«Ведомости Парнасские» Т. Боккалини и их русские читатели: к вопросу о влиянии республиканских идей в России первой трети XVIII века
Present article is focused upon two samples of Early-Modern «civil sciences»: rhetorical inquiry dealing with contingency (so called «rhetorica primaria»), and mathesis politica, traditionally referring in intellectual context of the Early Enlightenment to Descartes. Special attention is paid to the famous «new sciences», which are considered in the secondary literature as antithetical: Giambattista Vico’s scienza nuova and Thomas Hobbes scientia civilis. Drawing upon almost unknown 17th century Dutch political writings, the study examines the ways of reception of Thomas Hobbes’ civil science conceived as a rhetorical inquiry. The author also explores G. Vico alternative to Hobbes’ constructionist theoretical style.
In his «Five memoirs on public instruction» the French politician and philosopher of the Age of Revolution, Marquis Nicolas de Condorcet formulated the basic ideas of his five-levels educational model. This article focuses on its impact on school reform implemented by Jules Ferry in the 1880s. It argues that it was Condorcet, who developed the republican model of public education, which proved to be pioneering for post-revolutionary era and which retains its value nowadays. Condorcet’s plan was to create an educational system in which every citizen would have an opportunity to receive education – from primary to higher levels – free of charge. The one and only criterion for selection to pass to the new educational level should be the natural abilities and talents of a given person. To what extent these ambitious ideas of Condorcet were implemented by his followers? And what should be the role of the state in education of a new man?
This paper is a review of the recent Russian translation of Philip Pettit’s 1997 book “Republicanism”. The Russian translation comes to light on the wake of the global political shift, which compels to re-evaluate the shares of realism and idealism in the republican theory. The discussion of the book itself is preceded by a review of Pettit’s many contributions to analytic philosophy. In Russia, understanding of Pettit’ philosophical republicanism is complicated due to low familiarity of the audience with the normative approach to politics in general. This may result in overrating the republican criticism of liberalism; it is more appropriate to speak about republicanism correcting or upgrading, than refuting liberalism. A purely logical demonstration of the priority of the republican concept of freedom as non-domination over the liberal concept of freedom as non-interference is hardly possible. Rather the difference between liberalism and republicanism points to their disagreement over the nature of the underlying political reality: whereas liberalism distrusts the state and the “big government”, republicanism embraces it. Pettit’s version of republicanism is a normative theory, which strategically seeks to translate political agendas of various groups into the common republican language. The principle of nondomination functions as the touchstone of normalization for the political spaces. The pluralistic ontology of the republicanism excludes every kind of metaphysical unities, from the indivisibility of the sovereignty to the individuality of the isolated citizen, considering them to be potential sources of domination. The book remains silent about the role of philosophy in politics, as well as about the power of the normative reason in the community, where it enjoys prioritization over direct democracy and majority rule. Finally, “the people” itself emerges in the process of the appropriate republican education.
This book deals with the problem of method in the early modern civil sciences – from the Hermann Conring “statistics” to the Giambattista Vico's “new science”, from the Tacitean political art to the Thomas Hobbes' mathesis politica. The study is focused upon the birth of the political science out of the failure of the humanist ethics and traditional Aristotelianism, and the attempts to overcome the “discursive anarchy” (V. Kahn) in the political theory. The authors of the book demonstrate the ways the central events in the early modern intellectual history – the birth of the scientific fact and the principle of objectivity, the penetration of the mathematical apparatus in the humanities – influenced the Barock political thought, and analyze the pivotal categories of the modern politics – state of exception, reason of State, manipulation – are put forward.
We address the external effects on public sector efficiency measures acquired using Data Envelopment Analysis. We use the health care system in Russian regions in 2011 to evaluate modern approaches to accounting for external effects. We propose a promising method of correcting DEA efficiency measures. Despite the multiple advantages DEA offers, the usage of this approach carries with it a number of methodological difficulties. Accounting for multiple factors of efficiency calls for more complex methods, among which the most promising are DMU clustering and calculating local production possibility frontiers. Using regression models for estimate correction requires further study due to possible systematic errors during estimation. A mixture of data correction and DMU clustering together with multi-stage DEA seems most promising at the moment. Analyzing several stages of transforming society’s resources into social welfare will allow for picking out the weak points in a state agency’s work.