ENTRE LA SOCIEDAD Y EL ESTADO.

It is necessary to distinguish c1earIy between the social and the political principies. The two were confussedin the ancient world, except only in China, where Laotse' s rural social system confronted theurbanpoliticalsystem~of Confucius. The Greeks, on the other hand, did not rnake a true distinction between these two principies and, consequently, between social and political reality. Plato'ssystem irnplies the annulment of Society; Aristotles's State would absorb its existence, In stoicisrn one encounters an occasional glimpse of insight into this distinction, but without a clear, conscious grasp of the matter. So much so, that universal society and the Roman Empire are identified as one. Medieval christianity, however, intuits the social principIe, but fails to develop it adequately. On the contrary, the tendency to affirm the supremaey of the State over Society continues to grow. Althusius took issue with the notion of distinguishing between these terms. He rejects the picture of Society as facing the State but acknowledges the autonomy of the social groups and of the principIe that interrelates them. The triumph of absolutism impeded the progress of his original and significant contribution. During the rSth century, paral1eling the development of the bourgeoisíe, the idea began to make headway of a "civil society", as distinct from the State. It is, however, á society dominated by an individualistic criterion, because, theoreticalIy as wel1 as practicalIy, anything that makes references to corporativeexistence is ruled out. After the French Revolution and as a reaction against it, the reality of Society as a totality opposed to the State is clearIy stated. Saint Simon is a precise exponent of this new attitude. In his judgement, Society administers, whereas the State governs, and, giving priority to Society, he pronounces that as many tasks as possible ought to be transferred from politics to administration. Hegel also perceives the differentiation clearIy, but considers that, by itself, Society is incapable of achieving order and liberty, and that it depends on the State to provide these foc her, Lorenz von Stein thinks along the sarne lines. Marx envisions a victorious Society, free at last at the end of the class struggLe but asserts Society's absolute submission to the State during the time necessary to achieve that goal. After this historical exposition, the author states briefly where he himself stands. Rather than individuals, diverse groups comprise the social community, which makes itself felt through communality of life and thought. Alone, it is incapable of handling alI the conflicts which might arise within it -hence the necessity of the State. Nevertheless, the greatest possible margin of social spontaneity ought tobeallowed. To this end, on the one hand, thé greatest -feasible decentralization, must takeplace.. On the other, the administrative, i, e., social management ought to assume many functions which nowadays, are part of thegovernmental process.Resumen en inglés

Education and Intended Number of Children in Germany, Moldova and Norway: An International Comparison Using FReDA and GGS-II-data

In this study, we compare the intended number of children in Germany, Moldova and Norway in 2020 and 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic. In a first step, we compare the intended number of children (including children born) in the newly available Generations and Gender Survey round 2 (GGS-II) and the German FReDA-GGS data. In a second step, we estimate the number of further intended children with multinomial logistic regression models. The results reveal considerable differences across the three countries. Respondents in Moldova plan to have rather large families (on average 3.3 children, including children born), whereas individuals in Norway and Germany intend to have 2.0 and 1.8 children, respectively. In the multinomial logistic regression analyses, we find differences in the association of educational level and fertility plans by gender and country. In Germany, education is positively related to the intention to have further children. This pattern is more pronounced for women than for men. Furthermore, this association is also found among Norwegian men. In Moldova, we find only weak evidence for this association. For Norwegian women, education and the intention to have further children also seem to be unrelated. While most data about the intended number of children refer to the 2000s or earlier, we contribute to the literature by providing recent insights on the intended number of children in three European countries, including Moldova, a country that is understudied in demographic research

How socio-cultural factors and opportunity costs shape the transition to a third child

Objective: Why do parents decide to have more than two children? Background: This study explores how opportunity costs and socio-cultural factors such as value of children, perceived social pressure and intergenerational fertility transmission influence the transition to higher order fertility in seven European countries. Method: Using panel data for Austria, Bulgaria, France, Georgia, Hungary, Poland and Russia, stemming from the Generations and Gender Survey (GGS), we aim to identify the driving mechanisms behind the birth of a third child and draw attention to socio-cultural factors and opportunity costs. We estimate average marginal effects in binomial logistic regressions. Results: Multivariate analyses demonstrate that lower opportunity costs and perceived social pressure positively influence the transition to the third child – for both sexes. In contrast, emotional and social values of children are not relevant and intergenerational transmission is associated with the birth of the third child for men and women differently. Perceived social pressure turns out to matter in all countries, although the social groups likely to have large families differ across countries. Conclusion: Overall, this study provides insights into the link between socio-cultural factors, perceived cost and the formation of large families in life course, revealing the reasons why women and men may deviate from the widespread two child norm. Therefore, it brings new contribution regarding the motivation for a third child

Vida monológica y vida dialógica (Una conferencia dada el 13 de Junio de 1928 en Zurich)

This article presents the Spanish translation of a lecture by Martin Buber, unpublished until 2012. Although not included in the Martin Buber Werkausgabe (MBW), this text clearly and concisely exposes the fundamental ideas of Buber’s anthropological thought. In it, Buber analyses the crisis of the person in an age marked by individualistic self-absorption and explores the tension between monological life and dialogical life. Concrete examples circulate in this text from theatre, religion, philosophy, and culture. However, Buber’s thought is not limited to an abstract philosophical analysis, but appeals to a concrete transformation of the person and his or her relationships, through a responsible response to what is happening and to each other. In the face of the political crises of his time, his response lies in the promotion of dialogical life as the basis for an authentic community.Este artículo presenta la traducción al español de una conferencia inédita hasta 2012 de Martin Buber. A pesar de no haber sido incluida en la Martin Buber Werkausgabe (MBW), este texto expone de manera clara y concisa las ideas fundamentales del pensamiento antropológico del autor. En ella, Buber analiza la crisis de la persona en una época marcada por el ensimismamiento individualista y explora la tensión entre la vida monológica y la vida dialógica. Circulan en este texto ejemplos concretos desde el teatro, la religión, la filosofía y la cultura. Sin embargo, el pensamiento de Buber no se limita a un análisis filosófico abstracto, sino que apela a una transformación concreta de la persona y sus relaciones, por medio de una respuesta responsable a lo que sucede y al otro. Frente a las crisis políticas de su tiempo, su respuesta radica en la promoción de la vida dialógica como base para una comunidad auténtica.   &nbsp