Suchergebnisse

The aim of the paper is to reconstruct and analyze Alvydas Jokubaitis's under-standing of politics. It is argued that Jokubaitis couples politics with morality in opposition to the liberal project of the autonomy of politics, which seeks to separate these two fields of human activity. According to Jokubaitis, politics is a realm of realization of the spiritual side of human nature. That is the reason why, through morality, he also tries to align poli-tics with other domains of human spirituality, such as religion and metaphysics. What is common to politics, morality, religion, and metaphysics is the sphere of normativity, i.e., that of purposes, principles, and imperatives. At the same time, Jokubaitis attacks those schools of modern thought which interpret politics as corresponding solely to the physical, animal side of human nature. In this regard, positivism and scientism are singled out as the crudest attempts to misconstrue the nature of politics. The paper is based on a convic-tion that the acknowledgement of the importance of morality allows one to piece together Jokubaitis's various considerations about the nature and distinctiveness of politics into a coherent whole.

The aim of the paper is to reconstruct and analyze Alvydas Jokubaitis's under-standing of politics. It is argued that Jokubaitis couples politics with morality in opposition to the liberal project of the autonomy of politics, which seeks to separate these two fields of human activity. According to Jokubaitis, politics is a realm of realization of the spiritual side of human nature. That is the reason why, through morality, he also tries to align poli-tics with other domains of human spirituality, such as religion and metaphysics. What is common to politics, morality, religion, and metaphysics is the sphere of normativity, i.e., that of purposes, principles, and imperatives. At the same time, Jokubaitis attacks those schools of modern thought which interpret politics as corresponding solely to the physical, animal side of human nature. In this regard, positivism and scientism are singled out as the crudest attempts to misconstrue the nature of politics. The paper is based on a convic-tion that the acknowledgement of the importance of morality allows one to piece together Jokubaitis's various considerations about the nature and distinctiveness of politics into a coherent whole.

The aim of the paper is to reconstruct and analyze Alvydas Jokubaitis's under-standing of politics. It is argued that Jokubaitis couples politics with morality in opposition to the liberal project of the autonomy of politics, which seeks to separate these two fields of human activity. According to Jokubaitis, politics is a realm of realization of the spiritual side of human nature. That is the reason why, through morality, he also tries to align poli-tics with other domains of human spirituality, such as religion and metaphysics. What is common to politics, morality, religion, and metaphysics is the sphere of normativity, i.e., that of purposes, principles, and imperatives. At the same time, Jokubaitis attacks those schools of modern thought which interpret politics as corresponding solely to the physical, animal side of human nature. In this regard, positivism and scientism are singled out as the crudest attempts to misconstrue the nature of politics. The paper is based on a convic-tion that the acknowledgement of the importance of morality allows one to piece together Jokubaitis's various considerations about the nature and distinctiveness of politics into a coherent whole.

The aim of the paper is to reconstruct and analyze Alvydas Jokubaitis's under-standing of politics. It is argued that Jokubaitis couples politics with morality in opposition to the liberal project of the autonomy of politics, which seeks to separate these two fields of human activity. According to Jokubaitis, politics is a realm of realization of the spiritual side of human nature. That is the reason why, through morality, he also tries to align poli-tics with other domains of human spirituality, such as religion and metaphysics. What is common to politics, morality, religion, and metaphysics is the sphere of normativity, i.e., that of purposes, principles, and imperatives. At the same time, Jokubaitis attacks those schools of modern thought which interpret politics as corresponding solely to the physical, animal side of human nature. In this regard, positivism and scientism are singled out as the crudest attempts to misconstrue the nature of politics. The paper is based on a convic-tion that the acknowledgement of the importance of morality allows one to piece together Jokubaitis's various considerations about the nature and distinctiveness of politics into a coherent whole.

