Suchergebnisse

The author's argument is that Europe must renounce Kant's universalism & adopt political means in resolving its permanently conflictual situations. In that way it is to construct its new identity that stems neither from the divergent past of its members nor from their divergent perceptions of the future, but is being built in the politically active present. The European Union as a community sui generis is founded on a paradox. Namely, it does not grow from its familiar historical identity, but is growing into it by permanently resolving the conflictual situations of the state of nature by political means. That paradoxical political project may be subscribed to only politically: mythologies, religions, ideologies & metaphysics would, as it were, create a state-of-nature but only at a higher cultural level. 4 References. Adapted from the source document.

The author looks into Scheler's philosophy of war as stated in his work The Genius of War. In the context of Germany during World War One, Scheler polemicized with various interpretations of the essence & the nature of war, particularly with those that reduce wars to economic or sociological roots, & claimed that the spiritual drive behind the "real" war was only to increase power. The war for him is part of the human nature, but not as a mere struggle for survival but as the struggle for power that maximally exalts, expands & deepens the common & indivisible values of our moral consciousness. The author argues that Scheler's intention is to glorify war, counter to Kant's universalism & rationalism. He is particularly dismissive of Kant's idea of "eternal peace" & all that is linked with cosmopolitanism & pacifism. The author concludes that Scheler's philosophy is self-delusional. References. Adapted from the source document.

The first part of this essay deals with the fundamental concepts of political science: what politics is -- its subject & its purpose; the nature of human beings as social or political (symbiotic) beings; the nature of authority & law in the function of maintaining & developing people's natural sociability in the political community. The second part looks into the character of political community or state as a universal symbiotic community, as a community of communities (particular public associations, towns, & provinces, which are communities of simple & private associations -- the families of associations). The author analyzes the definition of the universal symbiotic community (which the author calls a kingdom or at times a republic), the right to sovereignty (ius majestatis), or the right of supreme authority (ius regni), that inalienably belongs to the people or the entire political body. Adapted from the source document.

If it is true that a systematic understanding of modern society cannot be constituted without relying on the major works of the political thinking of modernity, the opposite is also true, ie., that none of those works cannot be properly understood unless from the viewpoint of a developed theory of modernity. In his General Theory of Modernity, Jacques Bidet points out that his metastructural theory of the modern epoch finally makes it possible to critically reexamine & reconstruct the entire "political metaphysics" of modernity. His intention is sufficiently (at the very least) outlined in his interpretations of Hobbes, Spinoza, Locke, Rousseau, Kant & Hegel. The author singles out Bidet's pregnant interpretation of Hobbes, & faces the question: what is to be done with the Leviathan? The first part of the article gives a detailed account of Bidet's basic hypotheses & insights into Hobbes' crucial role in finding an adequate conceptual definition of the logical starting point of exposition of the theory of modernity as a purely discursive relation in the formula of the social agreement. The second part puts forward a critical appraisal of Bidet's key reconstructional thesis that Hobbes' theory of authorization is perceived as the actual logical starting point of exposition of metastructural theory categories. In part three it is shown that Hobbes' theory of political representation & authorization could indeed be the starting point to a political theory of modernity (because it establishes man as the "author" of politics, & his representative or the sovereign as his "actor" or representative). In the author's judgment, Bidet's reconstructional thesis, which denies the epistemological status of the "natural state" as the first & most general concept in the sequence of exposition, is not valid. In the natural state, man's nature is not ahistorically postulated as that of a wolf; it is essentially dual. At issue here is primarily the modern man (and not merely man in general) in the epochal constellation wherein he, simultaneously & contradictorily, exists as a particular individual (bourgeois), which pursues his natural right, & as a moral subject (a Christian believer), which, as a being of conscience, fathoms & follows the imperatives of the natural or moral or divine laws. Precisely this duality, his inner cleavage of modern man, is also the starting supposition of Hobbes' theory of modernity encompassed in the key concept of the "natural state." In view of Bidet's argumentation, & relying above all on Zarka's fundamental interpretation of Hobbes' political philosophy as semiology of power, we are constantly faced with the Leviathan as an incomparable challenge to our cognitive faculty. Adapted from the source document.

