University of Arts in Belgrade
Digital Repository of the Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of BelgradeNot a member yet
4571 research outputs found
Sort by
Avenues of Approach – Petar Bojanić and the Institution of Architecture
No full textThe philosopher Petar Bojanić advocates resistance of the architectural discipline to the philosophy of architecture. Using the technique of mise-en-scène, in “Thinking Architecture/Disciplining Architecture” (2015) Bojanić reaffirms that after architecture’s theoretical turn in the second half of the 20th century the architect is undoubtedly capable of theoretically thematizing his/her own work. I argue strongly that this implies, among other things, building a disciplinary language, which must reconcile, or at least balance between, the verbal and non-verbal form of expression. Also, I try to show that it is precisely theory that the architect has needed through history to establish the architectural discipline as liberal and autonomous.
In “The Real and the Theoretical” (2013) the philosopher from Belgrade stresses the tensions between reality and theory present in the work of the architect. Theorizing in the field of architecture carries a danger of severe detachment from currently important and pressing social problems. Since there is no discipline without a group and since architecture is defined as the art of community, architectural practice can be understood, as it is in “The Architectural Philosophy” (2013), as a spatial way of transforming society
Romi u Beogradu za vreme Drugog svetskog rata
No full textŽivot i stradanje Roma u Beogradu 1941. i 1942. godine
Robert Eaglestone, The Broken Voice. Reading the Post-Holocaust Literature, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2017.
No full textŠta je arhitektonski koncept? „Koncept“ kod Deleza i „projekt“ kod Аjzenmana
No full textTwo great theories – one in philosophy, one in architecture – emerge
nearly simultaneously in the twentieth century: Gilles Deleuze’s understanding of the “concept,” that is, defining philosophy as an activity that produces concepts, and Peter Eisenman’s idea of the “project” as a platform, “position,” or “theory” of an architect. My intention is to suggest and problematize the idea of the concept as “capacity” or “potentiality” implying the production of a multitude of “concepts” or varying “conceptions.” Deleuze’s great significance for architecture of this
century allowed for the construction of the “concept” as “author’s potential,” the source of activity and creative architectural acts. An
architectural concept, determined in the course of the text, and thanks to which architectural terminology is redefined, could potentially be quite useful in philosophy and theory of the subject.Dve velike teorije – jedna u filozofiji, jedna u arhitekturi – pojavljuju se skoro simultano u dvadesetom veku: Žil Delezovo razumevanje „koncepta“, odnosno, definisanje filozofije kao aktivnosti koja „proizvodi“ koncepte, i Piter Аjzenmanova
ideja „projekta“ kao platforme, „stanovišta“, ili „teorije“ (jednog) arhitekte. Moja namera je da predložim i problematizujem ideju koncepta kao „kapaciteta“ ili „potencijalnosti“, implicirajući proizvodnju mnoštva „koncepata“ ili „koncepcija“.
Delezov veliki značaj za arhitekturu ovog veka omogućio je konstrukciju „koncepta“ kao „autorskog potencijalа“, izvora aktivnosti i stvaralačkih arhitektonskih akata. Arhitektonski koncept, koji se odredjuje u ovom tekstu, i zahvaljujući kome se redefiniše arhitektonska terminologija, potencijalno može da bude veoma koristan u filozofiji i teoriji subjekta
Biljana Albahari, Pisanje stradanja: knjiga o knjigama. Vodič kroz publikacije o Holokaustu, Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju, Beograd, 2017.
