Back to the origins, that sounds like a program. And in this introductory effort to explore relations between methodology, epistemology and cosmology this program will be pursued taking the word “origin” in two senses. Religion has a way of trying to comprehend the nature of the universe, perhaps not the very origin in doing so, but certainly shaping and being shaped by people’s minds much before anything called explicit and systematic science entered the arena. And then there is “origin” in the second sense: the origin of the universe, how did it all start?
Causality is, as often said, not a law but the form of a law; a discourse used to bring some understanding to a chaotic world. In that discourse the two words “cause” (C) and “effect” (E) are subject to rules of speech: E cannot precede C in time. And the connective relating them, an arrow, like C–>E, translated as “C causes/leads to/is followed by E”, or some synonyms, is two-way.
October 8-12, 1974 a symposium on “Patterns of Resource Use, Environment and Development Strategies” was convened in Cocoyoc, Mexico by the directors of United Nations Environment Programme and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Maurice Strong and Gamani Corea. The rapporteurs were Barbara Ward for resource use and the environment and Johan Galtung for development strategies. That part of THE COCOYOC DECLARATION—adopted by the participants–is reproduced below, with a certain sadness: it is as valid today, more than 30 years later. The two directors received a three feet long cable, from the US State Department, rejecting the declaration entirely. Signed by: Henry Kissinger.
Every religion contains, in varying degrees, elements of the soft and the hard. For the sake of world peace, dialogue within religions and among them must strengthen the softer aspects.
Below are two emails I penned yesterday and disseminated which I am reproducing here (with minor spelling and grammatical corrections). Dear Colleagues: It is fitting that this be shared as I have been following Prof Werner’s work over several years and there is life-value consilience between McMurtry’s (LVOA), Galtung’s (Peace Studies), Eisler’s (Cultural Transformation… Read More
ON THE ROLE OF THE MEDIA FOR WORLD-WIDE SECURITY AND PEACE by Johan Galtung Université Nouvelle Transnationale 154 rue de Tolbiac F75013 Paris July 1985 Reproduced from: https://www.transcend.org/galtung/papers/On%20the%20Role%20of%20the%20Media%20for%20Worldwide%20Security%20and%20Peace.pdf On Data, Theories and Values What the media do and what researchers do are not that different. Both of them relate to empirical reality and are interested in… Read More
Reproduced from: https://www.transcend.org/galtung/papers/The%20Doctrine%20Of%20Just%20War.pdf THE DOCTRINE OF JUST WAR: JUST THAT, WAR! (OR MORE WAR THAN JUST) By Johan Galtung, Peace and Conflict Studies, Univ. of Queensland There is no scarcity of literature in this field, much of it permutations around the basic core of “I am of course against war, but – -“. So let it… Read More
School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution Published on Mar 31, 2016 For more information go to scar.gmu.edu/lynch-lecture http://digilib.gmu.edu/jspui/bitstream/handle/1920/10665/ICAR_occasional_paper_11.pdf
Not one or a group of persons, not one or a group of countries. But they may serve as instruments for scripts engraved on the deeper recesses of their minds, not the conscious, easily retrievable ones. Scripts that are too trivial, obvious, too painful/shameful and hence repressed. Jung calls them archetypes; they often come in syndromes.
How a life-valued versus money-valued dichotomy makes a world of money-valued indifference to peace, and how the cognitive maps of Carl Jung, Johan Galtung and John McMurtry make a world of life-valued difference to healing that indifference! Have we collectively inherited a money-valued as opposed to a life-valued collective unconscious? Does money-value enable cultural violence… Read More