Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Oregon, 1999. / Typescript. Includes vita and abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 356-371). Also available for download via the World Wide Web; free to University of Oregon users. Address: http://wwwlib.umi.com/cr/uoregon/fullcit?p9947971.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Boston University. / Using the two volumes of the Helmes-Laski Correspondence, published by Harvard and edited by Mark DeWolfe Howe, as one of its principal sources, this dissertation examines the circumstances leading up to the publication of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes' essay, Natural Law in the Harvard Law Review in November, 1918, when Harold J. Laski was its editor. From this focus several lines of inquiry expand, developing from the two major questions of the dissertation: 1) What is Natural Law? and 2) How significant, profound and pertinent were Holmes' and Laski's contribution to the theory of Natural Law, the validity of which they denied? A last chapter examines the co-fusions in Laski's connecting together the plural sovereignty with the personality of associations theories -- ideas he apparently gathered from Otto Gierke. Gierke's position is analyzed directly from his writings, with the conclusion that he was unclear in his own formulations, and that Laski was even more unclear in what he thought Gierke said. Reasons for the vitiation of Laski's work are analyzed, and in summary his frustrations are stressed, while Holmes' great accomplishment within the framework of his own creative inconsistencies is forcefully stated. The conclusion of the whole is that no matter what they said they believed both Holmes and Laski lived and worked as though they believed in Natural Law.

Published in 1977, Wendell Berry's book The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture gained widespread popularity. More than half a century later, many of the notions of the body and the earth presented in its seventh chapter, "The Body and the Earth," remain relevant and important for environmental discourse today. Berry's discussion of the body and the earth examines their mutuality and codependence from an ontological, theological, agricultural, and even biological perspective. The coupling of this text with Judith Butler's, Frames of War: When is Life Grievable? contemporizes his argument through its more socio-political and philosophical claims regarding life and the body. Through the discussion of societal frames that often prescribe the value of life and bodies, Butler introduces the concept of precarity, or the imposition of violence and its resultant instability of the body. Driven by the external forces of society, precarity weakens, commodifies, and exploits the body, creating unsustainable social systems. As we learn from Berry, this bodily precarity parallels the violence and mistreatment of the earth. The body, and its ecological and anthropological interconnectedness, establishes both material and immaterial ties to the earth, suggesting that any damage done to the body affects not just itself, but the entire system. In bringing together Butler and Berry through an ecocritical dialogue, a new ethic regarding the formation and meaning of a life emerges, prompting revision of the current societal parameters that establish the definitions of the body and the earth. Berry's resurgent relevance comes from his admonitions to repair the relationships of all bodies and the networks of which they are a part. Thus, the connection between an individual and their body, other bodies, and the earth must be restored for an environmental ethic to both persist and establish productive environmental change.

No description available.

No / In this paper, we argue that two key trends – an unfolding ecological crisis and a reduction in the amount of (cheap) energy available to society – bring into question both the relevance and the resilience of existing educational systems, requiring us to rethink both the content and the form of education in general, and peace education in particular. Against this background, we consider the role education might play in enabling citizens and societies to adapt peacefully to conditions of energy descent and a less benign ecological system, taking seriously the possibility that there will be fewer resources available for education. Drawing on Wes Jackson’s and Wendell Berry’s concept of an education in ‘homecoming’, and on E.F. Schumacher’s concept of ‘appropriate technology’, we suggest a possible vision of peace education. We propose that such education might be focused around ‘appropriate knowledge’, commitment to place, and an understanding of the needs and characteristics of each local context. We then consider an example of what this might mean in practice, particularly under conditions of increasing resource scarcity: Permaculture education in El Salvador, we suggest, illustrates the characteristics and relevance of an education that aims to foster ‘appropriate knowledge’ within a particular and very challenging context. The paper concludes by considering the wider implications of our argument.

