Praxis Circle’s Post

5 Female Philosophers That You Should Know

Traditional religious affiliations are on the decline and screen-based media consumption is rising. Grantee Carl Plantinga is exploring the profound impact of movies on moral understanding. This investigation, transcending mere entertainment, explores how movies shape our ethical perspectives, often serving as modern-day parables that illuminate complex moral dilemmas and social issues. Plantinga's interdisciplinary approach delves into how screen stories, through their affective power and reflective aftermath, influence our moral codes, thoughts, and actions. As we navigate the narratives portrayed in films, we engage in a continual process of moral reevaluation, often leading to deeper empathy and understanding. This study positions movies as pivotal in shaping our moral landscapes, offering a unique lens through which we can view and understand the complexities of our world. Learn more: https://bit.ly/48miMs4

An exceptionally interesting connection in this context is Derrida’s insistence that certain binaries haunt our linguistic system. Our language, he argues, does tend to favor fundamental divisions: male/female, straight/queer, Western/non-Western, civilized/uncivilized, white/black, etc. We tend to generate meaning by playing these binaries off one another; indeed, meaning is often a function of the dominance of one side of the pair over the other. So, “male, straight, civilized, and white” rules over “female, queer, non-Western, and uncivilized.” It is almost like a computer language: on or off, one or zero. Can you see how so much of the woke rhetoric today follows from this? Woke theorists want to privilege the underside of these classic binary oppositions.

How did the Ancient Greek concept of “parrhesia” influence America's First Amendment? In her insightful essay for the "Why Liberalism" series, Teresa M. Bejan, professor of political theory at Oxford, examines the historical roots of free speech, tracing it from the democratic ideals of Athens through to the fearless speech practices of Quakers. Bejan argues that parrhesia—frank speech without fear or favor—is crucial to understanding America’s distinctive commitment to free speech and what we risk losing as tolerance for offensive speech declines. Explore this compelling analysis here: https://lnkd.in/eDcWhb4Q

What happens when religious infrastructures no longer serve the communities for which they were created? How is spirituality evolving as individuals are increasingly turning to meaning-oriented content through apps and social media platforms? Is it possible for spiritual innovators to survive without the kinds of services religious denominations have always provided? In this issue of Harvard Divinity Bulletin, Sue Phillips, who co-founded Sacred Design Lab, explores these questions and offers some solutions. She highlights a few successful efforts which have "used design-thinking principles to explore emerging opportunities, refresh existing commitments, and inspire funders to do new things." Read more of Sue Phillips’ insights here: https://bit.ly/3W3ozhw

In this conversation, we dive into how religious and cultural beliefs can be interpreted differently over time. While respecting others’ practices, Andrés shares his perspective on how ancient religious texts can feel contradictory in today’s reality. We also discuss how cultural terms evolve, like how something once meant as a term of endearment can now be seen as offensive in different contexts. It's a thought-provoking look at how words, culture, and beliefs shift over time.

In this entry I explore how certain cultural complexities challenge our view of truth. Is there only one Truth, or are there many truths? Learn more: https://bit.ly/3XcVmD2.

Do you have DEI disclosures on your hiring platforms? Can we talk about the word Caucasian and its origin? This term from the late 18thC gained momentum in the 19th and 20th centuries. It was used in racial, bioanthropological "science" to justify white supremacy, and it's complete bunk. It comes from an idea that humans came from the Caucasus Mountains, which may have biblical origins- humans were classified as either Caucasoid, Mongoloid, or Negroid. This belief of racial hierarchy justified: 🚮 genocide and war 🚮 slavery, segregation, and "separate but equal" 🚮 medical experiments on Indigenous persons 🚮 eugenics 🚮 hoarding of Indigenous bodies and items of cultural patrimony in institutions 🚮 internment of Chinese and Japanese people 🚮 the theory of a "thrifty gene" in settler colonialism By continued usage of this word, we are ironically holding space for white supremist ideas and systems. Language transmits culture. Further, we are reminding marginalized folks of the power of systemic racism, where ideas in motion tend to stay in motion and we must call them out. We have many words to define someone's origin- culture, ethnicity, ancestry, heritage, descent; yet we choose one that does not exist- race. I identify as Euro-Canadian; I am a settler-descendant of Scottish, British ancestry with a splash of French. It is likely that the lingering use of the word Caucasian is unintentional; it is past time to be more intentional in our language and actions. https://lnkd.in/gxbTK7Tc https://lnkd.in/gY4wgeZz

What do we mean when we talk about #Totalitarianism today? Totalitarianism once seemed like a fairly safe historical word, belonging to another time, and another mindset. Yet over the past ten years artists, writers, and activists are now regularly using the word to describe not just regimes, but current modes of thinking and ideology. In this lecture Professor Lyndsey Stonebridge returns to the work of the most famous theorist of totalitarianism, the political-philosopher, Hannah Arendt and asks what can we learn from her anti-totalitarian thinking today? Watch the Inaugural lecture here: https://lnkd.in/efHpmuuM