Rad razmatra Rousseauovo romantičarsko okretanje prirodi u epohi razuma. Kada sugotovo svi relevantni francuski prosvjetitelji (Voltaire, Diderot, d'Alembert, Montesquieu idr.) smisao izgradnje modernoga čovjeka vidjeli u odgoju putem racionalizma, Rousseau jeupozoravao da je priroda prvi učitelj od kojeg dijete, a onda i građanin, treba učiti. Znanosti iumjetnosti zbog svoje kompetitivne naravi iskvarile su prirodnoga čovjeka, kojemu je prirodadala ljubav prema sebi i milosrđe prema drugome, vrijednosti koje ekonomski kompetitivniracionalizam stavlja u drugi plan. Cilj je izlaganja afrmirati Rousseauov koncept »Drugeprirode« koji afrmira harmoniju društva temeljenu na prirodnom poretku. Rousseauva»prirodna pedagogija« zastupljena je kroz čitavu njegovu flozofju, od flozofje umjetnosti(Discours sur les sciences et les arts; Julie ou la Nouvelle Héloïse; Lettre sur les spectacles) i flozofjeodgoja (Émile ou de l'éducation; Les Rêveries du promeneur solitaire) preko flozofje politike(Du contrat social) i flozofje ekonomije (Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalitéparmi les hommes; Économie politique) do metafzike (Profession de foi du vicaire savoyard).U svim navedenim djelima zrcali se Rousseauov pokušaj da preko prirodnih načela odgojimodernoga čovjeka i njegovo društvo. U biti njegove flozofje jasno se može uočiti pogrešanstav mnogih interpreta kako je Rousseau stvorio pretpostavke Francuskoj revoluciji. Naprotiv,Rousseau je flozof prirode, kako stoji i na njegovu nadgrobnom epitafu u Panthéonu. On jeodgajao pojedinca koji neće biti »čovjek revolucije« jer u sebi sadrži dovoljno ljubavi premasebi i drugome da bi zadavao udarce pojedincu i društvu. Iz Rousseauove se flozofje, stoga,ne može izvesti pledoaje za revoluciju.
This paper discusses a key contemporary problem, that of inequality. Certainly, the most visible inequality today is economic inequality, which is not only a characteristic found today, but is also the result of a long historical development. The problem arises when inequality becomes artificial (produces itself) and thus becomes a matter of social sciences and humanities. At this point, the question of economic inequality becomes a non-economic issue and thus opens the possibility of formulating such principles that will be able to reduce the issue to a minimum. This paper discusses this possibility, while referring to Thomas Piketty's book on capital in relation to John Rawls's principles of justice to which Piketty refers to.
Rad pokazuje filozofijski diskurs opasnosti od društva normalnih. Riječ je o razmatranju odnosa ludila i nenormalnosti važnih za društvo i političku zajednicu iz nekadašnje optike Michela Foucaulta i današnje perspektive Manfreda Lütza. Smisao je rada pokazati kako je pojam norme i iz njega proizašloga normiranja i discipliniranja doveo do imperativa zdravog društva utemeljenoga na normi. Takvo društvo isključuje sve one koji na bilo koji način odstupaju od ponašanja predviđenoga normom. U takvu se zahtjevu krije opasnost suvremenoga društva koje ne razlikuje nenormalnost i ludilo, nego ih koristi za diskreditiranje svojih članova koji ne pristaju na postavljeno normiranje. Radi se o tome da biti nenormalan samo znači kritički ne pristajati na postojeću normu koju je nametnula većina bilo da je riječ o pravnoj, političkoj, društvenoj, vjerskoj, obrazovnoj, odgojnoj ili medicinskoj normi. Na temeljima Foucaultovih filozofskih i Lützovih psihologijskih uvida rad pokazuje kako opasnost po društvo ne predstavljaju oni koji po bilo čem odstupaju od norme nego upravo oni »normalni«, koji kao nosioci »normalnoga« društva nekritički pristaju i provode normativni poredak. ; The paper presents a philosophical discourse on the dangers of the society of normal persons. It is about the importance of relation between madness and normality within the society and the political community from the former Michel Foucault's optics and today's Manfred Lütz's perspective. The purpose of this paper is to show how the concept of the norm, and accordingly of the normalisation and discipline, leads to the imperative of the healthy society based on norms. Such society excludes all those who in any way deviate from the behavior predicted by the norm. Such request is the danger of modern society that does not differentiate abnormality from insanity, but use them to discredit its members which refuse to be subordinate. To be abnormal means only to be critical toward the norm that is set by majority, whether is it a legal, political, social, religious, educational or medical norm. On the foundations of Foucault's philosophical and Lütz's psychological insights, the thesis shows that the danger to society are not those who deviate from the norm, but the "normal people" who, as bearers of "normal" society, uncritically accept and implement the normative order.
