The main thesis I put forward in this article is that the democratic theory needs an anthropological perspective which defines the human in plurality and signifies the pos-sibility of achieving a fully inclusive rational consensus. I argue that a model of democ-racy in terms of cosmopolitan anthropology can help us to better envision the main challenge facing universal norms and principles today. How to create democratic forms of living together? I think we can answer this question by interpreting Hannah Arendt’s theory of political action on a philosophical anthropological basis. It is common knowledge that Hannah Arendt is suspicious of ethics and warns that ethics and con-science alone cannot produce the conditions for peace. In the present paper, I examine Arendt’s philosophical project together with Kant’s philosophical anthropology and try to demonstrate its importance for plurality and living together in peace.
The article concerns the effects of which brought Poland to participate in missions in Afghanistan and Iraq. The basic problem analysis is whether in the case of these operations, we are dealing with missions or from participation in the war? This distinction carries serious legal consequences, organizational and economic. From the presented content begs the conclusion that the economic effects are negligible in relation to expenditures and casualties.
Starting from the premise that some form of "reality transcendence", i.e. the ability to imagine a different reality and reach out for the (un)thinkable, is necessary for political action, the aim of this paper is to analyse the concepts of myth and utopia elaborated by Georges Sorel and Karl Mannheim and to examine their possible contributions to a theory of political action and social change. By comparing the role the authors assign to rationality and irrationality in human affairs, methodological and conceptual differences between Sorel's and Mannheim's approaches to the political are illustrated. It turns out that due to its immunity to critique Sorel's concept of the social myth is highly problematic. Mannheim's concept of utopia, on the other hand, culminates in a technocratic understanding of the political. Though both approaches emphasise the collective dimension of political action, they ultimately exhibit elitist understandings of the political.
Zmarły w 1983 roku Raymond Aron był i pozostał ikoną socjologicznej analizy rzeczywistości politycznej. Jego dzieła naukowe, jak i komentarze są do dzisiaj przykładami mistrzowskiej oceny społeczno-ekonomicznej we Francji, Europie i na poziomie stosunków międzynarodowych. W dobie kryzysu wiarygodności nauk społecznych warto pochylić się nad metodą francuskiego socjologa, która – z perspektywy trzydziestu lat – zapewniała trafność jego spostrzeżeń naukowych, a i jemu pozwoliła zachować elitarność naukowca-intelektualisty. W polskiej socjologii odczuwalny jest brak opracowań opisujących aronowską socjologię polityki.
EN
Raymond Aron, who died in 1983, was and remains an icon of sociological analysis of political reality. His academic work, as well as political commentaries, are considered today to be examples of an outstanding socio-economic assessment of French, European and World politics. While facing the current crisis of the credibility of social science, it is necessary to contemplate methods of analysis applied by Aron who – judging thirty years on – provided accurate observations and retained the elitism of a public intellectual. There is a lack of enhanced studies on Aron's political sociology concepts in Polish sociology.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.