-
Gary Gutting responds to Bertrand Russell and Adam Smith on work, leisure, and value for The Stone.
-
Timothy Spangler reviews Wealth and Poverty: A New Edition for the Twenty-First Century and Free Market Revolution: How Ayn Rand’s Ideas Can End Big Government for the Los Angeles Review of Books: “Many of the same post-War thinkers are referenced, and in many ways the two books complement each other—one a large dense and highly ornamented Wagner opera, the other a memorable Broadway show with tunes you can hum during the cab ride home.”
-
Anthony Gottlieb explores evolutionary psychology’s “Just So Stories” for the New Yorker.
|
Writing in City Journal, Jens-Martin Eriksen and Frederik Stjernfelt discuss the parallels between the recent violence and protests regarding the anti-Islam film The Innocence of Muslims and the Danish cartoon controversy six years ago:
Jens-Martin Eriksen and Frederik Stjernfelt’s The Democratic Contradictions of Multiculturalism, published by Telos Press, is available for purchase here. The following interview with the authors appeared on the Huffington Post. There is a moment in Jens-Martin Eriksen and Frederik Stjernfelt’s The Democratic Contradictions of Multiculturalism, when an Indian-Malaysian interview subject leans toward Eriksen and entreats him to describe the Malaysian multiculturalism as an “apartheid.” He invokes the infamous example of the erstwhile South Africa to underscore the distinct disadvantage his family experiences as a religious and ethnic minority in their native county with its “hard” form of multiculturalism. This provocative claim raises many questions about how multiculturalism is experienced in different contexts around the world. Jens-Martin Eriksen, co-author (with Frederik Stjernfelt) of The Democratic Contradictions of Multiculturalism, recently appeared on The Agenda with Steve Paikin to discuss the rise of hatred in Western nations. Watch the video after the break. Ruth Starkman’s report on the recent Telos in Europe conference appeared in the Huffington Post. L’Aquila and its historic buildings offer a unique place to debate the problems of Europe and the West, as the latter have also endured their share of continuing crises and efforts to rebuild. From Sept 7-10, 2012, some 50 philosophers, historians, literature scholars, social theorists, European Parliament members gathered to debate the fate of “The West: Its Legacy and Future” in the inaugural conference in L’Aquila hosted by the Telos Institute and the independent publisher Telos Press, which publishes the eponymous journal of politics and thought. Telos 160 (Fall 2012) is now available for purchase here. |
   |
|||
|
Telos Press Publishing · PO Box 811 · Candor, NY 13743 · Phone: 212-228-6479 Privacy Policy · Data Protection Copyright © 2025 Telos Press Publishing · All Rights Reserved |
||||
In the current Mohammed film crisis, certain patterns repeat themselves from the crisis over the Danish cartoons six years ago. In both cases, Middle East Islamists seized on a marginal piece of anti-Islam criticism to put pressure on the West—and on more moderate forces in their own countries. 
An uncannily warm light fills L’Aquila’s 13th century Basilica Santa Maria di Collemaggio. As one approaches the altar, it becomes clear the illumination falls in from the open sky. The roof and dome collapsed in L’Aquila’s catastrophic 2009 6.3 earthquake. While the church is still undergoing repair, much of the edifice appears intact, newly reinforced by concrete and already restored in many parts. In fact, it attests to the continued vitality of this ancient European city as it slowly rebuilds amid various economic, legal and bureaucratic struggles. 
The Supreme Court decision on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration’s signature legislation on health care, attracted exceptional public attention, and rightly so. Health is a vital concern, and the topic is charged with acerbic party politics. More importantly, the terms of the debate give evidence of a widespread awareness, across the political spectrum, that the case has raised questions about the scope of government power and the permissible reach of legislation. If there is one point on which opponents have agreed, it is this recognition of the core importance of the outcome for defining the relationship of the state to society. Both proponents of cradle-to-grave government care and advocates of a strictly limited state power (whether in individualist, free-market, or communitarian modes) recognize that the health-care outcome could be a decisive moment in the evolution of American society. 
