Article/Interview: : Rethinking the Future of World Religion: A Conversation with Jorge N. Ferrer. Integral Review. July 2012, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 22+P2P Foundation
- The future of (participatory) religion? Part 1: Global Religion hypothesis vs. the Mutual Transformations of Religion
- The future of (participatory) religion? Part 2: interspiritual wisdom vs spirituality without religion
Why is this significant for economics, policy, and society? Because spirituality is about consciousness and religion is about values and norms. Economic systems is based on the level of collective consciousness of societies, and institutional rules reflect prevailing values and norms in practice.
For Dante, individual morality cannot be dissociated from social responsibility because the individual is a citizen, and to be a good individual, he must be a good citizen. Thus, to retrace the moral journey of the pilgrim through Hell, Purgatory, and Paradise, is to follow the journey of the citizen from a corrupt society, through the transition from selfishness to social responsibility, to his goal in the ideal society. The moral level of Dante's allegory is also the political level because it is impossible to be a moral human being without being a good citizen, and it is difficult to be either a good citizen or a moral person in a bad society. In Hell, Dante leads his pilgrim-persona step by step through a knowledge of what constitutes a corrupt society and a corrupt person and shows how even a basically good individual can be affected by the evil around him. By analyzing the structure of Hell, investigating each region in the order in which the pilgrim goes through it, since each sin has political implications, we can see how Dante reveals the hidden corruption that undermines society and how he unmasks the respected public figures. By the end, Dante's audience should understand what constitutes evil in a society as well as in an individual and be able to see the part we play in the evil around us.
3 comments:
FDR said he should "Drive the moneylenders out of the temple" and he did in many ways,but today,who would take that fight???Obama,no, Mit, not a chance in hell!
Don't want to excuses Obama, but he had many formidable obstacles to deal with — monumental crisis bequeathed to him, aggressive military thwarting him, entitled business and FIRE sector using all its resources to advance the status quo , and a united obstructionist opposition determined to neuter him. Under the circumstances, he was still able to pass a health care bill that recognizes access to health care as right rather than a privilege. If McCain had won, things would have gone a lot worse for progressives.
It´s true Tom.He had to deal with a lot, the health care plan alongside with a congress that did all they could to obstruct all he did a Mc Cain had been real disaster.I don´t think President Obama is lack of any good intentions ,but i think he had to work in a system (your article from C.Wright Mills classic told a lot,thank´s!)there just a few in his position that could deal with these forces.Obama is it seems a very humble,listening president,a good man,but i wish he acted with a greater strenght at the start when he had a opportunity to pass throw a real "Change",and not let these Geithner etc crowd of advisers in and choosed others as economic and legal advisors in his team,it could have worked real well.But it´s easy to say of course!But Mit and Ryan,i tremble for such future alternative Tom!
Post a Comment