Sorel 's Reflections on Violence is not a mere intellectual endeavor; rather, it is a revolutionary guideline. As Chiaria Bottici notes in A Philosophy of Political Myth, this Sorel 's text 'clearly has an activist intent: to develop a severe critique of the parliamentary socialists and their neglect of the primary role played by proletarian violence in history ' (Bottici 2007, 159). In Reflections on Violence Sorel tries to develop a specific revolutionary ethics which will be true to the genuine Marxism. He explicitly states that the task of his study is 'to deepen our understanding of moral conduct ' (Sorel 2004, 40). It is crucial that moral conduct is associated here with political practices and,
The Kant’s caution is that the possession of power inevitably corrupts the free judgment of reason, stands as a classic example of this view. It is important to grasp the notion of genealogy, as it has become crucial to many postmodern perspectives in International Relations. Genealogy is a style of historical thought which exposes and registers the significance of power–knowledge relations. Genealogy affirms a perspective which denies the capacity to identify origins and meanings in history objectively. A genealogical approach is anti-essentialist in orientation, affirming the idea that all knowledge is situated in a particular time and place and issues from a particular perspective.
Roland H. Stromberg (1990) emphasized that Burke considered the revolutionary ideas as philosophes’ mistakes. Political rationalists whose method was unrealistic, and plenty of abstraction (p. 36). Therefore, Burke not only adopted a counter-revolutionary attitude, but a counter-enlightenment one. The contrast between Burke’s favourable attitude to the American Revolution and his direct rejection of the French Revolution is unusual. That is why there is a desire to understand the reason behind this radical change.
According to him, the state is based on the authoritarian sovereignty - as it is in the classical defense of divine favor - monarchical sovereignty - and in the authoritarian sovereignty - which Hobbes is in Leviafhan - which is a lot of free from hegemony, on the contrary to the free union of the citizens. According to Rousseau, only such domination is prevalent . Contractual thought and the doctrine of sovereignty were developed during the period of religious wars and civil wars in Europe. They are the answer to the weaknesses of the social and political institutions that characterize this age, to unbridled authority, to wars and social miseries. According to him, sovereignty is indivisible and
For Kant, it is essentially social. There is also the influence of Rousseau on Kant. According to Rousseau, in a republic governs itself, its members are also both the source of the law and subject to the law. Kant uses the word “realm” to mean a “systematic union of different rational beings under common laws.” (4:434) And, those common laws are established by the categorical imperative. It is a requirement that we ought to act only according to principles that could be universal laws in a
Hegel knew the dangers of civil society, and saw it as a site of conflict and oppression, as an arena of self-interest and division. In his opinion, there is a need of the state to regulate society. Both the state and society depend upon each other, yet the relationship is conflictual and needs to be balanced. He explained the concept more in political and legal connotations than economic. He used the concept of civil society to explain a sphere that is distinct from the state.
Moreover, his major argument against the French Revolution was its foundation on abstract ideals, that although possibly desirable, could have problematic consequences of tyranny and disorder. Consequently, his work focuses on the values of tradition and gradual governmental change as an alternative to revolution. Now, while Burke makes a compelling case for tradition, I find his idea of
Goethe’s Rebellion Through Werther: An analysis on the works of Goethe indicates his rebellion against the Age of Enlightenment, and through the character of Werther and the surrounding cast uses the story as a cautionary tale of philosophical arguments posed in open disagreement during the Romantic Movement. Following the Age of Enlightenment and the introduction of the Industrial Revolution, the societal ramifications that not only occurred throughout Europe also bled into a number of intellectual aspects which evolved after Enlightenment thought - leading to the intellectual movement of Romanticism. As a rebellion against the radical rise of rationalism being applied to the world, while the new approaches to investigation, reasoning
In opposition to Divine Right of King for example, there arose in Europe the ideology of self-determination and self-government. It eventually replaced the ideology that had supported monarchial governments. In turn, it helped to justify the American and French Revolution and the development of a constitutional monarchy in Great Britain. The main and crucial point of discussion in any ideological system in any society is how it is maintained and built. Karl Marx was the one who first raised this question and claimed that “the idea of ruling class are in every epoch the ruling idea.
COMPARISON BETWEEN TO THOMAS HOPPES AND JOHN LOCKE VIEWS ON STATE OF NATURE Introduction Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and John Locke (1632-1704) were both political philosophers. They are mainly known for their master pieces on political philosophy. I.e. Hobbes' Leviathan and Locke's Two Treatise of Government. Each of them has different views and perspective of the State of Nature and Social Contract.