Suchergebnisse

Traduction japonaise, original anglais disponible en ligne sur HAL-SHS. Remerciements à Matoba Hiroshi pour sa traduction. ; International audience ; This paper responds to two different contexts. The first one was the coming UK referendum and, whatever the result, the challenge for the EU to reinvent itself or dissolve if it continues failing European populations. The second context was a deep questioning in Japan, but also in South Korea, about the future of East Asia and of ASEAN: is a convergence possible beyond economic interactions? How to breach cultural divides? How to overcome the search for hegemony, deep historical hatred, in order to reach and establish a common ground? The paper analyzes the presupposition of the European construction from the beginning: a union can be negotiated and instituted by the construction of a joint or common economic sphere. This construction has always denied or even repressed the fact that the autonomization of the economic sphere is complex historical process different for each nation in Europe or in the rest of the world. So the economic sphere has different relations to politics, society, knowledge production and education, even religion, in each nation. The same can be said of the conception and practice of public opinion, the structure and role of the state, etc. A union based on the presupposition of a common economic sphere becomes unsustainable in time of crisis. No solution can be hoped from the minds of politicians and bureaucrats: they don't act at the level where solutions can be found. "Culture", like "market", does not touch the problems at stake. The only real solution is to produce and share knowledge on the differentiation in each case of politics, civil society, the economy, research and education, even religion in order to map the differences and the family ressemblance between the different national trajectories. This joint knowledge is the only common ground of a coherent and creative union in Europe. It is also true in other parts of the world where ...

Traduction japonaise, original anglais disponible en ligne sur HAL-SHS. Remerciements à Matoba Hiroshi pour sa traduction. ; International audience ; This paper responds to two different contexts. The first one was the coming UK referendum and, whatever the result, the challenge for the EU to reinvent itself or dissolve if it continues failing European populations. The second context was a deep questioning in Japan, but also in South Korea, about the future of East Asia and of ASEAN: is a convergence possible beyond economic interactions? How to breach cultural divides? How to overcome the search for hegemony, deep historical hatred, in order to reach and establish a common ground? The paper analyzes the presupposition of the European construction from the beginning: a union can be negotiated and instituted by the construction of a joint or common economic sphere. This construction has always denied or even repressed the fact that the autonomization of the economic sphere is complex historical process different for each nation in Europe or in the rest of the world. So the economic sphere has different relations to politics, society, knowledge production and education, even religion, in each nation. The same can be said of the conception and practice of public opinion, the structure and role of the state, etc. A union based on the presupposition of a common economic sphere becomes unsustainable in time of crisis. No solution can be hoped from the minds of politicians and bureaucrats: they don't act at the level where solutions can be found. "Culture", like "market", does not touch the problems at stake. The only real solution is to produce and share knowledge on the differentiation in each case of politics, civil society, the economy, research and education, even religion in order to map the differences and the family ressemblance between the different national trajectories. This joint knowledge is the only common ground of a coherent and creative union in Europe. It is also true in other parts of the world where ...

Traduction japonaise, original anglais disponible en ligne sur HAL-SHS. Remerciements à Matoba Hiroshi pour sa traduction. ; International audience ; This paper responds to two different contexts. The first one was the coming UK referendum and, whatever the result, the challenge for the EU to reinvent itself or dissolve if it continues failing European populations. The second context was a deep questioning in Japan, but also in South Korea, about the future of East Asia and of ASEAN: is a convergence possible beyond economic interactions? How to breach cultural divides? How to overcome the search for hegemony, deep historical hatred, in order to reach and establish a common ground? The paper analyzes the presupposition of the European construction from the beginning: a union can be negotiated and instituted by the construction of a joint or common economic sphere. This construction has always denied or even repressed the fact that the autonomization of the economic sphere is complex historical process different for each nation in Europe or in the rest of the world. So the economic sphere has different relations to politics, society, knowledge production and education, even religion, in each nation. The same can be said of the conception and practice of public opinion, the structure and role of the state, etc. A union based on the presupposition of a common economic sphere becomes unsustainable in time of crisis. No solution can be hoped from the minds of politicians and bureaucrats: they don't act at the level where solutions can be found. "Culture", like "market", does not touch the problems at stake. The only real solution is to produce and share knowledge on the differentiation in each case of politics, civil society, the economy, research and education, even religion in order to map the differences and the family ressemblance between the different national trajectories. This joint knowledge is the only common ground of a coherent and creative union in Europe. It is also true in other parts of the world where ...