No / In this paper, we argue that two key trends – an unfolding ecological crisis and a reduction in the amount of (cheap) energy available to society – bring into question both the relevance and the resilience of existing educational systems, requiring us to rethink both the content and the form of education in general, and peace education in particular. Against this background, we consider the role education might play in enabling citizens and societies to adapt peacefully to conditions of energy descent and a less benign ecological system, taking seriously the possibility that there will be fewer resources available for education. Drawing on Wes Jackson’s and Wendell Berry’s concept of an education in ‘homecoming’, and on E.F. Schumacher’s concept of ‘appropriate technology’, we suggest a possible vision of peace education. We propose that such education might be focused around ‘appropriate knowledge’, commitment to place, and an understanding of the needs and characteristics of each local context. We then consider an example of what this might mean in practice, particularly under conditions of increasing resource scarcity: Permaculture education in El Salvador, we suggest, illustrates the characteristics and relevance of an education that aims to foster ‘appropriate knowledge’ within a particular and very challenging context. The paper concludes by considering the wider implications of our argument.

This thesis will explore a theology of place and placemaking that is focused on the participatory role of humans in both creation and redemption, while suggesting the central and paradigmatic role of artistry in our construction of and identification with place. Building on the most recent theological and philosophical engagement with place, this thesis will argue for a theology of place that takes seriously the doctrines of creation and incarnation, focusing on a particularly redemptive understanding of placemaking in the material world. In its study of scripture and theology, it will focus on God's blessing of people to participate in the making of places, along with the role this human making has in relationship to divine presence and the divine plan for creation and redemption. After developing a theology of place and placemaking more generally, the second half of this thesis will consider the practical, constructive, and transformative capabilities of placemaking as witnessed through the arts. Relying on theological engagement with the arts, it will argue that artistic making of all kinds and attention to place go hand in hand. Exploring a selection of artistic genres, including the photography of Marlene Creates, the quilts of Gee's Bend, and the literature of Wendell Berry, this thesis will suggest that imaginative and “artistic” placemaking practices can give us a deeper understanding of the creative, redemptive, and transformative work of Christ in Creation, while also elucidating our calling to participate in it.

La llibertat d'expressió té els seus origens en el liberalisme de Gran Bretanya iels Estats Units. Les primeres reivindicacions a favor d'un intercanvi lliure d'ideesvan començar al segle XVII, amb el discurs Areopagitica de John Milton, quedemanava al Parlament anglès l'abolició de la censura a la imprempta. El 1971la llibertat d'expressió es va incorporar a la Constitució dels Estats Units; la sevaPrimera Esmena declarava: "el Congrés no farà cap llei... per la que es limiti lallibertat de paraula, o la de premsa". Aquest treball es centra en les aportacions ala llibertat d'expressió realitzades per John Stuart Mill, utilitarista anglès, i OliverWendell Holmes, realista americà, les quals es van introduir entre la segonameitat del segle XIX i la primera meitat del segle XX. Les obres d'ambdós autorss'estudien tenint en compte el moviment filosòfic al qual pertanyen. En primerlloc, la teoria sobre llibertat de pensament i discussió de John Stuart Mill esrelaciona amb la seva filosofia moral i política. En segon lloc, s'analitzen lesopinions judicials d'Oliver Wendell Holmes en les que formula el test del "perillclar i actual" i la teoria del "mercat obert de les idees". Aquesta aproximaciópermet mostrar que ambdós autors van liberalitzar el concepte de llibertatd'expressió imperant a la seva època, i van considerar que els seus fonamentsprincipals eren la recerca de la veritat i l'autorrealització individual. / La libertad de expresión tiene sus orígenes en el liberalismo de Gran Bretaña ylos Estados Unidos. Las primeras reivindicaciones a favor de un intercambio librede ideas empezaron en el siglo XVII, con el discurso Areopagitica de JohnMilton, que pedía al Parlamento inglés la abolición de la censura en la imprenta.En 1791 la libertad de expresión se incorporó a la Constitución de los EstadosUnidos, cuya Primera Enmienda declaraba: "el Congreso no hará ley alguna...por la que se limite la libertad de palabra, o la de prensa". Este trabajo se centraen las aportaciones a la libertad de expresión realizadas por John Stuart Mill,utilitarista inglés, y Oliver Wendell Holmes, realista americano, las cuales seintrodujeron entre la segunda mitad del siglo XIX y la primera mitad del siglo XX.Las obras de ambos autores se estudian teniendo en cuenta el movimientofilosófico al cual pertenecen. En primer lugar, la teoría sobre libertad depensamiento y discusión de John Stuart Mill se relaciona con su filosofía moral ypolítica. En segundo lugar, se analizan las opiniones judiciales de Oliver WendellHolmes en las que se formula el test del "peligro claro y actual" y la teoría del"mercado abierto de las ideas". Esta aproximación permite mostrar que ambosautores liberalizaron el concepto de libertad de expresión imperante en suépoca, y consideraron que sus fundamentos principales eran la búsqueda de laverdad y la autorrealización individual. / Freedom of speech has its origins in liberalism from Great Britain and the UnitedStates. The first claims for a free exchange of ideas started in the 17th century,with John Milton's Areopagitica, in which the abolishing of printing censorship bythe English Parliament was demanded. In 1791, freedom of speech was includedin the Constitution of the United States, whose First Amendment declared:"Congress shall make no law. abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press".This study focuses on the specific contributions to freedom of speech made bythe English utilitarian John Stuart Mill and the American realist Oliver WendellHolmes, which were introduced throughout the second half of 19th century andthe first half of 20th century. The works of both authors are discussed bearing inmind the philosophical movement to which they belong. Firstly, John Stuart Mill'stheory of thought and speech is related to his moral and political philosophy.Secondly, Oliver Wendell Holmes' judicial opinions on both "clear and presentdanger" test and the "free marketplace of ideas" are analysed. This approachmakes it possible to show both authors liberalize the concept of freedom ofspeech and consider that its foundations are, basically, the discovery of truthalong with individual self-development.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, Dept. of English Language and Literature, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.

