Being Sure Of Each Other

We are deeply social creatures. Our core social needs — for meaningful social inclusion — are more important than our civil and political needs and our economic welfare needs, and we won't secure those other things if our core social needs go unmet. Our core social needs ground a human right against social deprivation as well as a human right to have the resources to sustain other people. Kimberley Brownlee defends this fundamental but largely neglected human right; having defined social deprivation as a persistent lack of minimally adequate access to decent human contact, she then discusses situations such as solitary confinement and incidental isolation. Fleshing out what it means tothers. Our core social needs can clash with oo belong, Brownlee considers why loneliness and weak social connections are not just moral tragedies, but often injustices, and argues that we endure social contribution injustice when we are denied the means to sustain ur interests in interactive and associative freedom, and when they do, social needs take priority. We have a duty to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to satisfy their social needs. As Brownlee asserts, we violate this duty if we classify some people as inescapably socially threatening, either through using reductive, essentialist language that reduces people to certain acts or traits — 'criminal', 'rapist', 'paedophile', 'foreigner' — or in the ways we physically segregate such people and fail to help people to reintegrate after segregation.

"To survive, let alone flourish, we need to be sure of - securely tied to - at least one other person. We also need to be sure of our general acceptance within the wider social world. This book explores the normative implications of taking our core social needs seriously. Chapter 1 sketches out what those needs are, and Chapter 2 shows that they ground a fundamental, but largely neglected human right against social deprivation. Chapter 3 then argues that this human right includes a right to sustain the people we care about, and that often, when we are denied the resources to sustain others, we endure social contribution injustice. Chapters 4 - 6 explore the tension between our needs for social inclusion and our needs for interactive and associative freedom, showing that social inclusion must take priority. While Chapters 5 and 6 defend a narrow account of freedom of association, Chapter 7 shows that the moral ballgame changes once we have made morally messy associative decisions. Sometimes we have rights remain in associations that we had no right to form. Finally, Chapter 8 exposes the distinct social injustices that we do to people whom we deem to be socially threatening. Overall, the book identifies ways to change our social and political practices, and our personal perspectives, to better honour the fact that we are fundamentally social beings"--

If believers are right in the significance they claim for religion, how can they tolerate uncertainties, or preach a Gospel of good news if they are uncertain what they are to talk about? Is religious conviction something which no honest man can profess? Do believers in fact speak with one voice? These are some of the questions that prompted this book, which embodies the F.D. Maurice lectures delivered at King's College London in 1961. It discusses topics that were causes of as much concern to Maurice as they are in our own day: 'eternal' punishment; Christian social duty; the problem of subscription ex animo to Articles. Professor Ramsay argues that it is reasonable to be sure in religion while being tentative in theology. In the course of his discussion he compares Maurice and Newman in relation to their views on theological certainty, and also considers the question whether the time has come for revision of the Thirty-nine Articles.

George Orwell set out ‘to make political writing into an art’, and to a wide extent this aim shaped the future of English literature – his descriptions of authoritarian regimes helped to form a new vocabulary that is fundamental to understanding totalitarianism. While 1984 and Animal Farm are amongst the most popular classic novels in the English language, this new series of Orwell’s essays seeks to bring a wider selection of his writing on politics and literature to a new readership. In Why I Write, the first in the Orwell’s Essays series, Orwell describes his journey to becoming a writer, and his movement from writing poems to short stories to the essays, fiction and non-fiction we remember him for. He also discusses what he sees as the ‘four great motives for writing’ – ‘sheer egoism’, ‘aesthetic enthusiasm’, ‘historical impulse’ and ‘political purpose’ – and considers the importance of keeping these in balance. Why I Write is a unique opportunity to look into Orwell’s mind, and it grants the reader an entirely different vantage point from which to consider the rest of the great writer’s oeuvre. 'A writer who can – and must – be rediscovered with every age.' — Irish Times