In this chapter, I distinguish two traditions of transcendence in Eurasia: the radical transcendence, or strict dualism, and the more dialogical religious traditions, where transcendence is interwoven with immanent, polytheistic, pantheistic and plural religious practices.

We need the weak exclusivity of premodern or early modern histories if only because national societies are now increasingly unable to exclusively manage the escalating crises generated by the ‘counter-finalities’ of modern nations.66

We can extrapolate Collins’ insight further into the nature of the sovereign subject position among human communities.

The necessity of recognizing the multiplicity of the sources of our subjecthood is increasingly urgent because of the yawning mismatch between the nation as a sovereign unit and the global forces that shape the destinies of people in those nations.

Kant thought of religious belief and institutions as having become infected by the ‘bounded will’, or the propensity to evil.

Recognition of transcendence not only acknowledges something greater that enables us to do what we do as humans; it also generates awareness that history is not simply the product of human activities but a co-production with the natural world and with ‘eternal objects’ beyond our understanding. The

But no movement of major social change has succeeded without a compelling symbology and affective power.

In this context, O’Neill emphasizes that the categorical imperative does not posit any substantive goals. Its regulatory function is negative. It only prevents any person or group from claiming a special privilege or harming the interests of others. Thus, it undertakes the standpoint of everyone else – a universal point of view. Significantly,

Nabaneeta Dev Sen, “Crisis in Civilization, and a Poet’s Alternatives: Education as One Alternative Weapon,” paper presented at Tagore’s Philosophy of Education: a conference dedicated to the memory of Amita Sen, Kolkata, India, March 29–30, 2006.