The present study has attempted the analysis of public discourse and its moral expectations through metaphor at a contrastive level in the theoretical framework of cognitive linguistics. The study deals with the identification of morality models in public discourse in English and Lithuanian. The materials of the study consist of analytical political articles extracted from the online archives of two following websites: (1) www.economist.com, (2) www.politika.lt. The collected data amounts to 415, 670 words in total. Three methods of analysis were applied to the collected data: qualitative, quantitative and contrastive. The analysis reveals that political affairs in both cultures are framed by the same conceptual metaphors. The structural composition of the conceptual metaphors has been examined in terms of the following thirteen SOURCE domains: MOTION, RELATIONSHIP, STRENGTH, HEALTH, SPORTS, WAR, ESSENCE, BUSINESS, DIRT, SENSES, WHOLENESS, THEATRE, and ANIMALS. The cross-mapping between SOURCE domains and TARGET domains is held by different epistemic correspondences, which leads to the variability of MORALITY models across the two languages, i.e. English and Lithuanian. British politics tends to be more varied in its moral expectations, which derive from three types of Morality Systems: Pragmatic, Rational and Integrated. Thus, the moral expectations governing British political discourse are based on the Complex Morality Model. By contrast, Lithuanian politics is predominantly governed by the Pragmatic Morality Model.

The present study has attempted the analysis of public discourse and its moral expectations through metaphor at a contrastive level in the theoretical framework of cognitive linguistics. The study deals with the identification of morality models in public discourse in English and Lithuanian. The materials of the study consist of analytical political articles extracted from the online archives of two following websites: (1) www.economist.com, (2) www.politika.lt. The collected data amounts to 415, 670 words in total. Three methods of analysis were applied to the collected data: qualitative, quantitative and contrastive. The analysis reveals that political affairs in both cultures are framed by the same conceptual metaphors. The structural composition of the conceptual metaphors has been examined in terms of the following thirteen SOURCE domains: MOTION, RELATIONSHIP, STRENGTH, HEALTH, SPORTS, WAR, ESSENCE, BUSINESS, DIRT, SENSES, WHOLENESS, THEATRE, and ANIMALS. The cross-mapping between SOURCE domains and TARGET domains is held by different epistemic correspondences, which leads to the variability of MORALITY models across the two languages, i.e. English and Lithuanian. British politics tends to be more varied in its moral expectations, which derive from three types of Morality Systems: Pragmatic, Rational and Integrated. Thus, the moral expectations governing British political discourse are based on the Complex Morality Model. By contrast, Lithuanian politics is predominantly governed by the Pragmatic Morality Model.

The present study has attempted the analysis of public discourse and its moral expectations through metaphor at a contrastive level in the theoretical framework of cognitive linguistics. The study deals with the identification of morality models in public discourse in English and Lithuanian. The materials of the study consist of analytical political articles extracted from the online archives of two following websites: (1) www.economist.com, (2) www.politika.lt. The collected data amounts to 415, 670 words in total. Three methods of analysis were applied to the collected data: qualitative, quantitative and contrastive. The analysis reveals that political affairs in both cultures are framed by the same conceptual metaphors. The structural composition of the conceptual metaphors has been examined in terms of the following thirteen SOURCE domains: MOTION, RELATIONSHIP, STRENGTH, HEALTH, SPORTS, WAR, ESSENCE, BUSINESS, DIRT, SENSES, WHOLENESS, THEATRE, and ANIMALS. The cross-mapping between SOURCE domains and TARGET domains is held by different epistemic correspondences, which leads to the variability of MORALITY models across the two languages, i.e. English and Lithuanian. British politics tends to be more varied in its moral expectations, which derive from three types of Morality Systems: Pragmatic, Rational and Integrated. Thus, the moral expectations governing British political discourse are based on the Complex Morality Model. By contrast, Lithuanian politics is predominantly governed by the Pragmatic Morality Model.

