Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Hegel's three methods of history
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Hegel and The Libertarians
ABSTRACT: This paper aims to show how the Hegelian philosophy can contribute to the conceptual discussions between the two strains of contemporary ethical-political philosophy. I argue that the Hegelian political theory is of central import to the discussion between communitarians and libertarians, both in the communitarian criticism of the libertarian — mainly in Michael Sandel's criticism of Rawls — and in the Rawlsian project of a society founded in justice as equality. For if the communitarians' theoretical basis is the living of a community in terms of historical-social values, and the individualists' deontological rationality is the basis for the libertarians, Hegel's pointing to a synthetic resolution of the two positions provides a moral foundation for their harmonious coexistence. This does not, however, mean that there is one simple ideological solution that can unite the universal and the particular, the community and the individual, through artificial dialectics, as the critics of Hegelian thought would affirm following the Frankfurt School.
This present text aims to show how the Hegelian philosophy can contribute to the conceptual discussions between the two strains of the contemporary ethical-political philosophy. In our view, both the communitarians and the libertarians still need to pass through the Hegelian conceptual skeleton to bear the organized societies'ethical-political matters within the considered democratic standards.
Hegel, although still holds the blemish of a Absolute State's thinker, not democratic, in his work, mainly in what refers to the "Philosophy of the Right", makes possibles the deepening of the investigations for authors like Rawls, who worries about questi...
... middle of paper ...
...nal). Paris. Aubier, 1994.
________________. Philosophical Arguments. Harvard. Harvard University Press, 1995.
Tilliette, Xavier. L'intution Intellectuelle de Kant á Hegel. Vrin. Paris, (1995).
Walzer, Michael. "Philosophy and Democracy". In: Political Theory 9 (1981).
________________. Spheres of Justice. Oxford, Basil Blackwell, (1983).
________________. "Liberalism and the Art of Separation". In: Political Theory 12, 3 (1984).
________________. Interpretation and Social Criticism. Cambrigde. Harvard University, (1987).
________________. The Company of Critics. Londres. Peter Halban, (1989).
Wolff, R. P. Understanding Rawls. A Reconstruction and Critique of "A Theory of Justice". Princeton, Princeton University Press, (1977).
Wylleman, A. (ed.). Hegel on the Ethical Life Religion and Philosphy. Louvain. Louvain University Press, (1989).
Abadinsky, Howard. Law and Justice: An Introduction to the American Legal System. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2008. Print.
The First Crusade was a widely appealing armed pilgrimage, and mobilized a vast conquering force at a time when the Christian Church was moving towards centralization and greater political influence in Europe. The Church gained a wider audience more accepting of its leadership, benefitted economically, and developed its own militarily force. These outcomes, along with the Church’s documented ambition to expand and its reversal of prior teachings, support the idea that the First Crusade was a deliberate political maneuver, intended to to expand and consolidate the authority of the
The New Elite, or Chapter 1, is where Khan introduces the idea of the new elite appearing at St. Paul’s. The new elite, according to Khan, believes that they achieve what they do because of their hard work. On the other hand, the old elite, that is slowly disappearing, believes they achieve their success because of their family ...
The Kurds and the Palestinians are two nations that are knowingly similar in their struggle for independence, yet every one of them has a unique, different history toward this struggle. These two cases initially began in the earls of the 20th century, after WWI, with the history of these nations dating way further than that. Britain was indirectly responsible, with France, for starting these dilemmas in the Middle Eastern region which remain unsolved until our days.
Compare John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau all dealt with the issue of political freedom within a society. John Locke's “The Second Treatise of Government”, Mill's “On Liberty”, and Rousseau’s “Discourse On The Origins of Inequality” are influential and compelling literary works which, while outlining the conceptual framework of each thinker’s ideal state, present divergent visions of the very nature of man and his freedom. The three have somewhat different views regarding how much freedom man ought to have in political society because they have different views regarding man's basic potential for inherently good or evil behavior, as well as the ends or purpose of political societies. In order to examine how each thinker views man and the freedom he should have in a political society, it is necessary to define freedom or liberty from each philosopher’s perspective.
This paper briefly looked at the structure of Nagel’s overall argument and then outlined and analyzed the part of his argument where it seems inconsistent.
