blog




  • Essay / My attitude towards political philosophy

    This lecture was very interesting, but at the same time not very confusing for me. I have read additional literature to develop my views on this topic. I found Descartes' expressions on God, humans and the soul very interesting. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get an original essayThe only existence of which I am sure is my own, that is, the existence of my mind, of my soul and my thoughts, while the being of the entire material world (and my own body) remains in doubt. We do not have conclusive data confirming the veracity of our sensations. It may simply be the result of our imagination. However, according to the philosophy of Descartes, there is one of our ideas that we have not been able to create ourselves, and which we must instead recognize as given, because it contains a more complete reality than that which we find in ourselves- same. And I agree with Descartes that this is the idea of ​​God - the most perfect being, the unlimited being, directly opposed to the sense of limitation of our own being and therefore inspired by God himself , inherent in us before any experience, like the idea we have about ourselves. It was very interesting to see how we can apply philosophy to politics. This is the first time I was confronted with the term political philosophy. Thomas Hobbes played an important role in establishing political philosophy. Thomas Hobbes defended the idea of ​​​​the asociality of the person, according to which man by nature is not a social being, because, from his point of view, "... civil societies are not simple assemblies, but alliances for the creation of which treaties and loyalty are necessary. necessary." To form a civil society, "natural sociality" is not enough. We should examine Hobbes's position more carefully; it expresses the radical nature of the Hobbesian model of the natural state. In a natural state, a person is free in the sense that no act will be considered unjust towards anyone, because in a natural state there are neither civil nor "divine" laws. In such a natural state, it is simply impossible to either. sin against God, nor commit crimes From the point of view of T. Hobbes, when creating the institution of the state, people sacrifice their natural rights, and from the moment of creation, only l. The state is considered the only person authorized to solve the problem of preserving society, its stability and tranquility. Thus, T. Hobbes formulates the main goal of the state - to protect the life and property of people. members of society, using for this purpose the means that the State deems necessary. According to the theoretical construction of T. Hobbes, the State is endowed with unlimited powers to achieve its objective. It has no control from civil society due to the fact that the conditions for creating a State, outside the natural state, involve the refusal of people from the rights of this State and their transfer to the State. Thus, the right of the natural state - the right to do anything for its own conservation - is acquired by the state and since then it is only allowed to decide what is good for people and what is bad for the preservation of their lives and property. Moreover, the contract is concluded only between citizens, while the government is not subject to the contractual process and therefore has no legal responsibility. It is no coincidence that his main political-legal treatise is called “Leviathan”. To describe the essence of the state, he uses the image of the biblical monster Leviathan, devouring people. After watching the “Age of Reason” video from part two.