Author
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of the study was to assess the influence of historical philosophical movements on contemporary cultural values in Netherlands. Methodology: This study adopted a desk methodology. A desk study research design is commonly known as secondary data collection. This is basically collecting data from existing resources preferably because of its low cost advantage as compared to a field research. Our current study looked into already published studies and reports as the data was easily accessed through online journals and libraries. Findings: The study revealed a complex interplay between past ideas and present beliefs. Scholars have identified several key philosophical movements, such as Enlightenment rationalism, Romanticism, existentialism, and postmodernism, each of which has left a lasting imprint on societal norms, attitudes, and behaviors. Enlightenment ideals of reason, individualism, and progress have shaped modern notions of democracy, scientific inquiry, and human rights. Conversely, Romanticism's emphasis on emotion, nature, and subjective experience has influenced contemporary attitudes towards art, literature, and environmentalism. Existentialist themes of freedom, authenticity, and existential angst resonate in contemporary discussions on identity, meaning, and personal fulfillment. Implications to Theory, Practice and Policy: Cultural hegemony theory, social constructionism and modernization theory may be used to anchor future studies on assessing the influence of historical philosophical movements on contemporary cultural values in Netherlands. Develop educational initiatives that foster critical engagement with philosophical ideas and their cultural implications. Advocate for the integration of philosophical education into school curricula and lifelong learning programs. By promoting philosophical literacy from an early age, policymakers can equip individuals with the critical thinking skills and ethical awareness needed to navigate complex cultural landscapes, fostering social cohesion and democratic citizenship.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bfy:oejpcr:v:8:y:2024:i:1:p:1-13:id:1962. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chief Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ajpojournals.org/journals/index.php/EJPCR/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.