The aim of this essay is to prove the reliability of and why Libertarianism is the most coherent of the three views, which refers to the idea of human free will being true, that one is not determined, and therefore, they are morally responsible. In response to the quote on the essay, I am disagreeing with Wolf. This essay will be further strengthened with the help of such authors as C.A. Campell, R. Taylor and R.M. Chisholm. They present similar arguments, which essentially demonstrate that one could have done otherwise and one is the sole author of the volition. I will present the three most common arguments in support of Libertarianism, present an objection against Libertarianism and attempt to rebut it as well as reject one main argument from the other views. As a result, this essay will prove that one is held morally responsibly for any act that was performed or chosen by them, which qualify as a human act.
Culver, Keith Charles. Readings in the philosophy of law. 1999. Reprint. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press, 2008. Print.
Kung, Hans. The Incarnation of God: An Introduction to Hegel's Theological Thought As Prolegomena to a Future Christology. T&T Clark, 2001. hard cover.
The crusades is a time when radical religion took that what is good and turned it to evil. The crusaders were attacks by Christians against the Muslims to reclaim the holy lands. These attacks were motivated by a speech given by Pope Urban. Pope Urban took his power as the Pope and misused it to encourage the Christians to attack the Muslims. He told the Christians that the Muslims were bad people and made-up a lot of false things they had done. Pope Urban also took a positive part of the Christian religion in going to heaven and turned used it make the Christians do evil things. Pope Urban told the Christians they would be given eternal life if they killed Muslims. Pope Urban used the positive Christian idea of believe in a central figure and used it for his own gain. He claimed that God wanted the Christians to attack and they would be rewarded if they did. This shows that Pope Urban’s
Rawls creates a hypothetical society, via a thought experiment known as the “Veil of Ignorance,” in which all that you knew of yourself is eliminated from your mind to allow you to come to a rational decision on how you would like your society to be organized. Rawls principle is that under a social contract what is right must be the same for everyone. The essence of Rawls' “veil of ignorance” is that it is designed to be a representation of persons purely in their capacity as free and equal moral persons. Out of this experiment Rawls provides us with two basic p...
The Crusades were a series attacks against the Muslim people in Jerusalem in an effort to take back the Holy Land. The causes of the Crusades are highly debated, but religious devotion is the obvious cause for Pope Urban the Second to call upon the Crusades. The religious reasons that lead to the creation of the Crusades is that the Christians wanted to take back Jerusalem, add another reason. The economical and political reasons that could oppose the religious reasons are that the Crusades were caused because people wanted to gain more riches and possessions and that Pope Urban wanted to protect the Byzantine empire from the Seljuk Turks. Although the economical and political reasons were the causes of the Crusades, the religious reasons
Spanning from 1095 to 1212 C.E, the Crusades were an effort made by medieval Christians to regain their holy lands back from the Muslims. There were five crusades in total going in order from the First Crusade to the Children's Crusade. A few were effective in their own respects although these Crusades proved costly to the European Kingdoms as a result of large losses of life. This paper will explore these crusades and explain why some succeeded whereas others failed.
In order for the crusades to begin, the Christians needed to gather an army to travel and fight the forces of Muslims. With all the power being held by monarchies at this time, the church needed to be cleaver in order to gain troops to put their lives on the line. To gain the support of these warriors and dedication of men, Pope Urban II (1088-1099) challenged those morals of men by telling them to grab their weapons and join the holy war to recover the land of Jerusalem. It was not the challenge that convinced men to take part in this war. The promise of “immediate remission of sins” attracted the men to stand up for their religion and beliefs while at the same time, promising them a trip to heaven when life comes to an end. With this statement, men instantly prepared for battle which in a very short period of time gave the church power which has been held by the monarchies. Men of rich and poor prepared for battle, some wearing ...
Toni Morrison is one of the leading Afro-American writers who addressed the position of the African Americans in the pre-slavery and post slavery periods. She was concerned with the way Black individuals and communities were expressive or silenced within a dominant culture which has been intolerant of the racial difference. She knew fully well that everything was not well with America. She was aware of the identity crisis faced by the Blacks in America. Therefore, she tried her best to defend her race, protest against racial discrimination and glorify her culture and tradition.