Show simple item record

dc.contributor.otherKenneth Ehrenberg, Co-facilitator, UB Philosophy and Law Winnifred Sullivan, Co-facilitator, UB Law; on leave for 2006-07 at the National Humanities Center George Hezel, UB Law, Director of Affordable Housing Clinic James Magavern, Law Practitioner and UB Law Lobsang Shastri, Librarian of the Tibetan Works and Archives, Dharamsala, India; Central Eurasian Studies, Indiana University Kenneth Shockley, UB Philosophyen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-13T15:00:19Zen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T16:55:30Z
dc.date.available2011-10-13T15:00:19Zen_US
dc.date.available2011-10-27T16:55:30Z
dc.date.createdThursday, September 21, 2006en_US
dc.date.issued2011-10-13en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10477/1413
dc.descriptionReturning to the conversation of the previous day, what does a Buddhist point-of-view add to current debates over the role of law in society? Should the government try to make society better through law – the interventionist approach – or take a minimalist approach? Given the locus of Buddhism in individual enlightenment, does this mean that larger social changes can only be achieved through changes in each individual? If so, should a government mandate or facilitate these individual changes through, for example, requiring meditation, Buddhist rituals, Buddhist inspired education? If not, will Buddhist values remain central to the political and legal process? Or, is the promotion of particular religious values even an appropriate role for government?en_US
dc.format.mediumvideo, avien_US
dc.subject.classificationBuddha, Lawgiver, Social Change, Conscience, Self, Societyen_US
dc.titlePanel 3: Social Change and Conscience, Self and Societyen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record