Abstract

The idea is considered that T. Hobbs’s “Leviathan” is not only a particular example and a representation of classical Western European thinking, but turns out to be some “metatheoretical” place, in which the very potentiated field of the opportunity of clarification, and very production of a social order problem, and, ambivalently – all socio-theoretical discourse is formed. According to the author, after T. Hobbes problems which are “strategic” for all modern theoretical sociology and which, at the same time, are constitutive for her can be put. What “art” – which is in the middle of the life, in the middle of human reality – can collect particular human existence in the uniform and coordinated been, acting for the benefit of all? How does it turn out in such a way that creation which “master”, according to Hobbes, is the person gains universal dimension? How is transition owing to which individual free figures get the lives unified way which substantially is represented the general state is carried out? Whether such a transition is possible? How to think of it? By what force on what basis, according to what principles, by the action of what algorithm, due to what structure small figures keep in borders of a body of the Leviathan? The solution which is proposed by Thomas Hobbes for a problem of social order – that is the public contract on the utilitarian basement – has, on the belief of the author, secondary value in the face of opening by Hobbes the matrix of the social-theoretical thinking. Thus, contradictions and discrepancies which can be found in the text by Gobbes, the author seeks to consider as “a point of growth of a discourse” and as fixing and registrations of potential opportunities of the discourse of social order, as well as the phenomenon of society itself.

Highlights

  • Contradictions and discrepancies which can be found in the text by Gobbes, the author seeks to consider as “a point of growth of a discourse” and as fixing and registrations of potential opportunities of the discourse of social order, as well as the phenomenon of society itself

  • Але якщо є партикулярні індивіди, то для того, щоб була спільнота, ми маємо очікувати приходу якогось Левіафану, хоча виглядати він може по-різному, наприклад, як «дворовий собака» анархізму, як «чихуахуа» ліберальної демократії чи як «мопс» відкритого суспільства

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Яке пропонує Томас Гоббс для проблеми соціального порядку – тобто суспільний договір на утилітарно-прагматистських підствах – має, за переконанням авторки, вторинне значення перед лицем відкриття Гоббсом (під час формулювання цього рішення) самої теоретикосоціальної матриці мислення. У «Левіафані» відкрито чудову можливість – причому, так би мовити, постійно діючу можливість – спостерігати емпіричну дію того, що називають «дискурс»; сам дискурс, відкритий Гоббсом, встановлює, що самозбереження, взяте тільки за наявності природного стану життя, нікого не зберігає, бо, по суті, виводить на конфлікт всередині самої природи людини – таке протиріччя не залишає надій на існування будь-якого сущого, зокрема, звичайно, і цього сущого!

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.