Problem: Although Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. transformed American jurisprudence into critical self-awareness, there is no consensus on the nature of his legal theory. Holmes imperfectly represents each of several incompatible approaches. Commentators presume Holmes lacked any original or coherent theory of justice. Friedrich Nietzsche is likewise presumed a critical philosopher without a coherent theory of justice. Nietzsche wrote esoterically, but there is no consensus on the content of his esoteric agenda. Nietzsche's attitudes toward women appear misogynistic, but his philosophy paradoxically appeals to many feminists. Method: By re-conceptualizing Holmes and Nietzsche in terms of the principles of self-organized criticality, their understandings of causation and developmental dynamics become coherent. This thesis re-conceptualizes common-law legal reasoning as exploiting principles of self-organized criticality to build knowledge inductively. This reveals that Holmes and Nietzsche's genealogical critique of idealism rests on the computational implausibility of assuming there always exist microlevel rules to achieve desired macro-level goals. The legal-reasoning model shows that justice entails an inexhaustible open-system dynamic of applying limited resources to accommodate better an ever-broadening matrix of conflicting values. Nietzsche assesses psychological and social conditions that foster this collective creativity and decadent conditions that inhibit the growth of justice. Nietzsche identifies problems specific to institutions that require special safeguards that he esoterically conceals. Using Nietzsche's exoteric accounts of psychology and rhetoric based on principles of self-organized criticality, Nietzsche's esoteric techniques can be inferred, including his syncretism of pagan myths, which reveals his esoteric content. Conclusion: Holmes and Nietzsche applied a coherent theory of justice based on principles of causation and dynamics not widely accepted until the late twentieth century but having roots in ancient myths and isolated prior thinkers. Nietzsche defines justice as pursuing robust community growth without sacrificing the future for the present. Both Holmes and Nietzsche accord pursuit of justice with the good life whereby individuals promote their own development for greater sacrifice for the community. Nietzsche's esoteric solution to his problem of institutions was matriarchy. Nietzsche's matriarchy follows from his identification of the root of the institutional problem as male windfall opportunism, an evolved unconscious male tendency resulting from uncertainty over genetic parentage.