Anne Conway and Henry More on Freedom

ABSTRACT

This paper seeks to shed light on the often-overlooked account of divine and human freedom presented by Anne Conway in her Principles of the Most Ancient Modern Philosophy, partly through a comparison with the theory of freedom offered by her philosophical mentor, Henry More. After outlining More’s theory of freedom, explored in a number of different works, I argue that, given evidence from correspondence regarding Conway’s familiarity with More’s work, and the timing of the writing of the notes that would be compiled in the Principles, it is highly likely that she has his account of freedom in mind when she offers her own theory of divine and human freedom. Further, I argue that whilst they both agree in attributing substantive freedom to both God and human beings, the Principles crucially departs from More’s philosophy in refraining from limiting freedom to human beings alone but extending it to all creatures. However, I argue that the question of whether Conway follows More in allowing for the possibility of human beings to develop morally to the extent that they attain a good nature and no longer have indifference of the will in a strict sense is unclear.     

Freedom and Borderline Experience

In–depth interviews with 52 diverse informants about their experience of freedom reveal a devaluation of freedom relative to money and power. The way in which many of these informants conceptualize freedom has a borderline quality to it—a term that refers to borderline personality disorder, but which is conceptualized here as a cultural construct similar to that of the culture of narcissism, as Christopher Lasch called it. The conclusion speculates about why informants see the world in this way.     

Naturism as a Form of Religious Naturalism

The version of religious naturalism sketched here is called naturism to distinguish it from conceptions of religious naturalism that make fundamental appeal to some idea of deity, deities, or the divine, however immanental, functional, nonontological, or purely valuational or existential such notions may be claimed to be. The focus of naturism is on nature itself as both metaphysically and religiously ultimate. Nature is sacred in its own right, not because of its derivation from some more–ultimate religious principle, state, being, beings, or order of being. Humans, their cultures, and their histories are conceived as integral parts of nature, manifestations of potentialities that lie within it and have been actualized by biological evolution. While there is no purpose of nature, the natural order contains beings capable of purposive behavior. With this purposive behavior, and the goals and ideals implicit in it, humans have the capacity to give significant direction to their ongoing cultural evolution and to discover and maintain their appropriate place within the community of creatures.     

Institutions of Conscience: Politics and Principle in a World of Religious Pluralism

This article considers the difficult question of whether there are any reasons for theocratic religious devotees to affirm liberalism and liberal institutions. Swaine argues not only that there are reasons for theocrats to affirm liberalism, but that theocrats are committed rationally to three normative principles of liberty of conscience, as well. Swaine subsequently discusses three institutional and strategic implications of his arguments. First, he outlines an option of semisovereignty for theocratic communities in liberal democracies, and explains why an appropriate valuation of liberty of conscience may justify a standard of that kind. Second, he addresses the question of permissible government aid for religion and symbolic endorsement of religious groups. Third, Swaine considers innovations and new approaches that could be employed internationally to better display liberal government's affirmation of religiosity, to promote liberty of conscience, and to help improve relations between liberal and theocratic parties around the globe.     

It's Personal—Or Not At All: On God as Love/r

Abstract : Henriksen discusses what it means that God is personal, with special regard to the claim that God is love. If God is love, God must be understood as personal. This approach is related to different elements concerning human life and human freedom, and how to engage in human life. Also the radical alternative is suggested: instead of understanding God as love, the alternative is considered that death is God (as the final and strongest power there is). This alternative shows that it is the most likely interpretation of actual human conduct to opt for the alternative that God is love. Hence, to understand God as love is part of what it means to relate humanely and with hope to what is taking place in human life.     

Ethics and science: Educating the public

This article looks at the public debate which took place in the first half of the twentieth century and has repercussions to the present day. It was about the ethical stance of scientists, and how science should be organized. In particular, it examines the positions taken by Professor F. Soddy, F.R.S. and Nobel Laureate, who stressed the responsibility of scientists for the uses made of their research, Professor Michael Polanyi, F.R.S., who emphasised the obligation of scientists to the truth and the essential role of morality in the organization of science, and Professor J.D.Bernal, F.R.S., who insisted that science was practised for utilitarian reasons and should be consciously developed for the good of society.     

Conflicts of interest in Germany: A legal perspective

In spite of recent efforts to promote cooperation between universities and industry, Germany still lacks a sufficient legal framework for regulating potential conflicts of interest resulting from university-industry cooperation. Prospective regulation of conflicts of interest has to take into account specific constraints imposed by the German constitution. It has to follow stringent procedural and material requirements and carefully weigh the individual researcher’s right to academic freedom against the public demand for objectivity in research. Because of this cautious consideration of the conflicting interests constitutionally mandated in Germany, a potential regulation legitimate in this country may serve as a model for other countries facing the need of the adoption of such a regulation. The ideas presented in this paper are developed in detail in the author’s dissertation, Rechtsfragen der Kooperation zwischen Hochschulen und Wirtschaft — Ein Rechtsvergleich: Deutschland — USA, Verlag Vahlen, München, 2002. An earlier version of this paper was presented at an International Conference on “Conflict of Interest and its Significance in Science and Medicine” held in Warsaw, Poland on 5–6 April, 2002.     

On the psycho-social conditions of psychotherapy in post-Soviet Georgia

The article describes the social, economic and political conditions that influence the practice of psychotherapy in post-Soviet Georgia. The author looks at the specific Soviet and post-Soviet mentalities and defines certain characteristics of these mentalities, the master-slave relationship between the people and the State, the materialistic world view, the nostalgia for the past and idealization of Soviet times, the identity crisis produced by the socio-economic traumas. The paper then provides clinical illustrations of these phenomena and shows how they can interfere with the process of psychotherapy.     

Freedom and the value of games

This essay explores the features in virtue of which games are valuable or worthwhile to play. The difficulty view of games holds that the goodness of games lies in their difficulty: by making activities more complex or making them require greater effort, they structure easier activities into more difficult, therefore more worthwhile, activities. I argue that a further source of the value of games is that they provide players with an experience of freedom, which they provide both as paradigmatically unnecessary activities and by offering opportunities for relatively unconstrained choice inside the ‘lusory’ world that players inhabit.     

Médicaments princeps vs. marché concurrentiel. De la motivation obligatoire,au contrôle des motifs médicaux ?

Physicians are free to prescribe the drugs they consider the best for their patients, and simultaneously required to seek healthcare’ cost-effectiveness — especially after patents expiry. While the physician choice of a given molecule is indisputable, French pharmacists gradually gained a large power to choose the brands on chemicals’ and biologics’ competitive markets. In May 2018, the highest judicial Court decided the physician must expressly motivate his exclusive choice of a given brand, and can not simply refuse the brand’ substitution by pharmacists. This unprecedented requirement is extrapolable to all substitutable drugs in France (registered generics and biosimilars). It raises the possible examination of medical choice motives — but in our opinion, it finishes, rather than it opens the arms race between prescribers and mandatory health insurers in France.