Civics. Government[edit] On smaller scales, modern human development theory attempts to unify ethics and small-scale politics with the urban and rural economies of sustainable development. Notable theorists including Jane Jacobs and Carol Moore argue that political secession of either cities or distinct bio regions and cultures is an essential pre-requisite to applying any widely shared ethics, as the ethical views of urban and rural people, different cultures or those engaged in different types of agriculture, are irreconcilably different.
This extreme advocacy of decentralization is hardly uncommon, and leads to the minimal theory of civics – anarchism. Civics refers not to the ethical or moral or political basis by which a ruler acquires power, but only to the processes and procedures they follow in actually exercising it. Recently, the concept of global civics has also been suggested as a way of applying civics in the highly interdependent and globalized world of the 21st century. Progressive Era. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, 1901-09 (left), William Howard Taft, 1909-13 (center), and Woodrow Wilson, 1913-21 (right) are often referred to as the "Progressive Presidents"; their administrations saw intense social and political change in American society. Initially the movement operated chiefly at local levels; later it expanded to state and national levels. Progressives drew support from the middle class, and supporters included many lawyers, teachers, physicians, ministers and business people.[7] The Progressives strongly supported scientific methods as applied to economics, government, industry, finance, medicine, schooling, theology, education, and even the family.
Political reform[edit] "The Awakening" Suffragists were successful in the West; their torch awakens the women struggling in the East and South in this cartoon by Hy Mayer in Puck Feb. 20, 1915 Exposing corruption[edit] Modernization[edit] The Progressives were avid modernizers. Women[edit] Woman suffrage[edit] Modernization. Modernization theory is a theory used to explain the process of modernization within societies. Modernization refers to a model of a progressive transition from a 'pre-modern' or 'traditional' to a 'modern' society. The theory looks at the internal factors of a country while assuming that, with assistance, "traditional" countries can be brought to development in the same manner more developed countries have.
Modernization theory attempts to identify the social variables that contribute to social progress and development of societies, and seeks to explain the process of social evolution. Modernization theory is subject to criticism originating among socialist and free-market ideologies, world-systems theorists, globalization theory and dependency theory among others. Modernization theory not only stresses the process of change but also the responses to that change. Earliest expressions of the theory[edit] Émile Durkheim The idea of modernization is relatively new. State theory[edit] Ecological economics. Ecological economics/eco-economics refers to both a transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary field of academic research that aims to address the interdependence and coevolution of human economies and natural ecosystems over time and space.[1] It is distinguished from environmental economics, which is the mainstream economic analysis of the environment, by its treatment of the economy as a subsystem of the ecosystem and its emphasis upon preserving natural capital.[2] One survey of German economists found that ecological and environmental economics are different schools of economic thought, with ecological economists emphasizing strong sustainability and rejecting the proposition that natural capital can be substituted by human-made capital.[3] Ecological economics was founded as a modern movement in the works of and interactions between various European and American academics (see the section on history and development below).
History and development[edit] Nature and ecology[edit] Demographics of atheism. Atheists comprised an estimated 2.01%, and non-religious a further 9.66% of the world population, according to The World Factbook in 2010.[1] In East Asia, atheists and the irreligious are the majority. Outside of East Asia and some European countries atheist or non-believer percentages are typically in the single digits.
According to one study, the number of atheists is on the rise across the world, with religiosity generally declining.[2] However, another global study has concluded that atheism is on a global decline due to continuing steady increases in religiosity in China, which harbors the majority of atheists and non-religious people, and Eastern Europe which has had significant changes in religiosity after the fall of communism.[3] Scientific assessment of the extent of "atheism" in various populations is beset with a number of problems.
Studies and statistics[edit] The demographics of atheism are substantially difficult to quantify. Statistical problems[edit] Prejudice[edit] Criticism of atheism. Criticism of atheism is criticism of the concepts, validity, or impact of atheism, including associated political and social implications. Criticisms include arguments based on theistic positions, arguments pertaining to morality or what are thought to be the effects of atheism on the individual, or of the assumptions, scientific or otherwise, that underpin atheism. Criticism of atheism is complicated by the fact that there exist multiple definitions and concepts of atheism (and little consensus among atheists), including practical atheism, theoretical atheism, negative and positive atheism, implicit and explicit atheism, and strong and weak atheism, with critics not always specifying the subset of atheism being criticized.
