Furthermore, would creating one authoritarian organisation enable democracy or rather destroy it? Would reducing the political actors be a democratization practice after all? We can see where the argument of not desirability enters along with non-feasibility. Last but not least as Archibugi (1998) reasons in the book ‘Re-Imagining Political Community: Studies In Cosmopolitan Democracy’ “there is no actual guarantee that the greater coordination in world politics will be informed by the values of
MODERN ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY TERM PAPER ASSIGNMENT I.D 10459836 QUESTION 3. ACCORDING TO STARWSON, RUSSELL’S THEORY OF DESCRIPTIONS “EMBODIES SOME FUNDAMENTAL MISTAKES “ DISCUSS SOME OF THE OBJECTIONS RAISED AGAINST RUSSELL’S THEORY OF DESCRIPTIONS. HOW COULD ONE DEFEND RUSSELL AGAINST THESE OBJECTIONS BY STRAWSON? Strawson in his paper “On Referring” argues in relation to Bertand Russell’s theory of description. Strawson argues that expressions do not refer to themselves but instead people refer when they are using expressions.
In his Meditations on First Philosophy, French philosopher René Descartes proposes the concept of the cogito as an incontrovertible basis for his metaphysical system. This essay will explain the nature of Descartes’s cogito, assess his argument for the concept and its implications, and evaluate its merit as the “one thing, however slight, that is certain and unshakeable” he so desired. This essay will begin with an explanation of the principle of cogito ergo sum and a gloss of Descartes’s argument for its veracity. The essay will then examine the cogito’s implications with regards to what it dictates about the nature of one’s existence, and what it can and cannot determine about that existence. This paper will then conclude with an evaluation
Two essential lines of expostulations permeate this focus. Firstly, there is the assertion that Skepticism contradicts itself. A true Skeptic cannot possibly assent to a doctrine or system, and by this notion, cannot engage in any form of explicitness. Whatever a Skeptic may intend to state would contradict his or her own sense. The Skeptic must engage in a life out of the sphere of discourse only to let the philosophers guide discussion that may influence the State whether they or by proxy of other members of the political class.
However, as a counterargument, his intent could be considered to not be neutral, as he clearly makes a statement on how knowledge should be perceived; based on sense perception and reasoning as ways of knowing only, and his way of leading a discussion, with language as a way of knowing might influence the public. Language as a way of knowing can consist many flaws, as the speaker can produce an idea using certain words, influencing the listeners, and thus, neutrality is hard to find in speeches and discussions, as there will always be preconceived ideas. We can look at another example: the Socratic method. Socrates designed a method of finding knowledge through discussion, and through accepting that he had no knowledge of anything whatsoever. By acknowledging this, it
Instead, Derrida attempts to deconstruct, or uncover, hidden differences that underlie logocentrism. At the heart of the notion of logocentrism is the silencing of voices by intellectual elites in the creation of the dominant discourse. Derrida argues for a decentering, so that previously excluded or silenced voices may contribute. While the ultimate result of this is unclear, Derrida privileges a movement away from any sort of silencing, a movement away from the fallacy of universal truth, and movement towards a society characterized by participation, play, and difference. Michel Foucault Perhaps the most recognizable figure associated with poststructuralism is Michel Foucault(1937-1984).
Below some of Marx criticism of this idea by different scholars in discussed. “Both Marx and Hegel agree that the separation of the state from civil society is a paradox that needs to be resolved. However, Marx rejects Hegel 's explanation that puts an institutional order between the state as ethical agency and civil society as the sphere of private interests. Marx 's views, then, are in contrast to Hegel 's in explicitly seeking to resolve the state-society separation on the level of society as the true reality of human beings. Marx sought to realise 'the essence of socialised man ' in what he called a 'true democracy”.
Kenneth Waltz attempted to explain a structural realist perspective about anarchic structure. He argues that due to the absence of a international governing body, states should actively pursue conflict in order to ensure their own survival. He goes on to use economic concepts to describe his viewpoint of the anarchical structure of international politics. He says, “The market arises out of the activities of separate units--persons and firms--whose aims and efforts are directed not toward creating order but rather fulfilling their own internally defined interests by whatever means they can muster”(Waltz, 52). This supports the realist argument that states operate based on self interest and, contrasting with Wendt, do not consider their identities within the international system.
This concept sets politics as a unique sphere of action, a total opposite to economics. Which in this case, it is understood in terms of wealth, and other spheres like, ethics, aesthetics or religion. These examples are different from politics because motives, preferences, intellectualness, and moral qualities are nonexistent questions in a definition of interest. Morgenthau states against two similar misapprehensions, first is the ability to understand the statesmen’s motives. Motives aren’t always dependent on the actual policy, or the results of policy.
Postmodernism is a political ideology that traditional ideologies put forward as ideas that stand independently, but these truths lack an objective bias. Postmodern perspectives contain an ideology that put absolute statements as timeless truths, which should be viewed with profound skepticism. A postmodernism perspective suggests that the older ideologies were put forward as metanarratives, meaning, these neutral descriptions are portraying a set of independently existing truths and therefore any perspective at odds with such descriptions was dismissible as biased, self-interested, subjective, and misleading. Postmodern theorist, Jean-Francois Lyotard explained that postmodernism calls into question metanarratives is any system of thought