Suchergebnisse

Brak transparentności procesów decyzyjnych typowy dla demokracji liberalnych oraz związany z nim kryzys zaufania obywateli wobec instytucji politycznych to jedne z głównych przyczyn sukcesów odnoszonych przez stronników demokracji nieliberalnej. Zdaniem krytyków liberalizmu zbyt wiele decyzji współcześnie delegowanych jest do ciał nienadzorowanych demokratycznie. Zwolennicy koncepcji demokracji deliberacyjnej formułują różne remedia na tę sytuację. Nie czynią tego jednak stronnicy najpopularniejszej obecnie z wersji demokracji deliberacyjnej – podejścia systemowego do deliberacji. Autor artykułu twierdzi, że podejście to może legitymizować "niedemokratyczny liberalizm" – jedną z przyczyn kryzysu demokracji liberalnej. Celem artykułu jest prezentacja i ocena stosunku zwolenników podejścia systemowego do roli odgrywanej w procesie politycznym przez nienadzorowane demokratycznie gremia eksperckie.

Harmony and Progress. Social and Political Views of Leonard Trelawny Hobhouse
The subject of the article is the social and political thought of Leonard Trelawny Hobhouse, one of the pioneers of British sociology and one of the main ideologists of the doctrine of New Liberalism. This essay's aim consists in presenting both Hobhouse's academic profile and his most important theoretical claims. It will depict the sources of his philosophical and sociological inspiration as well as his antipathies (particularly, his attitude towards Herbert Spencer). Hobhouse's theoretical worldview will be portrayed as a systemic entity. The sources of all his social and political theses will be shown to spring from the content of his first, strictly philosophical work, The Theory of Knowledge. Hobhouse's teleology, evolutionism and organicism originate directly form here.

The aim of the paper consists in presenting the place occupied by Bernard Bosanquet's philosophy in the context of the welfare provision debate taking placentury in Britain. The main thesis of the article is that although often accused of totalitarian or radically individualist tendencies, which supposedly had an effect on his attitude towards eugenics, Bosanquet's treatment of the "social problem" may be seen as an application of moderate liberal principles. Toon intellectual and political attitudes of the time towards eugenics, then passing to Bosanquet's stand in relation to thisreferring to the thesis of the article. ; The aim of the paper consists in presenting the place occupied by Bernard Bosanquet's philosophy in the context of the welfare provision debate taking placentury in Britain. The main thesis of the article is that although often accused of totalitarian or radically individualist tendencies, which supposedly had an effect on his attitude towards eugenics, Bosanquet's treatment of the "social problem" may be seen as an application of moderate liberal principles. Toon intellectual and political attitudes of the time towards eugenics, then passing to Bosanquet's stand in relation to thisreferring to the thesis of the article.

The aim of the paper consists in presenting the place occupied by Bernard Bosanquet's philosophy in the context of the welfare provision debate taking placentury in Britain. The main thesis of the article is that although often accused of totalitarian or radically individualist tendencies, which supposedly had an effect on his attitude towards eugenics, Bosanquet's treatment of the "social problem" may be seen as an application of moderate liberal principles. Toon intellectual and political attitudes of the time towards eugenics, then passing to Bosanquet's stand in relation to thisreferring to the thesis of the article. ; The aim of the paper consists in presenting the place occupied by Bernard Bosanquet's philosophy in the context of the welfare provision debate taking placentury in Britain. The main thesis of the article is that although often accused of totalitarian or radically individualist tendencies, which supposedly had an effect on his attitude towards eugenics, Bosanquet's treatment of the "social problem" may be seen as an application of moderate liberal principles. Toon intellectual and political attitudes of the time towards eugenics, then passing to Bosanquet's stand in relation to thisreferring to the thesis of the article.

The aim of the paper consists in presenting the place occupied by Bernard Bosanquet's philosophy in the context of the welfare provision debate taking placentury in Britain. The main thesis of the article is that although often accused of totalitarian or radically individualist tendencies, which supposedly had an effect on his attitude towards eugenics, Bosanquet's treatment of the "social problem" may be seen as an application of moderate liberal principles. To on intellectual and political attitudes of the time towards eugenics, then passing to Bosanquet's stand in relation to this referring to the thesis of the article.

This paper is dedicated to the subject of the relations binding British idealists' thought to nineteenth and twentieth century disputes in political philosophy. The two of them are taken into consideration: liberal-conservative and liberal-communitarian. The Author follows through the nuances of idealist thought in search of those of its elements, that weight in favour of its conciliatory, individualist-communitarian character. The first step of the argument is the characterization of liberal-conservative/liberal-communitarian standpoints. Then some of the fundamental elements of idealists' social and political thought are analyzed: the social recognition thesis, the concepts of common good and positive liberty. On this basis the following features are pointed to as crucial to accepting liberal-communitarian/conservative character of the idealists' theories: teleology; metaphysical foundation of politics; contextualism; a tension between ethical relativism and universalism; the criticism of the concept of negative freedom; and individualism.

The world of post-truth is a world of intense disinformation, an offensive of pseudoscience and widespread skepticism about expert knowledge. It is a world in which the terms of the political game are imposed by illiberal democrats who undermine the authority of scientific institutions. The liberal-democratic politicians have had to take up the gauntlet thrown down to them in this way. However, according to the book's author, they have not been followed by liberal theorists. Liberal theorists have never attempted to confront the pessimistic vision of a world in which citizens cannot distinguish expert from pseudo-expert and science from pseudo-science. The dominant liberal theories are based on the assumption that citizens are either competent to participate in major political decisions or that they can easily acquire such competence. The book strikingly explores a very different perspective. How would the theory and practice of liberal democracy have to change if we assume that laypersons will never appreciate the relevance of the arguments put forward by experts?