Various agnostics and theists have criticised atheism for being an unscientific, or overly dogmatic and definitive position to hold, some with the argument that 'absence of evidence cannot be equated with evidence for absence'. Atheism and the individual[edit] Social epistemology. Is a broad set of approaches to the study of knowledge , all of which construe human knowledge as a collective achievement. Another way of positioning social epistemology is as the study of the social dimensions of knowledge. [ 1 ] One of the enduring difficulties with defining social epistemology is defining what knowledge means in this context. There is also a challenge in arriving at a definition of social which satisfies academics from different disciplines. [ 2 ] Social epistemologists may be found working in many of the disciplines of the humanities and social sciences , most commonly in philosophy and sociology .
In addition to marking a distinct movement in traditional, analytic epistemology , social epistemology is associated with the interdisciplinary field of Science and Technology Studies (STS). [ edit ] The emergence of social epistemology The term "social epistemology" was first used by the library scientists Margaret Egan and Jesse Shera in the 1950s. .
[ edit ] See also. Sociology of knowledge. The sociology of knowledge is the study of the relationship between human thought and the social context within which it arises, and of the effects prevailing ideas have on societies. It is not a specialized area of sociology but instead deals with broad fundamental questions about the extent and limits of social influences on individual's lives and the social-cultural basics of our knowledge about the world.[1] Complementary to the sociology of knowledge is the sociology of ignorance[2] including the study of nescience, ignorance, knowledge gaps or non-knowledge as inherent features of knowledge making.[3] [4] [5] The sociology of knowledge was pioneered primarily by the sociologists Émile Durkheim and Marcel Mauss at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. Their works deal directly with how conceptual thought, language, and logic could be influenced by the sociological milieu out of which they arise.
Schools[edit] Émile Durkheim[edit] Karl Mannheim[edit] Robert K. The Problem of Unbelief and Atheism. Choose   [ PDF Version ]    [ RTF Version ]    [ EBook Version ]    for saving the document. —    Brief analysis of atheism —    Pragmatic attitude —    Complete rejection —    The Church responds To believe, in the Christian sense, means "to accept the invitation to a conversation with God," by abandoning oneself to one's Creator. Such a conscious faith predisposes us also to that "dialogue of salvation" which the Church must carry on with all people in the world today [1] , even with non-believers, "Many of our contemporaries...have never recognized this intimate and vital link with God" (GS 19), constituted by faith. Therefore, in the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, the Council also took a stand on the subject of unbelief and atheism.
It tells us how mature and aware our faith should be, a faith to which we are frequently called upon to bear witness before non-believers and atheists. 1.  Brief analysis of atheism 2.  Pragmatic attitude. Declaration on religious freedom - Dignitatis humanae. 1. A sense of the dignity of the human person has been impressing itself more and more deeply on the consciousness of contemporary man,(1) and the demand is increasingly made that men should act on their own judgment, enjoying and making use of a responsible freedom, not driven by coercion but motivated by a sense of duty.
The demand is likewise made that constitutional limits should be set to the powers of government, in order that there may be no encroachment on the rightful freedom of the person and of associations. This demand for freedom in human society chiefly regards the quest for the values proper to the human spirit. It regards, in the first place, the free exercise of religion in society.
This Vatican Council takes careful note of these desires in the minds of men. First, the council professes its belief that God Himself has made known to mankind the way in which men are to serve Him, and thus be saved in Christ and come to blessedness. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism - The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.pdf.
Giordano Bruno. Giordano Bruno (Latin: Iordanus Brunus Nolanus; Italian: [dʒorˈdano ˈbruno]; 1548 – February 17, 1600), born Filippo Bruno, was an Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, mathematician, poet, and astrologer.[3] He is celebrated for his cosmological theories, which went even further than the then-novel Copernican model: while supporting heliocentrism, Bruno also correctly proposed that the Sun was just another star moving in space, and claimed as well that the universe contained an infinite number of inhabited worlds, identified as planets orbiting other stars.
He was noteworthy in the 16th Century for promoting a pantheistic conception of God, to the dismay of the Catholic Church.[4] In addition to his cosmological writings, Bruno also wrote extensively on the art of memory, a loosely organized group of mnemonic techniques and principles. Life[edit] Early years, 1548–1576[edit] First years of wandering, 1576–1583[edit] In 1579 he arrived in Geneva.
England, 1583–1585[edit]