АвтоАвтоматизацияАрхитектураАстрономияАудитБиологияБухгалтерияВоенное делоГенетикаГеографияГеологияГосударствоДомДругоеЖурналистика и СМИИзобретательствоИностранные языкиИнформатикаИскусствоИсторияКомпьютерыКулинарияКультураЛексикологияЛитератураЛогикаМаркетингМатематикаМашиностроениеМедицинаМенеджментМеталлы и СваркаМеханикаМузыкаНаселениеОбразованиеОхрана безопасности жизниОхрана ТрудаПедагогикаПолитикаПравоПриборостроениеПрограммированиеПроизводствоПромышленностьПсихологияРадиоРегилияСвязьСоциологияСпортСтандартизацияСтроительствоТехнологииТорговляТуризмФизикаФизиологияФилософияФинансыХимияХозяйствоЦеннообразованиеЧерчениеЭкологияЭконометрикаЭкономикаЭлектроникаЮриспунденкция

The Different Meanings of Race

Читайте также:
  1. Adjectives formed from stems different from those of the corresponding nouns
  2. C) Some people prefer draught beer. They say bottles give beer a different taste.
  3. Causes of Development of New Meanings
  4. Comment on the change of meanings in the italicized words.
  5. CONVERSION IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF SPEECH.
  6. Define the morphemes the differential meaning of which helps to distinguish between words in the given sets.
  7. Different Kinds of Money
  8. Different types of classification of English idioms.
  9. DIFFERENT TYPES OF NON-SEMANTIC GROUPING
  10. EXERCISE 18. Match the meaning of the Latin roots with the description of their lexical meanings.
  11. F) Colloquial coinages (words and meanings)
  12. Find different derivational forms of the words below in the following passage and fill the table.

The racialist consideration of man cannot stop at a mere biological level, otherwise it would be worthy of the accusation by the Jew Trotsky of it being just “zoological materialism.”

It is also not enough to say, like Walter Gross, that “in the concept of race we intend that completeness of human life, in which body and spirit, matter and soul, are fused in a superior unity,” and that deciding whether one of the two things is determined by the other. Whether bodily form is determined by the soul or vice-versa is an extrascientific, metaphysical problem which is not a consideration of racialism.

Even less satisfactory is the following statement by Alfred Rosenberg: “We do not agree with the proposition that the spirit creates the body, nor with the inverse, that the body creates the spirit. There is no clear boundary between the spiritual world and the physical world: both constitute an indivisible whole.”

If race is no longer to be considered a myth, but as the object of a doctrine, then one cannot stop at these levels.

The concept of race assumes different meanings not only as applied man and to animal species, but also regarding different human types. We therefore must lay a primary distinction: that which lies between the “races of nature” and those of a higher, more human and spiritual, sense.

From a methodological point of view, it is absurd to consider racialism as a self-contained discipline instead of being strictly dependent on a general theory of man. The manner in which the human being is conceived affects the essence of any doctrine of race. If it is conceived in a materialistic manner, this materialism will display itself in the corresponding concept of race; if it is a spiritualistic manner, then the racial concept will also be so. Even when considering that which is material in the human and depends on the laws of matter, the racial doctrine should never forget the hierarchal place and the functional dependence possessed by matter in the whole of the human being.

Man distinguishes himself from the animal by his participation in a supernatural, superbiological element, and only by this participation can he be free or be himself.

The distinction in the human being of the three different principles of body, soul, and spirit is fundamental to the traditional vision of man. In a more or less complete form, one finds this distinction in all ancient traditions, and it was continued during the Middle Ages; the Aristotelian-Scholastic conception of the three souls,” vegetative, sensitive and intellectual; the trinity of soma, psyche and nous; the Roman one of corpus, mens and anima; the Indo-Aryan trinity of sthula-, linga- and karana-sarira, are as many equivalent expressions of that distinction. It is furthermore important to emphasize that this view is not to be considered as a particular “philosophical” interpretation amongst many others, but as objective, and impersonal knowledge which adheres to the very same nature of things.

 

As a basic explanation of the three concepts, it can be said that the spirit, in the traditional conception, has always meant something supernatural and superindividual; it has therefore nothing to do with the common intellect and less still with the pale world of “thinkers” and “men of letters.” It is instead the element which focuses the basis of any virile ascent, heroic elevation, or effort to achieve in life what is “more than life.”

 

In classic antiquity, the spirit, as nous or anima, was opposed to the soul as the masculine principle is opposed to the feminine, or as the solar element is opposed to the lunar. The soul already belongs to the world of becoming more than that of being; it is connected to the vital powers, as well as to all perceptive faculties and to any passions. With its unconscious ramifications, it establishes the connection between spirit and body. From this view, one must acknowledge that the inequality of mankind is not only physical, biological or anthropological, but also psychic and spiritual. Men are not only different in body, but also in soul and spirit.

According to this, the racial doctrine must articulate itself in three degrees.


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |

Поиск по сайту:



Все материалы представленные на сайте исключительно с целью ознакомления читателями и не преследуют коммерческих целей или нарушение авторских прав. Студалл.Орг (0.004 сек.)