Library
|
Your profile |
Philosophy and Culture
Reference:
Vorobyev M.V
The problem of social violence in
philosophy of the Russian Neo-Kantians
// Philosophy and Culture.
2016. ¹ 8.
P. 1099-1106.
URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=67996
Vorobyev M.V The problem of social violence in philosophy of the Russian Neo-KantiansAbstract: This article examines the practical philosophy of the Russian Neo-Kantian scientists P. I. Novgorodtsev, B. P. Vysheslavtsev, B. A. Kistyakovsky, and A. L. Saketti, for the purpose of determination of their attitude towards the problem of violence. The author attempts to designate the content of the problem of violence, clarify the specificity of the Neo-Kantian relation to it through the analysis of the texts of Russian Neo-Kantians. As an additional task, the author also explores the question on correlation between the Neo-Kantian problematics of violence and the corresponding views of I. Kant. During the course of this research it has been determined that the Russian NeoKantian scholars in their works touch upon three types of violence: legal compulsion, in which Neo-Kantians discuss the question of guarantees of legitimacy of compulsion and its conditions; extralegal, towards which Neo-Kantians hold a critical position; and foreign policy violence (war) – in this regard, the orientation towards overcoming is being formulated. The Russian Neo-Kantians believe that the main path in elimination of negative consequences of the social antagonisms that are present in human society lies in realization of the legal ideal, embodied in a legal state, which can be compared to Kant’s position Keywords: Russian Neo-Kantianism, problem of violence, practical philosophy, legal compulsion, revolution, war, Kantians.
This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article
References
1. Sakketti A.L. Pravo i nauka prava // Yuridicheskii vestnik. 1916 g. ¹ 16. Kn. XVI (IV). S. 5-37.,Shtol'tsenberg Yu. Pravo i moral'. Paul' Natorp i interpretatsiya Borisom Vysheslavtsevym Kanta i Fikhte // Neokantianst'vo nemetskoe i russkoe: mezhdu teoriei poznaniya i kritikoi kul'tury. Pod red. I.N. Griftsovoi, N.A. Dmitrievoi. M.: Rossiiskaya politicheskaya entsiklopediya, 2010. S. 317–327.,Sakketti A.L. Gosudarstvo i narodnost' // Yuridicheskii vestnik. 1915 g. Kn. XII (IV). S. 5-16.,Novgorodtsev P.I. Pravo na dostoinoe chelovecheskoe sushchestvovanie // Novgorodtsev P.I., Pokrovskii I.A. O prave na sushchestvovanie. Sotsial'no-filosofskie etyudy. SPb.; M.: t-vo M.O. Vol'f, 1911. S. 3-13.,Novgorodtsev P.I. Ob obshchestvennom ideale. M.: «Pressa», «Voprosy filosofii», 1991. 640 s.,Novgorodtsev P.I. Kant i Gegel' v ikh ucheniyakh o prave i gosudarstve: dva tipicheskikh postroeniya v oblasti filosofii prava. M.: Univ. tip., 1901. 245 s.,Mikhailovskii A.V. Dva literaturnykh svidetel'stva o Velikoi voine // Voprosy filosofii. 2015. ¹ 10. S. 106-111.,Kistyakovskii B.A. Izbrannoe: v 2-kh ch. / Sost., avtor vstup. st. i komment. A.N. Medushevskii. Ch. 1. M.: Rossiiskaya politicheskaya entsiklopediya (ROSSPEN), 2010. 656 s.,Kistyakovskii B.A. Izbrannoe: v 2-kh ch. / Sost., avtor vstup. st. i komment. A.N. Medushevskii. Ch. 2. M.: : Rossiiskaya politicheskaya entsiklopediya (ROSSPEN), 2010. 376 s.,Kant I. Spor fakul'tetov // Kant I. Sobranie sochinenii v vos'mi tomakh. Pod obshch. red. A.V. Gulygi. T.7. M., 1994. S. 57-136.,Zhuchkov B.A. O tak nazyvaemom «revolyutsionnom paradokse» Kanta // Kantovskii sbornik. 1990. ¹ 1 (15). S. 32-38.,Vysheslavtsev B.P. Etika Fikhte. Osnovy prava i nravstvennosti v sisteme transtsendental'noi filosofii. M.: Pechatnya A. Snegirevoi, 1914. 437 s.,Dmitrieva N.A. Filosofiya kak nauka i mirovozzrenie: k voprosu o patsifizme v nemetskom i russkom neokantianstve // Logos. 2013. ¹ 2 (92). S. 138-154.,Dmitrieva N.A. «Vechnyi mir» I. Kanta na rubezhe vekov i v period Pervoi mirovoi voiny // Prepodavatel' – XXI vek. 2014. T. 1. ¹ 2. S. 46-61.,Dmitrieva N.A. «Filosofiya gumanizma i prosveshcheniya»: kriterii, spetsifika, problematika russkogo neokantianstva // Filosofskie nauki. 2007. ¹ 1. S. 101-119.
|