Rad pokazuje kako je Vicova filozofija razrađena u Novoj znanosti pozicija onoga što će se kasnije odrediti političkom teologijom. Time rad polazi od određenja pojma političke teologije i prikazuje načela koja će Vica svrstati u tu specifičnu tradiciju filozofijskoga mišljenja. U tom smislu Vicova je filozofija utemeljena na metafizičkoj tradiciji i time postaje jasno kako može biti određena kao politička teologija. Vicova analiza je utemeljena na klasičnoj tipologiji oblika vladavine koju su razmatrali Platon i Aristotel, ali uključuje i filozofiju povijesti kako bi pokazala, suprotno uobičajenim razmatranjima, da se politički oblici vladavine kreću od metafizičkoga načela jednoga (monarhija), nekolicine (aristokracija) i svih (demokracija) i konačno završavaju u metafizičkome postulatu jednoga koji je ponovno najbolje izražen u monarhiji. Za tu metodu Vico koristi klasični obrazac političke teologije s principom božanske providnosti u formiranju političkih zajednica, jer je to središnji koncept političke teologije. Razlog je to zbog kojeg Vico pokazuje kako su prve zajednice bile utemeljene na religijskim postulatima, a tek kasnije na filozofskima. Autor zaključuje kako Vicova Nova znanost može biti određena kao važno djelo filozofije politike utemeljeno na političkoj teologiji koje danas, u uvjetima materijalizirane globalizacije ponovno postaje važna pozicija u prevladavanju krize modernoga materijalizma svijeta. ; The paper considers that Vico's philosophy developed in the New Science is a position of what would later be labelled as a political theology. Therefore, paper starts from the definition of the concept of political theology and demonstrates the principles that will put Vico into that specific tradition of philosophical thought. In this meaning Vico's philosophy is based on the metaphysical tradition and it is clear that it can be characterized as the political theology. Vico's analysis is based on the classical typology of political community (rule) set by Plato and Aristotle, but it includes the philosophy of history aiming to show, contrary to usual considerations, that the political forms of government moved from the metaphysical principle of the one (monarchy), the fewness (aristocracy), the all (democracy) and finally ended in a metaphysical postulate of the one that is best expressed again in the monarchy. For this method Vico uses the classical pattern of political theology with the principle of divine providence in forming the political community, because it is a central concept of the political theology. That is why Vico shows that the first communities were based on religious postulates, and afterword on the philosophical. The author concludes that Vico's New Science can be defined as an important piece on political philosophy based on political theology, which, in today's conditions of material globalization, once more becomes an important position in overcoming the crisis of modern materialism of the world. ; Cet article montre que la philosophie de Vico, élaborée dans La science nouvelle, est la position de ce qui va plus tard être considérée comme une théologie politique. Ainsi, ce travail commence par la définition du concept de théologie politique et démontre les principes à partir desquels on peut classer Vico dans cette tradition philosophique de pensée spécifique. En ce sens la philosophie de Vico se fonde sur une tradition métaphysique et il est clair qu'elle peut être caractérisée de théologie politique. L'analyse de Vico trouve sa source dans la typologie classique des régimes politiques que Platon et Aristote ont étudié. Elle inclut aussi une philosophie de l'histoire dans le but de montrer, contrairement aux considérations habituelles, que les formes politiques de gouvernement partent du principe de l'un (monarchie), de plusieurs (aristocratie), de tous (démocratie), et enfin se terminent dans le postulat métaphysique de l'un, à nouveau exprimé dans la monarchie. Pour cette méthode Vico se sert du modèle classique de théologie politique et de son principe de providence divine dans la formation des communautés politiques, concept central en théologie politique. C'est la raison pour laquelle Vico montre que les premières communautés ont été fondées sur des postulats religieux, et seulement plus tard sur des postulats philosophiques. L'auteur conclut que La science nouvelle de Vico peut être définie comme une oeuvre majeure de philosophie politique fondée sur une théologie politique, qui aujourd'hui, dans des conditions de globalisation matérielle, reprend une position importante dans le dépassement de la crise du matérialisme moderne. ; Die Arbeit vertritt die Ansicht, die in der Neuen Wissenschaft erarbeitete Philosophie Vicos sei eine Position dessen, was später als politische Theologie bezeichnet