This volume of essays by one of the world's foremost Kant scholars explores the efforts of the great Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) to construct a moral philosophy based on the premise that the most fundamental value for human beings is their freedom to set their own ends.

This volume provides an analysis of divine aseity in Karl Barth's thought and appreciates the vital role that this doctrine can play in contemporary theology. Brian D. Asbill begins by setting the general theological context, first through a broad sketch of the development of Barth's understanding of the relationship between the life of God pro nobis (pronobeity) and a se (aseity), and secondly through the examination of the basic theological convictions that guide his approach to the divine being in Church Dogmatics II/1. The second section, 'The Love and Freedom of God', turns to the dialectical pairings which guide Barth's accounts of the divine reality in his earliest dogmatic cycle (The Göttingen Dogmatics §§16-7) as well as in his most mature treatment (Church Dogmatics §§28-31). Particular attention is given to how these themes arise from revelation and relate to one another. In the final section, 'The Aseity of God', Asbill identifies this doctrine's basic features and primary functions. Divine aseity is characterized as the self-demonstration and self-movement of God's life, a trinitarian and entirely unique reality, a primarily positive and dynamic concept, and the manner and readiness of God's love for creatures. Divine aseity is said to indicate God's lordship in the act of self-binding, God's uniqueness in the act of self-revelation, and God's sufficiency in the act of self-giving.

This book, a work on human doing, analyses and applies three central aspects of human life – Action, Freedom and Responsibility – in the wide spectrum of the Philosophy of Mind. Reflections on these issues and their interconnections have a significant effect on the Philosophy of Value and application of ethical theories in practical life. This book even reconstructs the conceptual connection between action and freedom, on the one hand, and that between freedom and responsibility, on the other. It also puts the concepts of freedom and determinism to critical test and reinterprets them from different angles and perspectives. The conventional doctrine of karma, based on the teachings of the BhagavadgÁtÀ, is relieved from its usual deterministic presentation and a logically reasonable explanation is offered. Human actions and human agency are central concepts in the philosophy of mind and action. Free will and responsibility constitute the bedrock of the moral life of the human agents and the book pinpoints that freedom is meant to undertake the goal-oriented actions. It is, therefore, focused on the enquiry into the various aspects of philosophy of mind, as well as the philosophy of value.

This book provides close readings of primary texts to analyze the linkage between G.W.F. Hegel’s philosophy and Karl Marx’s critical social theory of necessity and freedom. This is important for three reasons: first, to understand the significance of the changing relationships of work, society, and critical social theory in the origins of Hegelian-Marxism in the US, as documented in the recently published correspondence between the Marxist-Humanist theoretician Raya Dunayevskaya and the critical theorist Herbert Marcuse; second, to identify the intersections of the Critical Theorists Jurgen Habermas’ and Marcuse’s influential reinterpretations of Marx’s “value theory” of economy and society that enables navigation of the changing relationships of the social and economic spheres in the last century, as developed in Marx’s Grundrisse; and, thirdly, to assess the potential of Moishe Postone’s renewal of Marx’s value theory, largely conceived by the notion of a necessity and freedom dialectic intrinsic to capitalism.

Considers legislation to require Federal departments and agencies to publish unclassified information and regulations. a. Justice Dept study "Is a Congressional Committee Entitled To Demand and Receive Information and Papers from the President and the Heads of Departments Which They Deem Confidential, in the Public Interest?" (p. 63-146). b. "Demands of Congressional Committees for Executive Papers" by Herman Wolkinson, Federal Bar Association, published in the Federal Bar Journals of Apr., July, and Oct., 1949 (p. 147-270). c. "Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights Survey of Withholding of Information from Congress" memos and summary analysis prepared by subcom staff (p. 287-428). d. "Congressional Power of Investigation" Committee Print No. 83-99, prepared by the Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress Feb. 9, 1954 (p. 447-513). Includes the following documents.

AR 25-55 11/01/1997 THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT PROGRAM , Survival Ebooks

Liberal education is not a theory. It is the tradition by which Western civilisation has preserved and enriched its inheritance for two and a half thousand years. Yet liberal education is a term that has fallen from use in Britain, its traditional meaning now freely confused with its opposite. This book is intended to correct that misapprehension, through the presentation of original source material from the high points in the liberal education tradition with particular focus on the British experience. Section 1: Origins (c. 450 BC to c. 450 AD) Section 2: The British Tradition (c. 750 to 1950) Section 3: After Tradition (1950 onward) Section 4: Liberal Education Redux (America)