The era of globalizations historic responsibility

1、 The era of globalization's historic responsibility Abstract: Globalization of society is more emphasis on high-risk nature of the human history of the progress of social responsibility. Western philosophers from Kant has several arguments for social progress, the “l(fā)ogic of argument the poss

2、ibility of weak, “historical inevitability argument is too strong, “Pragmatic necessity argument can be somewhere in between, but it does not replace the most emphasized Kants “moral duty argument. In the era of globalization, one of historys moral responsibility of the refusal to pessimism, to main

3、tain “permanent peace optimistic about the bright future of hope, and strive to make this hope did not become pure fantasy. Keywords: globalization, social progress, historical responsibility, hope, Kant, Popper, Rorty, Habermas “9.11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. events, as well as the United State

4、s and abroad all kinds of religious fundamentalist reaction to this incident, the German sociologist Beck (Ulrich Beck) and the British sociologist Giddens (Anthony Giddens) of “ risk society “concept, and the American political scientist Samuel P. Huntington (Samuel Huntington) of the clash of civi

5、lizations “concept in order to contact startling up. How to prevent destructive large-scale clash of civilizations and the possibilities of this great risk, should become an important issue to discuss globalization; how the new conditions in the history of mankind under the responsibility of making

6、a deep understanding of theoretical research and therefore the most urgent task of philosophy . 1 To understand human history, the question of responsibility for the future, from the Marx “on the 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, in the famous sentence starting: “People create their own history, but

7、 they are not arbitrarily created, and not in their own creation under the conditions chosen, but in a direct encounter, established, inherited from the past down under the conditions of creation. “tells us that the historical process for the assumed moral responsibility, not only this passage The f

8、irst phrase is the last part of it. People themselves to create their own history, which of course has given us, the creators of history, a heavy responsibility. But we are doing today each of these options for the future generations who will become their “established, inherited from the past down t

9、he conditions, and thus they generate are often irreversible effects, which allows us not only to the responsible for their own, but also to be responsible for our future generations. In our have glimpsed what the human genome this “l(fā)ast of human privacy or “Gods creation in the last secret of the e

10、ra, in our small group of terrorists is not only a master but also ready to use weapons of mass destruction times, in our The various nuclear powers have enough to destroy life on Earth, how many times the era of nuclear warheads, we will not really move toward a comprehensive, perhaps will lead to

11、a large-scale regression of civilization of mankind “clash of civilizations, in large measure depends on our not really think that we are already in a “clash of civilizations era. Social phenomena to describe and predict natural phenomena is different from the description and predictions. Descriptio

12、n of natural phenomena and language are not an integral part of nature, and will not participate in the object of description and prediction of activities, thereby affecting the activities of such objects, and social phenomena to describe and predict itself is a social phenomenon, it is will describ

13、e and predict the phenomenon of an impact. With regard to the operation of the sun in any case descriptions and predictions, the sun still in accordance with the laws of its own running, but none, or a well-known economist, said officials in charge of a particular stock will rise, the prediction its

14、elf can lead to stock up reasons. If all of us - especially policy makers and influence decision makers - believe that after the Cold War conflict in human culture or civilization will be crossed, then, while we may never know if there is no such idea, then the situation would have been what we can

15、have a great grasp to assert that this world is indeed a clash of civilizations will become the battleground. The thinking can be traced back to Kant there. 200 years ago, Kant argued he was towards the universal human progress in the rule of law and lasting peace in a time when the concept of the m

16、ain arguments put forward, it is inherent in this concept of practice effects or, conversely, the negative concept The practice has a negative impact. In the “repeat the question: Human beings are constantly moving forward to improve it? A text, Kant referred to the ancient Jewish prophets, todays p

17、oliticians who defend the status quo and those who predicted a complete left leaning religious priests who actually is to help with their own predict the realization of these predictions. This was the opposite of the prediction in terms of society, “self-realization (self-fulfilling) the role of - t

18、hose negative, leading to reversal of history there will be a prediction of the actual historical role, making the actual historical process turned out just like this prediction put it. For the same reason, in the “citizens of the world view of history under the general concept of a text, Kant point

19、ed out that human progress and well-being of the Kingdom of the concept of this millennium is by no means illusory, because such a concept although it is not deduced from experience, but it does experience, the process can be an impact. The fact that considerable experience shows that this progress

20、is possible; persons efforts can facilitate this could become a reality, and this effort is with people relevant to an understanding of history: “human nature for its own is this: for our species will be encountered in even the most remote times, it will never be indifferent, as long as the era beyo

