Today’s larger corporations engage in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for myriad reasons. Anchored in philosophical treatises, the paper discusses the different facets of CSR. It presents some CSR practices of local and multinational corporations and how these practices take care of the triple bottom line and maintain good corporate image. It also presents drawbacks to business ethics.The last part of the paper presents some challenges that CSR is facing. This paper argues that businesses should see CSR as a responsibility of creating a better life for the larger society as it creates a better life for its stakeholders .

The three intertwining careers of William Torrey Harris [1835-1909] in philosophy, philosophy of education, and educational administration converge in twelve of the Annual Reports of the board of directors of the St. Louis public schools, most of the essential features of which he formulated as the superintendent of schools from 1867-79. These twelve reports, comprising philosophical and educational principles, have been acclaimed nationally and internationally to be among the most valuable official publications in American educational literature. The major purpose of this paper is to clarify the nature and scope of the philosophical principles of Harris expressed in his Annual Reports. The areas of philosophy represented are metaphysics, anthropology, epistemology, ethics, and philosophy of religion. While the motivation and context of these philosophical principles are pedagogical in orientation, it is evident that Harris produced here a philosophical synthesis worthy of consideration in a formal survey of the history of American philosophy

The aim of this paper is two-fold: firstly, to argue for the claim that the two problems of geometry presented in the Meno seem to be connected to each other, and secondly, to offer, in connection with the first claim, a conjecture concerning the nature of the second problem of geometry brought up in the dialogue at 86e. This paper offers, in particular, a historical reconstruction of how we should understand this problem of construction in geometry.

This paper attempts to elucidate on Jacques Derrida’s concept of deconstruction and its difficult elements, viz., differance, dissemination, destinerrance, and geocatasthrophe. These basic ideas need elaboration for their proper understanding. Once successfully achieved, then here lies the significance of this paper.

A general conceptualization of God’s omnipotence is that he possesses illimitable superior power over and above every other thing. Consequently, God is thought of being able to bring about “all” things. Such belief includes that as all-powerful, he does not need to be protected or defended by his creatures, insofar as he “cannot” be vulnerable to the threats or attacks of any creature, except possibly self-inflicted attacks, which would be selfcontradictory. Human power, on the other hand, assumes the belief that even though God is absolutely omnipotent, believers in him have the duty to either carry out what they believe is his commandment or each one acts as he should act. This being so, the human claim to omnipotence absolutizes man/woman as being able, with impunity, in fact, with stupendous promise of reward, by acting as the “arm” or “brain” of God. The logical conclusion of such reasoning is to deny either claim of omnipotence by God or man. But how plausible would such a conclusion be to real-life situation?

Tradition has been disparaged as a conceptual category that should be jettisoned in the development process. It is thought to be capable of hindering the use of reason which is thought to be the primary mover of development. This thinking has its root in the Enlightenment rationalisations, especially as championed by the philosophes, Rene Descartes, and Immanuel Kant. Conservatives, such as Edmund Burke, contrarily, are of the opinion that tradition is a valuable resource for society because they regard tradition as the accumulated wisdom of the past. This paper argues that, even though the Enlightenment and conservative thinkers differ in their conceptions of the value of tradition, they misconceived what tradition entails because they failed to pay attention to its dynamics and consequently could not put its values in proper focus. The paper considers tradition as a relevant imperative in development attempts and, therefore, suggests a conception of tradition that makes it a dynamic and useful phenomenon.