Nachhaltigkeit Wofür? 2016
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-48191-2_3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Soziale Nachhaltigkeit als Thema der Anthropologie

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 115 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 13 publications
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…But it also can be supportive when one intends to talk about believing processes in a more general way. This might happen in different communicational contexts, as for instance in counselling (Wagner-Skacel 2022), pedagogics (Mitropoulou 2017, Mitropoulou et al 2018, law (Marko 2017), economy (Sturn 2017;Willfort and Weber 2017;Bergner et al 2022), technics (Hick et al 2020;Kranabitl et al 2021), ecology and sustainability (Zimmermann and Angel 2016;Angel and Zimmermann. 2016;Oviedo et al 2022), Christian theology (Oancea 2017; Davies 2022; Angel 2022c), or Buddhism (Forman 2022).…”
Section: Communication Model (Model Of Credition)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But it also can be supportive when one intends to talk about believing processes in a more general way. This might happen in different communicational contexts, as for instance in counselling (Wagner-Skacel 2022), pedagogics (Mitropoulou 2017, Mitropoulou et al 2018, law (Marko 2017), economy (Sturn 2017;Willfort and Weber 2017;Bergner et al 2022), technics (Hick et al 2020;Kranabitl et al 2021), ecology and sustainability (Zimmermann and Angel 2016;Angel and Zimmermann. 2016;Oviedo et al 2022), Christian theology (Oancea 2017; Davies 2022; Angel 2022c), or Buddhism (Forman 2022).…”
Section: Communication Model (Model Of Credition)mentioning
confidence: 99%