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

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  political dissent
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The question addressed by this article regards the meaning of sacrifice within the framework of Jan Patočka’s philosophy. Is human sacrifice aimed at reinforcing an institution or state of things as in the case of the Unknown Soldier narrative, or is it rather – as Patočka maintained – an essentially destabilizing deed, which has the power to shatter people’s knowledge and existence? In order to answer this question, I contrast Patočka’s standpoint with those of Émile Durkheim and of the main representatives of the so-called “sacred sociology”: Roger Caillois, Georges Bataille and other members of the Collège de sociologie. In conclusion, I show how Patočka’s approach to the theme of sacrifice helps us to understand if, and how, a “proper sacrifice” can actually become an instrument of political dissent within human societies.
DE
Die vorliegende Studie befasst sich mit der Bedeutung des Opfers im Werk Jan Patočkas. Dient das Opfer der Festigung von Institutionen bzw. der Erhaltung des Status quo wie im Falle des Mythos vom Unbekannten Soldaten? Oder ist das Opfer, wie Patočka behauptet, eher eine durch und durch destabilisierende Tat, die die Macht hat, die menschliche Erkenntnis und Existenz selbst zu erschüttern? Zur Beantwortung dieser Fragen wird ein Vergleich des Ansatzes von Patočka mit den Interpretationen des Opferbegriffs bei Émile Durkheim und den Vertretern der sog. „heiligen Soziologie“ vorgelegt (z. B. Roger Cailloise, Georges Bataille und weiteren Vertretern der Collège de sociologie). Ziel dieser Studie ist es aufzuzeigen, auf welche Art und Weise Patočkas Opferbegriff, insbesondere der Tat des authentischen Opfers „im eigentlichen Sinne“, ein Werkzeug des politischen Widerstands in der Gesellschaft sein kann.
EN
The paper discusses the clash between State Security (Státní bezpečnost) and political dissent during Czechoslovak normalisation, or rather one of its aspects: the expert knowledge that both sides used in the conflict. While State Security was making an effort to improve in the field of psychology and also in its use of technology, especially during surveillance, the dissidents gradually acquired a perfect knowledge of the Czechoslovak legal system, which helped them to defend themselves, at least to some extent, against the harassment by the security apparatus. The paper discusses the approaches taken by both sides as well as how they actually worked in practice.
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.