The present study has attempted the analysis of public discourse and its moral expectations through metaphor at a contrastive level in the theoretical framework of cognitive linguistics. The study deals with the identification of morality models in public discourse in English and Lithuanian. The materials of the study consist of analytical political articles extracted from the online archives of two following websites: (1) www.economist.com, (2) www.politika.lt. The collected data amounts to 415, 670 words in total. Three methods of analysis were applied to the collected data: qualitative, quantitative and contrastive. The analysis reveals that political affairs in both cultures are framed by the same conceptual metaphors. The structural composition of the conceptual metaphors has been examined in terms of the following thirteen SOURCE domains: MOTION, RELATIONSHIP, STRENGTH, HEALTH, SPORTS, WAR, ESSENCE, BUSINESS, DIRT, SENSES, WHOLENESS, THEATRE, and ANIMALS. The cross-mapping between SOURCE domains and TARGET domains is held by different epistemic correspondences, which leads to the variability of MORALITY models across the two languages, i.e. English and Lithuanian. British politics tends to be more varied in its moral expectations, which derive from three types of Morality Systems: Pragmatic, Rational and Integrated. Thus, the moral expectations governing British political discourse are based on the Complex Morality Model. By contrast, Lithuanian politics is predominantly governed by the Pragmatic Morality Model.

The present study has attempted the analysis of public discourse and its moral expectations through metaphor at a contrastive level in the theoretical framework of cognitive linguistics. The study deals with the identification of morality models in public discourse in English and Lithuanian. The materials of the study consist of analytical political articles extracted from the online archives of two following websites: (1) www.economist.com, (2) www.politika.lt. The collected data amounts to 415, 670 words in total. Three methods of analysis were applied to the collected data: qualitative, quantitative and contrastive. The analysis reveals that political affairs in both cultures are framed by the same conceptual metaphors. The structural composition of the conceptual metaphors has been examined in terms of the following thirteen SOURCE domains: MOTION, RELATIONSHIP, STRENGTH, HEALTH, SPORTS, WAR, ESSENCE, BUSINESS, DIRT, SENSES, WHOLENESS, THEATRE, and ANIMALS. The cross-mapping between SOURCE domains and TARGET domains is held by different epistemic correspondences, which leads to the variability of MORALITY models across the two languages, i.e. English and Lithuanian. British politics tends to be more varied in its moral expectations, which derive from three types of Morality Systems: Pragmatic, Rational and Integrated. Thus, the moral expectations governing British political discourse are based on the Complex Morality Model. By contrast, Lithuanian politics is predominantly governed by the Pragmatic Morality Model.

The present study has attempted the analysis of public discourse and its moral expectations through metaphor at a contrastive level in the theoretical framework of cognitive linguistics. The study deals with the identification of morality models in public discourse in English and Lithuanian. The materials of the study consist of analytical political articles extracted from the online archives of two following websites: (1) www.economist.com, (2) www.politika.lt. The collected data amounts to 415, 670 words in total. Three methods of analysis were applied to the collected data: qualitative, quantitative and contrastive. The analysis reveals that political affairs in both cultures are framed by the same conceptual metaphors. The structural composition of the conceptual metaphors has been examined in terms of the following thirteen SOURCE domains: MOTION, RELATIONSHIP, STRENGTH, HEALTH, SPORTS, WAR, ESSENCE, BUSINESS, DIRT, SENSES, WHOLENESS, THEATRE, and ANIMALS. The cross-mapping between SOURCE domains and TARGET domains is held by different epistemic correspondences, which leads to the variability of MORALITY models across the two languages, i.e. English and Lithuanian. British politics tends to be more varied in its moral expectations, which derive from three types of Morality Systems: Pragmatic, Rational and Integrated. Thus, the moral expectations governing British political discourse are based on the Complex Morality Model. By contrast, Lithuanian politics is predominantly governed by the Pragmatic Morality Model.

The present study has attempted the analysis of public discourse and its moral expectations through metaphor at a contrastive level in the theoretical framework of cognitive linguistics. The study deals with the identification of morality models in public discourse in English and Lithuanian. The materials of the study consist of analytical political articles extracted from the online archives of two following websites: (1) www.economist.com, (2) www.politika.lt. The collected data amounts to 415, 670 words in total. Three methods of analysis were applied to the collected data: qualitative, quantitative and contrastive. The analysis reveals that political affairs in both cultures are framed by the same conceptual metaphors. The structural composition of the conceptual metaphors has been examined in terms of the following thirteen SOURCE domains: MOTION, RELATIONSHIP, STRENGTH, HEALTH, SPORTS, WAR, ESSENCE, BUSINESS, DIRT, SENSES, WHOLENESS, THEATRE, and ANIMALS. The cross-mapping between SOURCE domains and TARGET domains is held by different epistemic correspondences, which leads to the variability of MORALITY models across the two languages, i.e. English and Lithuanian. British politics tends to be more varied in its moral expectations, which derive from three types of Morality Systems: Pragmatic, Rational and Integrated. Thus, the moral expectations governing British political discourse are based on the Complex Morality Model. By contrast, Lithuanian politics is predominantly governed by the Pragmatic Morality Model.

