Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Hegemony
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
100%
PL
Wbrew szeroko rozpowszechnionemu ujęciu filozofii Blocha, w ramach którego określana jest ona jako „mistyczna”, „eschatologiczna”, „idealistyczna” itd.,niniejszy tekst pokazuje, że najlepszą drogą interpretacji tej myśli jest jej interpretacja przez pryzmat marksistowskiej filozofii praktycznej. Podobnie jak Labriola i Gramsci, Bloch rozwija swoje pojęcie materializmu w oparciu o Marksowskie Tezy o Feuerbachu. Jego koncepcje „najwyższego dobra” i „techniki sojuszu” podejmują perspektywę pojednania pomiędzy ludźmi i naturą, bliską młodemu Marksowi; jego teoria antycypacji i nadziei skupia się na rozwoju kolektywnych możliwości działania; nawet jego „ontologia jeszcze-nie”, często krytykowana za teleologiczność, jest tak naprawdę oparta na pojęciu „otwartych możliwości” i tym samym może być interpretowana w ramach „słabej siły teleologicznej” przynależącej ludzkiej sprawczości. Niemniej jednak z perspektywy praktyczno-filozoficznej widać, że filozofia Blocha musi również zostać przemyślana na nowo w sposób, który uporałby się z jej esencjalistycznymi założeniami i zróżnicowałby jej teleologię.
EN
Contrary to the widespread portrayal of Bloch’s philosophy as “mystical,” “eschatological,” “idealistic” etc., the essay shows that it is best interpreted through the framework of a Marxist philosophy of praxis. Similarly, to Labriola and Gramsci, Bloch develops his concept of materialism from Marx’s Theses on Feuerbach. His concepts of the “highest good” and of an “alliance technique” take up young Marx’s perspective of a reconciliation between humans and nature; his theory of anticipation and hope is centered on the development of collective capacities to act; even his “ontology of the not yet,” which is often criticized for its teleology, is actually based on the concept of “open possibilities” and can thus be interpreted in terms of the “weak teleological force of open possibilities.” However, from a praxis-philosophical perspective, Bloch’s philosophy is also in need of a rethinking that overcomes its essentialist presumptions and pluralizes its teleology.
EN
“15 years of DTA” event reflected the role of DT since the publication of “Bringing discourse theory into media studies”.
EN
Some of the most promising post-Cold War developments in Marxian thought have been stimulated by problems facing Marxists in Western Europe, to that extent they all seem to lay bare, intentionally or otherwise, the lacking of qualities, of Marx’s prediction. The most significant example of the failure of Marxist theory to be realised in practice is the persistent survival of the capitalist mode of production. The inevitable crisis foreseen by Marx, which would lead to revolution, failed to materialise and that claim is now itself historical, since capitalism has become the norm for social organisation in most of the world’s nations. By asking the question how capitalism can persist amid crisis, Gramsci, provided the most promising way of revision to the stunted Marxian orthodoxy. Today for us is important to ask whether Marxist analysis of neoliberal global strategy or globalisation and fragmentation invite reconsideration of the tendency on the part of many international relations scholarships to ignore and simply dismiss Marxism. It is also important to consider whether the significance of Marxist project of developing a critical approach to international politics, is but one way in which Marxism progressed beyond the traditional Anglo-American scholarship to IR.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.