Using The White Paper (by which the EU has been trying to help the CEEC countries to bring their legislative activities in line with the EU regulation), the author looks into the regulation of genetically modified (GM) products & the ways in which risks from GM products can be minimized. The essay includes a review of the existing regulations & an analysis of the changes in the political & economic circumstances that require the corresponding changes in the existing by-laws. The prime movers in the arena in which the GM products policy is designed are scattered intercontinentally: the multinational corporations of the US agro-industrial complex, the individual farmers & their associations on both sides of the Atlantic, & the European agro-industrial businesses & governments. The disagreement among these protagonists was made apparent during the process preceding the adoption of the Protocol on Bio-Security, envisaged as the framework for the new regulation. The communique of the EU Commission as a sequel to the Cartagena Protocol on Bio-Security illustrates the EU's approach to the application of the caution principle, which is particularly appropriate in the situations in which science is not able to take in all the risks connected with the GM products. The process of the modification of the EU regulation on GM products is an indication of the complexity of the interests involved. This is the reason the process has not been completed. However, this does not justify the delay in the launching of this process in Croatia, which could use the regulation of other countries, briefly summarized at the end of the essay. Adapted from the source document.

Using The White Paper (by which the EU has been trying to help the CEEC countries to bring their legislative activities in line with the EU regulation), the author looks into the regulation of genetically modified (GM) products & the ways in which risks from GM products can be minimized. The essay includes a review of the existing regulations & an analysis of the changes in the political & economic circumstances that require the corresponding changes in the existing by-laws. The prime movers in the arena in which the GM products policy is designed are scattered intercontinentally: the multinational corporations of the US agro-industrial complex, the individual farmers & their associations on both sides of the Atlantic, & the European agro-industrial businesses & governments. The disagreement among these protagonists was made apparent during the process preceding the adoption of the Protocol on Bio-Security, envisaged as the framework for the new regulation. The communique of the EU Commission as a sequel to the Cartagena Protocol on Bio-Security illustrates the EU's approach to the application of the caution principle, which is particularly appropriate in the situations in which science is not able to take in all the risks connected with the GM products. The process of the modification of the EU regulation on GM products is an indication of the complexity of the interests involved. This is the reason the process has not been completed. However, this does not justify the delay in the launching of this process in Croatia, which could use the regulation of other countries, briefly summarized at the end of the essay. Adapted from the source document.

On its road to ED membership Serbia faces numerous challenges. Among important ones are how to solve the problems of environmental protection & sustainable management of natural resources. After defining sustainable development & its postulates, the author gives an overview of natural resources, this including land, water, air, as well as biodiversity, discussing their inter-dependence. She points to the relatedness between cultural & natural resources for sustainable development giving the "Derdap" National Park as an example. In the author's opinion, a very effective instrument for coping with these challenges is international co-operation in the field of sustainable use of natural & cultural-historical resources, from global connections & worldwide actions, to regional interconnections & co-operation including cross-border co-operation of neighboring countries in this area. References. Adapted from the source document.

The author analyzes the reinterpretation of the 17th-century English political philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) offered by contemporary American philosopher Gregory S. Kavka. The state of nature, the social contract (pact), the forming of the very first state, & the problem of compliance to its newly formed government are discussed. The question arises of how it is possible to make a social contract because it is still a "state of nature contract," & in these conditions, contracts do not oblige adherence while there is yet no one to punish rebellion or disobedience. (Rather, the state should be a result of that contract.) Another question concerns the possibility of establishing morality in the state of nature, because no authority is formed there, & therefore a moral code & positive law system are nonexistent. The author claims (together with Kavka) that, in spite of the fact that there exists no entire moral code, the possibility of elemental traces of morality exists, because morality & nature (from humanistic outlook) are timeless, as is the state of nature as well. 4 References. Adapted from the source document.