21、nd doubt can count on. “Precisely because of this, Kant said that human history, such an understanding must be seen as it is possible to , and even the nature of this goal is still needed. “ Kants point of view can make such a generalization: Despite the overall progress of mankind, and no firm guar

22、antees, we have an obligation to promote such progress; be more precise, that it is because mans overall progress toward a permanent peace is not established security, we are more obligation to promote such progress. One further point that we are not only an obligation to promote progress, and we al

23、so have an obligation to believe in progress, and an obligation to want to progress, and an obligation to wholeheartedly looking forward to the arrival of permanent peace. This is not only with the distant sight on the future of fantasy, here and now directly affect our actions and choices. Did not

24、this positive sense of “eternal peace of faith and hope, another sense of “eternal peace - Immanuel Kant in the “eternal peace Wen said at the beginning of that one, “a cemetery, it could not just “a hotel in the Netherlands sign on a picture, not just the ruins of the World Trade Center in New York

25、 in 5000 innocent people in the tragic ending, and became the final destination of this species of human. Two Kants idea of human progress, based mainly attributed to the historical progress of mankind to assume moral responsibility, but not all boil down to such a moral responsibility. In addition

26、to this “moral responsibility to demonstrate, but also seek to advance the concept of Kant offers the following two arguments. The first argument can be called “not impossible to demonstrate. In Kants view, on the basis of the idea of human progress is that it is not in any case be achieved, but the

27、re is nothing that it can not be desired: “Since human culture, as its own natural for the purposes is to continue moving forward, so it is conceivable that they exist in their own moral purposes are moving to improve moving forward, and although at times it was interrupted, but it will never break.

28、 I do not need to prove this hypothesis , but added the other party must be to prove it. “Kant is here to make one on the possibility “assumption; from logically speaking, on the possibility “the assumption that a weak assumption, but assumptions of this weak the negative - that progress is “impossi

29、ble - is a very strong assumption. In this case, more responsibility for making the argument is the assumption that the party holding strong. Right as a moral philosopher Immanuel Kant, as long as proof of the moral goal of human progress is not impossible enough, because of “moral goals to fulfill

30、when their card is not impossible that when the obligation becomes . “ The second argument can be called “Nature Program demonstration. In the philosopher Immanuel Kant as a historical view of human progress is not only the good aspects of human nature-driven results, but a human evil of nature as a

31、 tool to achieve them: “Nature makes all human endowments can be used in the development of means is that human society antagonistic, but only such a confrontation will be the reasons for the human legal order and limited. “who on the one hand with the tendency of society, on the other hand has a se

32、parate technology (isolating) the tendency to resistance everywhere. “But it is precisely this resistance was aroused all human capacity, and promote him to overcome his lazy tendencies, and because of vanity, lust for power or greed driven by the heart but to his fellow countrymen - he was neither

33、a very Good to tolerate them, can not be divorced from them - the middle position for themselves and win a seat. so he emerged from barbarism into the culture of the real first step, and culture has always been where the value of human society; then all human intelligence on the gradually developed,

34、 taste is formed, and because of continued enlightenment began to lay a way of thinking, this way of thinking can be rough to identify the moral with the natural endowments of practice goes into the practice of the exact principle, thus forced to form a kind of morbid consistency of society has fina

35、lly transformed into a moral whole. “It is in this sense, Kant said that the history of mankind in general can be seen as a covert nature implementation of the plan. “ Kants two arguments, from a twentieth century philosopher Karl Popper (Karl Popper) point of view, not too weak, that is, too. “Is n

36、ot impossible to argue too weak. Just say that the progress is possible, and not saying anything is not much difference, because it may do plenty, and even can be said that can not be counted. In Poppers view, science should tell us precisely what is impossible; social action - what he called “piece

37、meal engineering - should be the basis of precisely this kind tells us that “such and such a thing is not might occur, “the regularity of knowledge. If we say that “is not impossible to argue, the problems is that it put too little, then, “Nature program demonstrated the problems is that it put too

38、much. When Kant said that even a devil can also be set up composed of national rule of law, and thus only consider their own interests in various national is also expected to establish a universal rule of law, civil society worldwide, he assumed that these demons are the selfishness of Christians. B

39、ut in totally excluding utilitarian terrorists in front of a small number of people may cause irreparable damage to the case of loss, Kants this assumption is particularly thin. Kant on “nature program point of view is Hegel developed into the “cunning of reason point of view, but to this point of v

40、iew of Popper to the core of Hegels philosophy of history as what he calls “historicism in the typical . Historicism Popper think this is the so-called “open society enemies; from historys point of view, Poppers “open society can also be referred to as “open history: in his view, the history of mank

