Abstract

The art of beautiful speech has its origins in the ancient Greek tradition. In sophistic discussions of justice and truth, eloquence played a notable role. Plato did not deny the importance of the art of persuasion, but he pointed out the difference between the knowledge provided by philosophy and the belief that is a consequence of persuasion. Therefore, the authors try to shed light on whether rhetoric is a morally neutral skill with a great ability to relativize. In this sense, Kelsen's critique of the natural law concepts of justice and truth are considered. Due to the impossibility of their absolute determination, Kelsen emphasized the fateful significance of theological teachings and rhetoric that convinced people of the existence of the one and only value system that is the basis of all norms. Thus, it turned out that rhetoric was extremely important for natural law, but its significance is even greater today. The changes brought by the modern age, among which a special place is occupied by endangering the privacy of citizens due to the collecting personal data and strengthening the culture of surveillance, especially emphasize the need to use the finest tuned rhetorical elements. Convincing the existence of absolute norms turned into convincing the need for perpetual surveillance of citizens in order to ensure their survival. Therefore, the authors conclude that rhetoric is a morally neutral skill with great potential for everyday (mis)use and that in the current circumstances it has an advantage over philosophical considerations about absolute values. At the same time, the authors point out that such an abuse of the art of persuasion will lead to the other extremity from which people will seek a way out by returning to philosophy.

Highlights

  • Ме­ђу­тим, да ли је упра­во Кел­зе­но­ва кри­ти­ка ис­та­кла нај­ве­ћи зна­чај ре­тор­ и­ке за при­ род­но пра­во и да ли је та­ква по­ве­за­ност ути­ца­ла на ја­ча­ње при­род­ног пра­ва и уло­ге ре­то­ри­ке на­кон не­во­ља ко­је је иза­звао на­ци­о­нал­со­ци­ја­ли­стич­ки прав­ни по­зи­ти­ви­зам? Кел­зе­но­во уче­ње о при­род­но­прав­ном од­ре­ђе­њу прав­де и исти­не и уло­гу ре­то­ри­ке у том за­дат­ку, во­ди­ло је ка са­вре­ме­ним ис­тра­жи­ ва­њи­ма о др­жа­ви на­ци­о­нал­ног над­зо­ра

  • Упр­кос то­ме, Бал­кин не до­во­ди у пи­та­ње по­ сто­ја­ње др­жа­ве на­ци­о­нал­ног над­зо­ра, већ ње­но огра­ни­ча­ва­ње устав­ним ак­ти­ма

  • Ke­rr, Orin S., „The Na­ti­o­nal Sur­ve­il­lan­ce Sta­te: A Re­spon­se to Bal­kin”, Min­ne­so­ta Law Re­vi­ew 6/2009

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Ме­ђу­тим, да ли је упра­во Кел­зе­но­ва кри­ти­ка ис­та­кла нај­ве­ћи зна­чај ре­тор­ и­ке за при­ род­но пра­во и да ли је та­ква по­ве­за­ност ути­ца­ла на ја­ча­ње при­род­ног пра­ва и уло­ге ре­то­ри­ке на­кон не­во­ља ко­је је иза­звао на­ци­о­нал­со­ци­ја­ли­стич­ки прав­ни по­зи­ти­ви­зам? Кел­зе­но­во уче­ње о при­род­но­прав­ном од­ре­ђе­њу прав­де и исти­не и уло­гу ре­то­ри­ке у том за­дат­ку, во­ди­ло је ка са­вре­ме­ним ис­тра­жи­ ва­њи­ма о др­жа­ви на­ци­о­нал­ног над­зо­ра.

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.