumer-oriented equivalents in the English-speaking world? While not assuming that ...university education in those states reflects in any mechanistic way the regulated, business-led system long established in places like the US, and now being dramatically realized in countries like Britain, this edited collection identifies some marked shifts in the direction of what might best be described as ‘neoliberalisation’, examining its particularities in local situations where establishment ideologies were, until the early 1990s, deeply alien to all kinds of commercially driven entities. Many of the authors are concerned not only with the linked issues of commercialism, instrumentalism, bureaucracy, and managerialism, framed locally and nationally, but also with the meaning and purpose of universities outside or against their status as efficient gatherers of income. The collection makes specific reference to Lithuania, Hungary, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Georgia, and Russia, and comprises theoretical as well as empirical studies of diverse but connected subjects, including the marketization of the academy, regional reactions to globalization as expressed in the representational rhetoric of specific curricula, the role and place of civic education, comparisons between educational settings, pedagogies for a critical and ethical consciousness, corporate and state demands and their effects on academic freedom, and the positive potential of new communication technologies. In all these cases, the system of neoliberalism, or rather an uneven process of neoliberalisation, forms a backdrop to the particular issues discussed.
PDF