In his main oeuvre from the field of political philosophy ('Basic Traits of the Philosophy of Right'), Hegel wished to reconcile civil society with state. Civil society is for Hegel the way of abstract notion of property concretization. Subjective form of property is evolutioning into objective relationships among title holders. It is in the state where the will is set free from its particular interests and is becoming free in the widest sense of the word. Since civil society is established as per marketing principles, it is subject to inequalities. Since inequalities bear destructive effect on the life in community, civic particularism may be overcome only in institutional way. That institution is the state as the 'seriousness of the spirit', and the essence of civil society. Civil society is a liberal one, and the state is based on liberal principles. For Hegel, contrary to Hobbes and Locke, liberal society is not a social contract among individuals who possessed some natural rights (property), but reciproque and equal agreement among citizens and states which wish to recognize themselves mutually. It is not an own interest, but searching for rational recognition. The same as citizens, states also wish to reconcile themselves mutually, what in the situation in Kosovo and Metohia alike gets the original form.

The paper analyses the class basis of the civil society in Serbia in the period of post-socialist transformation. The analysis is based on data from several empirical studies implemented by the Institute for Sociological Research of the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade over the past twenty years, specifically in 1997, 2007 and 2012. The main objective of the analysis is to determine whether there is rootedness of civil society activities among the middle class. The basic hypothesis of the paper is that members of the middle class are the key actors of civil society in the entire period observed. Results of the analysis show that the members of the middle class have been holders of civil protests during the period of blocked transformation - almost the only phenomenal manifestation of the civil society in Serbia in the 1990s. On the other hand, research findings from 2007 and 2012 indicated a significant decline of civic activism among all social groups, and the decline was most marked precisely among the middle class. Although members of the middle class, compared with other social groups, were still more willing to engage in civic activities, data show that the differences between social classes were not especially marked, and therefore we can talk only conditionally about rootedness of civil society activities among the middle class.

Antonio Gramši posvetio je znatnu pažnju razmatranju kulturnih praksi i njihove funkcije u društveno-istorijskim procesima u svojim teorijskim spisima. Važan segment njegovog istraživanja predstavljala je i analiza umetnosti i književnosti modernog doba koju je na posredan način uključio u širu raspravu o problemu podesnosti istorijskog marksizma kao filozofske i društvene prakse, društvene moći i njene kulturne i istorijske pojavnosti, kulturne i političke emancipacije podređenih slojeva itd. Fokusirajući se u najvećoj meri na eksplikaciju sociokulturnih, političkih i istorijskih dimenzija italijanske književnost od renesansnog do modernističkog perioda, Gramši je razvio nacrt sopstvene verzije marksističke estetike, ponudivši specifična tumačenja problema društvene funkcije umetničkih praksi, prirode umetničkog stvaranja i umetničkog dela, kao i potrošnje umetničkih produkata. U ovom tekstu ćemo razmotriti Gramšijeve uvide o umetnosti u kontekstu njegovih obuhvatnih teorijskih, filozofskih i istorijskih ispitivanja sa namerom da na njihovoj osnovi izvedemo model za analizu muzičkih praksi modernog i postmodernog doba. Cilj takvog poduhvata je ispitivanje dometa / ograničenja gramšijevske analize muzike iz koga bi proistekao kritički osvrt na način primene ključnih koncepata ovog teoretičara u postojećim istraživanjima muzičkih pojava. ; Antonio Gramsci dedicated a lot of his attention in his writings to the analysis of the cultural practices and their function in the socio-historical processes. An important segment of his work included the analysis of art and literature of modern times which was indirectly incorporated into the discussion of the problem of usefulness of historical materialism as a philosophical and social practice, social power and its cultural and historical appearances, cultural and political emancipation of subaltern classes etc. Mostly focusing on the explication of socio-cultural, political and historical dimensions of Italian literature of Renaissance and the modern period, Gramsci elaborated a sketch of his own version of Marxist aesthetic proposing specific interpretations of the problem of social function of artistic practices, the nature of artistic action and artwork and the consumption of artistic artifacts. In this paper we will discuss Gramsci's thought on art in the context of his comprehensive theoretical, philosophical and historical research aiming at elaborating a Gramscian model of analysis of music practices of modern and postmodern times. One of our results should be the examination of the possibilities of the analysis of music based on Gramsci's theory as well as the critical review of the application of its main concepts in the existing body of research on music.

The Ministry of Science of the Republic of Croatia decided on a new "Rule book of definition of scientific areas". By the "Book", politology is a scientific field in the area of social sciences. The field is divided in three branches: 1. politology, 2. theory and history of politics, 3. political philosophy. The author of this article shows by documents how the "political science" is quite differently structured by IPSA and APSA, and describes 120 years of dominantly American development of "political science" and of professions of political scientists which brought out a recent new world standard with around 100 subdisciplines and areas of expertise which are structured in 8 fundamental disciplines: 1. political institutions, 2. political behaviour, 3. comparative politics, 4. internationa relations, 5. political theory, 6. public policy and public administration/management, 7. political economy, 8. political methodology. The author points out that a voluntaristic intervention in the definition of scientific areas could mean an attack on development of science, research organisation, renewal of teaching staff on University, and on academic education of political scientists, as well as on internationally comparable competence of Croatian experts, and Croatian democratic political thought and political culture in general. (SOI : PM: S. 240)