41、ind does not have a predetermined goal, but rather a process of endless possibilities. If you recognize the significance of the historical process means that it is a historical process of recognition of the objective or purpose or given, then Popper argued that history is simply no sense. In contras

42、t, Poppers emphasis on the progress of that concept of “moral responsibility argument in Kant, much appreciated. Karl Popper-style tone, Kant said: “The only reason the history of freedom, and it is the only Christians attitude is that our own commitment to freedom of historical responsibilities. In

43、 the same sense, we create our assumed the responsibility of life that only our conscience can be judged for us, rather than worldly success. “In other words, while history itself does not make sense, but we can and should be given a sense of history: We can give history a kinds of meaning, rather t

44、han to explore the hidden meaning of history, as our task. “Like, like Kant, Popper also believe that such an obligation, such a hope, not without the slightest practical effect: We can learn from history and given the significance of history to ethics, or that of our own ethics as a cautious reform

45、er attempt may not be in vain. On the contrary, if we underestimate the power of the history of ethical goals, we will never understand the history. There is no doubt, they often lead to their original vision of those who did not foresee the terrible results. However, in some aspects, we are more th

46、an the previous generation close to any of the American Revolution or the Enlightenment represented by Kants goals and ideals of . In particular, through the knowledge of the concept of self-liberation, diversity, or the concept of open society, through the establishment of a lasting peaceful end to

47、 the terrible war in the history of ideas, though perhaps still a distant ideal, it has already become a goal of almost all of us and hope. “ On the one hand, history itself, there is no meaning; the other hand, history can be up to us to give a specific meaning. Popper bluntly admitted, while argui

48、ng for these two points, which means truth and value proposition of a dichotomy: “I believe that this dualism of facts and choices are important. The fact that the class does not make sense that only through Our choice, they only get the meaning. historicist just one of many to attempt to overcome t

49、his dualism of the kind, which originated in fear, because it is afraid to admit: even on our own selection criteria, we also bear the ultimate of the responsibility. “ But the question is, in this dichotomy, under the value of completely stripping the factual basis of the situation, how to avoid Po

50、pper has always insisted against relativism? Such relativism, in Rorty (Richard Rorty) there is almost not hide. Popper, after all, also advocated that we should “obtain liberation through knowledge, while Rorty is emphasis on “knowledge and “hope are two different things: “I hope always will take t

51、he form of a false prediction . but for the hope of social justice, it is as a valuable human life, the only base. “ In Rortys view, this hope for social justice, one does not require arguments based on universal theories, two do not need to argue the facts based on historical trends. With regard to

52、 the former one hand, Rorty said: “The pragmatist on the pragmatic opponents have called reliable moral principle “view is that the past practice of these principles abbreviation - is generally the first one of our most admired customary way. For example, Muller and greater well-being of the princip

53、les and Kants categorical imperative is to remind ourselves of certain social customs - some parts of the Christian West, those social customs, if not in reality but it is also in the orally more equal than any other parts of the kind of culture - the two ways. “With regard to the latter, Kant and P

54、opper than Rorty is much to be pessimistic: not only is related to the concept of progress with the historical trend to the fact that demonstrated the possibility of pessimism, but also the trend of history itself, the pessimistic view. In Rortys view, beyond the resource capacity of the population

55、growth of modern science and technology means to usurp state power into the hands of thieves, the narrow-minded struggle between the national government - in that under the influence of three factors, not only that Kant envisaged the kind of worldwide liberal utopia, is now already in existence a sy

56、stem of democracy and freedom and philosophy of pluralism, in the twenty-first century will be very difficult to have place for you. However, Rorty believes that this does not prevent he insisted on justice for human hope, because “the rise of nineteenth century Europe, this utopian social ideals, w

57、e documented the most noble of the most imaginative creatures . “ Reposted elsewhere in the paper for free download Three There are two issues. First, human progress is not possible to find a “moral responsibility to demonstrate beyond argument, and this argument is neither as “not impossible to arg

58、ue or “l(fā)ogical possibility argument, as weak, but also unlike the “Nature Program demonstration “or historical inevitability argument “as strong? Secondly, if this argument can be found, then it is the historical process mean that peoples moral responsibility, therefore to reduce the number of? With

59、 Karl Popper and Richard Rorty have been Jürgen Habermas (Jürgen Habermas) point of view for us to answer these two questions provide an important inspiration. Habermas, as Popper acknowledged the same concept need to distinguish between fact and value, for which he has been including the philosopher Richard Rortys new pragmatism, inclu