Zusammenfassung Der vorliegende Aufsatz geht der Frage nach, aus welchen Gründen religiöse Aspekte im politischen Denken des Aristoteles – verglichen mit dem anderer zeitgenössischer Philosophen wie auch mit der politischen Praxis seiner Zeit – nicht prominent vertreten sind. Dabei beleuchtet er insbesondere den Umstand, dass Aristoteles der sozialintegrativen wie auch der identitätsstiftenden Funktion des Kultes im Hinblick auf die Polisgemeinschaft keine zentrale Bedeutung beimisst. Der Beitrag deutet dies auf dem Hintergrund der spezifischen Fragestellungen wie auch der politischen Prämissen des Philosophen, (...) darunter seine Fokussierung der Stasisproblematik und der Arm-Reich-Dichotomie. Angesichts dessen gelangt Aristoteles – abweichend von vielen seiner Zeitgenossen – zu der Einschätzung, dass sich soziale Kohäsion vorrangig durch das Austarieren konkurrierender Ansprüche fördern lässt, weniger durch Rekurse auf gemeinschaftsstiftende religiöse Vorstellungen oder kollektive Kultpraktiken. (shrink)

The philosophy of religion, as commonly understood by Christians in both the Catholic and Reformed traditions, whether they think it a worthwhile enterprise or not, begins with arguments for the existence of a deity, proceeds to show that this deity is necessarily unique, eternal, and suchlike, and leaves it to reflection on divine revelation to consider whether this deity might be properly designated as ‘three persons in one nature’. Much later, after discussing the metaphysical implications of the incarnation of the (...) second person of the triune godhead, one would arrive at theories about the death of Jesus Christ as putatively redemptive, and describable as sacrificial, atoning and the like. (shrink)

This paper analyzes how the figure of the childhas been used to authorize a series ofboundaries that have constituted thelimit-points of educational theories orphilosophies. Limit-points are the conceptualboundaries that educational theories produce,move within, respond to, and make use ofbecause the perception is that they cannot beargued away or around at the time. A method ofcomparative historico-philosophy is used tocontrast limit-points in Platonic figurationsof the child and education with childcenteredand eugenic theories of the late nineteenth andtwentieth century West. The figuration of (...) thechild in both periods is imbricated in formingboundaries around a power-motion-reason nexusand in delineating what necessity and justicemean. The meaning-space that the child canoccupy in relation to such concepts has shiftedwith them and has been important to depictingUtopian and cosmological imaginings atdifferent historical moments and forauthorizing in turn what counts as anappropriate and/or realistic educationalphilosophy. (shrink)