The present study has attempted the analysis of public discourse and its moral expectations through metaphor at a contrastive level in the theoretical framework of cognitive linguistics. The study deals with the identification of morality models in public discourse in English and Lithuanian. The materials of the study consist of analytical political articles extracted from the online archives of two following websites: (1) www.economist.com, (2) www.politika.lt. The collected data amounts to 415, 670 words in total. Three methods of analysis were applied to the collected data: qualitative, quantitative and contrastive. The analysis reveals that political affairs in both cultures are framed by the same conceptual metaphors. The structural composition of the conceptual metaphors has been examined in terms of the following thirteen SOURCE domains: MOTION, RELATIONSHIP, STRENGTH, HEALTH, SPORTS, WAR, ESSENCE, BUSINESS, DIRT, SENSES, WHOLENESS, THEATRE, and ANIMALS. The cross-mapping between SOURCE domains and TARGET domains is held by different epistemic correspondences, which leads to the variability of MORALITY models across the two languages, i.e. English and Lithuanian. British politics tends to be more varied in its moral expectations, which derive from three types of Morality Systems: Pragmatic, Rational and Integrated. Thus, the moral expectations governing British political discourse are based on the Complex Morality Model. By contrast, Lithuanian politics is predominantly governed by the Pragmatic Morality Model.

Many critics of Hannah Arendt claim that her account of politics lacks moral guidelines and constraints. In their view, she radically dissociated politics from morality. Such an interpretation is mistaken. These critics fail to acknowledge that Arendt's conception has its own resources of normativity. Fundamental categories of Arendt's political theory (plurality, natality, freedom, equality, forgiveness, promise) serve moral, as well as political, purposes. The internalization of these categories strengthens political actors' moral judgment and their sense of responsibility. Active participation in political life engenders respect for human dignity and the multiplicity of different perspectives. Critics ignore the moral dimension of Arendt's conception of politics because they confuse different levels of analysis of the relationship between politics and morality. In the paper, these levels are discussed using the metaphor of a three-storey house.

Many critics of Hannah Arendt claim that her account of politics lacks moral guidelines and constraints. In their view, she radically dissociated politics from morality. Such an interpretation is mistaken. These critics fail to acknowledge that Arendt's conception has its own resources of normativity. Fundamental categories of Arendt's political theory (plurality, natality, freedom, equality, forgiveness, promise) serve moral, as well as political, purposes. The internalization of these categories strengthens political actors' moral judgment and their sense of responsibility. Active participation in political life engenders respect for human dignity and the multiplicity of different perspectives. Critics ignore the moral dimension of Arendt's conception of politics because they confuse different levels of analysis of the relationship between politics and morality. In the paper, these levels are discussed using the metaphor of a three-storey house.

Many critics of Hannah Arendt claim that her account of politics lacks moral guidelines and constraints. In their view, she radically dissociated politics from morality. Such an interpretation is mistaken. These critics fail to acknowledge that Arendt's conception has its own resources of normativity. Fundamental categories of Arendt's political theory (plurality, natality, freedom, equality, forgiveness, promise) serve moral, as well as political, purposes. The internalization of these categories strengthens political actors' moral judgment and their sense of responsibility. Active participation in political life engenders respect for human dignity and the multiplicity of different perspectives. Critics ignore the moral dimension of Arendt's conception of politics because they confuse different levels of analysis of the relationship between politics and morality. In the paper, these levels are discussed using the metaphor of a three-storey house.