The author compares Hobbes' state of nature & Rawls' original position in an attempt to answer the question: How to arrive at a community starting from individualistic premises? The comparison shows a striking similarity between Hobbes' & Rawls' initial positions showing itself in the radical equality of the denizens in both "states of nature" & the insistence on the part of both authors to secure recognition of such equality. The essentially similar conditions in the state of nature suggest that the difference between their "social contracts" should lie in the other parts of their theories. The decisive differences lie in Rawls' assumption that individuals are motivated by a sense of justice (much stronger than in Hobbes' theory) that enables a choice of principles of justice in Rawls' state of nature. The agreement on principles is an expression of human sociability, while an agreement on a sovereign is a concession to human unsociability. 17 References. Adapted from the source document.

The author compares Hobbes' state of nature & Rawls' original position in an attempt to answer the question: How to arrive at a community starting from individualistic premises? The comparison shows a striking similarity between Hobbes' & Rawls' initial positions showing itself in the radical equality of the denizens in both "states of nature" & the insistence on the part of both authors to secure recognition of such equality. The essentially similar conditions in the state of nature suggest that the difference between their "social contracts" should lie in the other parts of their theories. The decisive differences lie in Rawls' assumption that individuals are motivated by a sense of justice (much stronger than in Hobbes' theory) that enables a choice of principles of justice in Rawls' state of nature. The agreement on principles is an expression of human sociability, while an agreement on a sovereign is a concession to human unsociability. 17 References. Adapted from the source document.

The author discusses the relationship between Hegel & Hobbes with regard to the tradition of natural law. Both thinkers start by considering the state of nature as a construct of reason. Yet while Hobbes describes the state of nature as the original state of the human race, Hegel in describing it rejects any social context. They both present natural law as an absolute fact of the individual's freedom, starting from which the whole political community has to be erected. The essential difference between Hobbes & Hegel begins with the demonstration of the ways in which radical individualism is being transcended. Hobbes believes that natural law has only been suppressed by the predominance of a legal & political order, while according to Hegel, the state of nature is a fiction & natural law achieves its realization only in a custom-ruled community. In Hegel the system of mediation is so powerful that a return to the state of nature appears to be impossible. In Hobbes, the natural state of war of all against all (Behemoth) is latent in the political community (Leviathan). The political community (Leviathan) exists only as long as it is able to suppress chaos (Behemoth). Adapted from the source document.

In this article the author wants to prove that Hobbes' theory of the state cannot be reduced to a logical construction, which -- completely abstracted from the ethical content -- approaches the problem of overcoming destitution in the state of nature as a problem of mechanics of forces. The existence of a powerful sovereign, who guarantees peace by forcing his subjects to obey, is not sufficient for the reinstatement of a lasting civil state. The author believes that it is possible to differentiate two lines of argument in Leviathan. The first one begins from the basic value of self-preservation & natural law derived from it, which is both the cause of the conflict in the state of nature & also the basis for overcoming this conflict. However, Hobbes cannot derive the conditions of maintaining the civil state from the state of nature. What is necessary is the second line of argument which is based on the notion of natural law. The content of natural law is a moral doctrine, on whose acceptance rests the conditions for creating & maintaining common life. Its significance is derived from Hobbes' fundamental insight that power itself cannot ensure permanent guarantee of safety. The author concludes that Hobbes' Leviathan cannot sustain itself, if both subjects & the sovereign are not bound by a moral sense of the importance of natural laws. References. Adapted from the source document.

On the occasion of the bicentennial of the publication of Kant's Treatise on Perpetual Peace, the author attempts to evoke & actualize that classic of modern philosophy of politics. According to Hajo Schmidt, the strong point of Kant's concept was his realism, which prevented him from slipping into intellectual, utopian idealization of human nature & political relations among people. Having in mind not only the rational but also irrational aspects of human nature, ie, the insuperable chasm between good & evil, Kant in that respect offers edifying peacemaking propositions. This he achieves by advocating the concepts of free individuals, independent national states, & the cosmopolitan unity of humankind. These three moments make up the content of Kant's concept of republicanism. Their identity & plurality are the foundations of the peace. 3 References. Adapted from the source document.