Suchergebnisse

This book chapter is under embargo until 04/10/2020 ; In a book called Free Speech for Radicals, Herber Newton, a heretical priest active in New York in the late nineteenth century, claimed that 'Anarchism is in reality the ideal of political and social science, and also the idea of religion' (in Schroeder 1916: 14). Newton's assertion, that anarchism is fundamentally religious, is deeply contested but from a twenty-first century perspective his coupling of anarchism and political science is also striking. Even accepting that the link he makes between these two terms is mediated by the reference to an ideal, hinting at a utopian aspiration that many anarchists would embrace, the conjunction jars. This chapter considers some reasons why, looking within both at conceptions of political science adopted in American and British academia in the course of the twentieth century and at anarchist literatures. The discussion considers how debates about the relationship between the analysis of politics and the legitimation of established power relations contextualize anarchist engagements with political science, how differences about the scope, application and character of scientific method have complicated this engagement and how overlaps between these two currents of argument help explain some very different anarchist approaches to the field. My argument is that Newton's view is a productive one, from which anarchists have much to gain. And the final section of the chapter examines some examples of anarchist political science, drawing on the work of C. Wright Mills and Peter Kropotkin.

The relationship between "orthodoxy" and "science" has recently become a research topic. The orthodox area has never remarked through scientific concerns. The recent concern is generated by intense discussions that are taking place in the West on this issue; therefore Orthodox concerns in this direction do not seem to have been generated from internal reasons, it is a form of imitation, of forced adaptation to modernity, a modernity that we are forced to adapt to by the European world in which we came and where we want to integrate deeper. This does not mean that the Orthodox concern for the relationship between religion and science would necessarily be alien to the essence of "orthodoxy". It just means that the concern for this issue is recent and has not arisen as a consequence of internal historical development of orthodoxy, as it is the case in the West, where modernity is a process deeply rooted in the history of ideas itself of this part of the world.

"A Conversational Method Law should be understood as a system for adapting human social technology to human physical technology. Law runs on language, and it upgrades according to the rules of language. So as we discuss those rules and the role they play in the development of law, I would like to do so at the same time. My aim is for this book to be an example of this method. This book tries to develop language we can use to talk about how to develop the kind of language (law) that will help us survive the future. I will try to state my understanding of how things are and how things ought to be straightforwardly. It is important to me to be clear enough to be understood where I am right, and identifiably wrong where I am wrong. But even if stated forcefully, everything I say here is to be taken provisionally, as an introduction to a conversation. That is because a book is only half a conversation. A book is only paper until read, and the reader brings more than half the meaning to the table. If I mean to say-as I do mean to say-that life-giving language arises from community and context, then I must admit that I am missing your half of the conversation. I wish that this book were closer in form to a conversation, such that you could respond to what I say here, and I could accept your criticism, and we could develop more precise and better language for talking about the issue. That is how we would make progress"--

This essay emphazises as «natural law» represents the core of the concept of «science» in Giambattista Vico. This philosopher, by refusing skepticism on the one hand, and the doctrine of natural law on the other, makes of natural law the focus of various questions, from politics to jurisprudence, from «equity» to the «Reason of State». ; Il saggio evidenzia come il «diritto naturale» rappresenti il cuore nevralgico della «scienza» di Giambattista Vico. Questi, nell'opporsi allo scetticismo, da un lato, e al giusnaturalismo, dall'altro, fa del «diritto naturale» il punto di incontro di molteplici questioni, dalla politica alla giurisprudenza, dall'«equità» alla «Ragion di Stato».