wird. Daher fängt das Paper von der Definition des Begriffs der politischen Theologie an und zeigt die Prinzipien, die Vico in diese spezifische Tradition des philosophischen Denkens einordnen. In diesem Sinne gründet sich Vicos Philosophie auf die metaphysische Tradition und es ist klar, dass sie als politische Theologie charakterisiert werden kann. Vicos Analyse basiert auf der klassischen Typologie der politischen (Herrschafts)form, wie sie von Platon und Aristoteles aufgestellt wurde, schließt jedoch die Philosophie der Geschichte ein, um im Gegensatz zu üblichen Überlegungen einen (Monarchie), der einigen (Aristokratie) und der allen (Demokratie) verschoben und letztendlich im metaphysischen Postulat des einen endeten, das wieder am besten in der Monarchie zum Ausdruck kommt. Für diese Methode verwendet Vico das klassische Muster der politischen Theologie mit dem Prinzip der göttlichen Vorsehung in der Bildung politischer Gemeinschaften, weil dies ein zentrales Konzept der politischen Theologie ist. Und dies ist der Grund, aus dem Vico zeigt, dass die ersten Gemeinschaften auf Religionspostulaten fußten und erst nachträglich auf philosophischen. Der Autor kommt zu dem Schluss, Vicos Neue Wissenschaft könne als ein bedeutendes Werk der auf die politische Theologie sich stützenden politischen Philosophie definiert werden, das in heutigen Bedingungen der materiellen Globalisierung einmal mehr eine wichtige Position einnimmt in der Bewältigung der Krise des modernen Materialismus in der Welt.
U radu analiziramo pojam »objektivnog neprijatelja« s ontologijske i političke razine. Hipoteza rada jest da »objektivni neprijatelj« nije biće nego je nebiće, odnosno kao konkretno, realno biće on ne postoji. Teza je postavljena u ontologijskom okviru da biće mora imati jednost, nepromjenjivost i prepoznatljivu formu, što je pokazano na ontološkim premisama Parmenida, Platona, Aristotela i Husserla. Na razini filozofsko-političke analize u teorijskim postavkama Carla Schmitta i Hanne Arendt vidljivo je da »objektivni neprijatelj« ne postoji kao konkretno biće, nego samo kao biće izmišljeno u pojmu koji nije adekvatan vlastitom predmetu, što znači da je u ontologijskom smislu neistinit. Rad upozorava na opasnost pojmovnog određenja »objektivnog neprijatelja« koji ne odgovara stvarnim bićima, pri čemu se navode i paradoksi hrvatskog političkog diskursa u određenju pojmova »fašist«, »ustaša«, »četnik«, »jugokomunist« i dr. ; In the paper we analyse the concept of the "objective enemy" at the ontological and political levels. The hypothesis of the paper is that "objective enemy" is not being, rather it is non-being, and therefore one does not exist as an concrete, realistic being. The thesis is set in an ontological framework that being must have unity, immutability and recognizable form that was shown in the ontological premises of Parmenides, Plato, Aristotle and Husserl. At the level of philosophical and political analysis in the theoretical concepts of Carl Schmitt and Hannah Arendt, it is evident that the "objective enemy" does not exist as a concrete being, but only as being invented by the concept that is not adequate to its own subject. This means the untruth in ontological sense. The work draws attention to the danger of the term of "objective enemy" that does not correspond to the real beings, also evident in the Croatian political discourse in the example of the terms: "Fascist", "Ustaša", "Četnik", "Yugo-communist", and others.
The author designates the Croatian thinker Juraj Krizanic as a philosopher of politics, i.e. a modern political theorist who, on the one hand, founds his postulates on traditional theological thought, and, on the other, takes into account the postulates of modern political theory. As a theologian, Krizanic bases his conception of history and theology on the providentialism of St. Aurelius Augustine, and his political theory on the acceptance of a part of the thought of his contemporary Thomas Hobbes. The theoretical position -- political theology, positions him precisely between the political-theological postulates of Augustine and the political-theoretical hypotheses of Hobbes. In agreement with Augustine, Kriznic concludes that the political community (state) has its foundation in God and the values comprised in him, which is especially manifest in Providence and royal worship as basis of the internal structure of the state. But, in agreement with Hobbes, Krizanic understands that the mission of the state decreed by Providence operates within the earthly state and the secular political frameworks, and that, on the other hand, the king instituted by the will of God has his foundation also in the political body (the people), and this ranks Krizanic among the modern political theorists. Adapted from the source document.