No full textDemokratska solidarnost između globalne krize i kosmopolitske nade
No full textFor almost half a century (between 1940 and 1990) the democratic
and social state has solved the twofold problem of growth and social exclusion through social inclusion within the borders of the national state. This solution since the 1970s came under threat of multiple crises of the environment, secular stagnation, under-consumption, legitimization and constitutionalization. There might be a social solution of present crisis possible through massive redistribution plus decent basic income (on the level of tuition-costs) plus green growth. However, after globalization of capital there are no longer national social alternatives available. Therefore, there is no alternative to transnational democratic state-formation. But are there actors relevant, strong and motivated enough to do that?Skoro polovinu veka (između 1940. i 1990.) demokratska i socijalna država je
rešavala dvostruki problem rasta i socijalne ekskluzije putem socijalne inkluzije
unutar granica nacionalnih država. Ovo rešenje se od 1970ih našlo pod pretnjom
višestrukih kriza životne sredine, sekularne stagnacije, niske potrošnje, legitimizacije i konstitucionalizacije. možda bi postojalo društveno rešenje postojeće
krize putem masovne redistribucije uz pristojan osnovni prihod (na nivou troškova školarine) i uz zeleni razvoj. međutim, nakon globalizacije kapitala više nisu
dostupne nacionalne alternative. Prema tome, nema druge alternative do formiranja transnacionalne demokratske državne formacije. Ali, ima li relevantnih aktera, dovoljno snažnih i motivisanih da to izvedu
Hegelovo opravdanje ljudskog prava na ne-dominaciju
No full text‘Hegel’ and ‘human rights’ are rarely conjoined, and the designation ‘human rights’ appears rarely in his works. Indeed, Hegel has been criticised for omitting civil and political rights all together. My surmise is that readers have looked for a modern Decalogue, and have neglected how Hegel justifies his views, and hence just what views he does justify. Philip Pettit (1997) has refocused attention on republican liberty. Hegel and I agree with Pettit that republican liberty is a supremely important value, but appealing to its value, or justifying it by appeal to reflective equilibrium, are insufficient both in theory and in practice. By reconstructing Kant’s Critical methodology and explicating the social character of rational justification in non-formal domains, Hegel shows that the republican right to non-domination is constitutive of the equally republican right to justification (Forst 2007) – both of which are necessary requirements for sufficient rational
justification in all non-formal domains, including both claims to rights or imputations of duties or responsibilities. That is the direct moral, political and juridical implication of Hegel’s analysis of mutual recognition, and its fundamental, constitutive role in rational justification. Specific corollaries to the fundamental republican right to non-domination must be determined by considering what forms of illicit domination are possible or probable within any specific society, in view of its social, political and economic structures and functioning.‘Hegel’ i ‘ljudska prava’ retko su povezivani i oznaka ‘ljudska prava’ retko se javlja u njegovim delima. Zaista, Hegel je kritikovan zbog izostavljanja ujedno građanskih i političkih prava. Moja pretpostavka jeste da su čitaoci tražili moderni Dekalog i da su zanemarili kako Hegel pravda svoje stavove, i stoga samo koje stavove opravdava. Filip Petit (1997) je preusmerio pažnju na republikansku slobodu. Hegel i ja se slažemo sa Petitom da je republikanska sloboda krajnje važna vrednost, ali apelovati na njenu vrednost, ili opravdavati je apelom na reflektivni ekvilibrijum, nedovoljni su i u teoriji i u praksi. Rekonstruišući Kantovu kritičku metodologiju i objašnjavajući društveni karakter racionalog opravdanja u ne-formalnim domenima, Hegel pokazuje da je republikansko pravo na ne-dominaciju konstitutivno za podjedanko republikansko pravo na opravdanje (Frost 2007) – gde su oba nužni uslovi za dovoljno racionalno opravdanje u svim ne-formalnim domenima, uključujući zahteve za prava ili imputacije dužnosti ili obaveza. To je neposredna moralna, politička i pravna implikacija Hegelove analize uzajamnog priznanja, i njegova temeljna, konstitutivna uloga u racionalnom opravdanju. Specifične posledice fundamentalnog republikanskog prava na ne-dominaciju moraju biti određene sagledavajući koji oblici nedozvoljene dominacije su mogući ili verovatni unutar bilo kog specifičnog društva, u pogledu njegovih društvenih, političkih i ekonomskih struktura i funkcionisanj