Minimal Justice and Regime Change in Brian Orend’s Political Ethics
The international team of authors from all over the world is united in the book by the disire to work out some practical guide lines against violence. Violence reigns supreme in our political and even daily life. Violence is the major threat to mankind. Nevertheless we do not really understand the scope of the threat. The book addresses the problem of violence from all possible perspectives. The major concern of the book is the practical applicability of nonviolence. The authors claim that our world can and should be nonviolent and that is the only possible way to save the planet and ourselves.
The legitimacy of NATO’s war against Serbia in March 1999 has been widely debated. In the previous chapter, Carl Ceulemans concludes that justice is on the side of NATO’s military campaign. But his analysis is not the only one possible within the framework of Just War Theory. In the following, a different analysis is presented. It shows that while operating within the framework of Just War Theory one can arrive at quite different conclusions from his.
In the Social Science, as different from the history of ideas, the steady preconception of viewing Hobbes as the philosopher who considered human to be a rational and selfish being exists. Such human beings in their natural condition set the war of all against all, but only the strong power can preserve them in the condition of peace. However true Hobbesian views as to the human relationships have almost nothing in common with these trivial suggestion. The article deals with some aspects of Hobbesian anthropology and his doctrine of the virtue. It is argued that the social order is represented by Hobbes as very agile and complex in its structure. At the first glance his philosophy could seem very legible and solely constructivist, designed as the triumph of coherence and implacable logic. At depth - it is not even contradictory, but the terrain of the questions without any answers.
The article deals with the problem of normative evaluation of war and mass violence. The doctrines of Realism, Pacifism, Militarism, Realism and Just War are the most widely used theoretical and normative tools of this evaluation and normative practice. The latest developments have brought the Just War theory to the fore. The peak of popularity of the Just War Theory may prove, nevertheless, to be its swan's song. The recent theoretical findings as well as the political applications of this ethical theory in Kosovo and Iraq, have proved to be somewhat less then adequate, to say the least. Theoretically it hovers uneasily in between Militarism and Pacifism, pragmatically it may work as a smoke screen for the most hideous forms of agression and an instrument of the wide scale information war. The author of this article is holding that we must not put aside the idea of the morally constrained war, it may be modified. The result of this modification may be entitled Necessary War doctrine. The necessary war differs significantly from the just war, it is closer to pacifism and less prone to theoretical critisism. The foundations of this doctrine has been laid by Russian philosopher Ivan Ilyin.
Hobbesian philosophy holds the attention of the researches up to now. The most discussable questions are the following ones: 1. Whether the philosophy of Hobbes is to be considered in relation to his physics and metaphysics or it is an autonomous area of contemplation? 2. Is the philosophy of Hobbes immanently intelligible, as a system of interrelated suppositions or it is to be interpreted out of the historical context of his published works? 3. Is his bellum omnium contra omnes merely an intellectual construction or this notion can be referred to the historical and universal facts of social life design?
The article deals with F. Kafka’s attitude to the First World War, reflected in his letters, diaries and prose.
Collection of articles is based on materials RUSO Conference October 26, 2013 and primarily focuses on different aspects of origin , course and consequences of the First World War. We investigate the approaching of the war , its relation in Russian and foreign historiography , problems of international relations of the era , the situation in the army and navy. The second major unit materials collection associated with the history of the Great Patriotic War. Considered moral questions of the political climate in the Soviet Union before and at the beginning of this war, the economy , the activities of individual units. Again referred to the exploits of heroes Panfilov . The collection also has special film Prutian campaign in 1711 , Russia's participation in the anti-Napoleonic wars , as well as a number of other problems of Russian history is closely connected with the history of some foreign countries . The collection is intended primarily for historians - researchers, university professors, as well as for all those interested in domestic history of modern and contemporary .
This important new book offers the first full-length interpretation of the thought of Martin Heidegger with respect to irony. In a radical reading of Heidegger's major works (from Being and Time through the ‘Rector's Address' and the ‘Letter on Humanism' to ‘The Origin of the Work of Art' and the Spiegel interview), Andrew Haas does not claim that Heidegger is simply being ironic. Rather he argues that Heidegger's writings make such an interpretation possible - perhaps even necessary.
Heidegger begins Being and Time with a quote from Plato, a thinker famous for his insistence upon Socratic irony. The Irony of Heidegger takes seriously the apparently curious decision to introduce the threat of irony even as philosophy begins in earnest to raise the question of the meaning of being. Through a detailed and thorough reading of Heidegger's major texts and the fundamental questions they raise, Haas reveals that one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century can be read with as much irony as earnestness. The Irony of Heidegger attempts to show that the essence of this irony lies in uncertainty, and that the entire project of onto-heno-chrono-phenomenology, therefore needs to be called into question.
The Eastern or Crimean War (1853–1856) phenomenon is the reflection of fundamental conflicts of the era: the clash of empires’ interests and emerging centers of capital – financial elites. The Crimean War can be referred as a protoworld war even by just considering the number of participants. The participants were not united by a common interest, but rather by a common rival. With the commencement of military actions, a common rival became a common enemy. Wars of such a scale usually occur in transitional phases of history, for example, a period of transition from political stability to political fragmentation, or vice versa. The Crimean War was related to the phase of the first type: it destroyed international political stability – the Vienna system, and opened the gate for political instability. The war had a chronocultural sense and this is one of the Crimean War’s secrets.
The article is concerned with the notions of technology in essays of Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger. The special problem of the connection between technology and freedom is discussed in the broader context of the criticism of culture and technocracy discussion in the German intellectual history of the first half of the 20th century.