1,720,960 research outputs found
Johna Graya liberalizm modus vivendi a możliwość uzasadnienia liberalnej filozofii politycznej
No full textThe following paper is aimed at presentation and critical appraisal of the political philosophy of John Gray. The author focuses on two aspects of Gray’s thought: his harsh refutation of epistemological, contractual and perfectionist liberalism, as well as original project of so called modus vivendi liberalism. Although the author shares Gray’s criticism towards most currents of the contemporary liberal philosphy, he argues that the positive concept raised by the British thinker falls for the very same reason, that is, the neglection of the Kantian deonthological ethics. In author’s opinion, no ethics grounded in the subjective will of human beings can be considered tenable, insofar as one seeks for the justification of any social order
Libertariańska koncepcja podmiotu moralnego w świetle sporu liberałów z komunitarystami
No full textThe following paper seeks for a reconstruction of the libertarian concept of moral subject. According to author, libertarianism – defined in a narrow meaning as an absolutism of private property rights linked with natural law theory, austrian school of economics teachings and anarcho-individualist tradition – comprises two main anthropological aspects. First of them, which stems from the methodological individualism and subjectivism of austrian school, has already been clearly described in the scientific literature. However, as author points out, there is also another ingredient of the libertarian views on human nature, that has not been grasped neither by interpreters, nor by libertarians themselves. Namely, in order to provide tenability for their moral claims, a communitarian aspect of a self needs to be endorsed by libertarian thinkers. In author’s judgement such a conlusion follows from the dispute between Rawls, Nozick, MacIntyre, Taylor, Sandel, Walzer and other protagonists of the liberalcommunitarian debate. In particular, a question of so called „natural assets” provides interesting clue about communitarian presumptions of the libertarian anthropology. A widespread opinion regarding libertarianism and communitarianism polar opposites on every fieldof philosophical inquiry should thereforebe overcome. In addition to that, author briefly summarises numerous divergences that make libertarian and communitarian perspectives contradictory to each other. Undouptedly, their approaches towards ethics and – subsequently – politics cannot be reconcealed whatsoever. Libertarianism remains morally individualist and politically anarchist, while communitarians are collectivists and basically statists. Nonetheless, these differences do not embrace the concept of self. At this angle proponents of those influential streams of the contemporary political thought turn out way more akin that one may suppose at glance
Problem demokracji totalitarnej w filozofii politycznej libertarianizmu
No full textThe aim of the paper involves presentation and evaluation of the concept of totalitarian democracy, which is to be found in the works of the libertarian political philosophy proponents: Murray N. Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe. In the course of our analysis, the author formulates following tenets. Firstly, although libertarian thinkers do not employ the expression „totalitarian democracy” themselves, that notion can be successfully identified in their writings. To Rothbard and Hoppe democracy — including the liberal one — is a totalitarian system by nature. It is supposed to stem from democratic regime’s lust for taking control over all aspects of individual’s life in libertarian terms: all aspects of the use of private property, as well as from the inherent fallacies of liberal safeguards, designed in order to protect democracy from degradation to mere tyranny of majority, such as the rule of law, constitutionalism, and checks and balances principles. Secondly, in author’s judgement, however Rothbard’s and — in particular — Hoppe’s critique of democracy should be considered consistent with libertarian ideals, it appears to a certain extent exaggerated also in their light.The aim of the paper involves presentation and evaluation of the concept of totalitarian democracy, which is to be found in the works of the libertarian political philosophy proponents: Murray N. Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe. In the course of our analysis, the author formulates following tenets. Firstly, although libertarian thinkers do not employ the expression „totalitarian democracy” themselves, that notion can be successfully identified in their writings. To Rothbard and Hoppe democracy — including the liberal one — is a totalitarian system by nature. It is supposed to stem from democratic regime’s lust for taking control over all aspects of individual’s life in libertarian terms: all aspects of the use of private property, as well as from the inherent fallacies of liberal safeguards, designed in order to protect democracy from degradation to mere tyranny of majority, such as the rule of law, constitutionalism, and checks and balances principles. Secondly, in author’s judgement, however Rothbard’s and — in particular — Hoppe’s critique of democracy should be considered consistent with libertarian ideals, it appears to a certain extent exaggerated also in their light
The Libertarian Argumentation Ethics, the Tranascendental Pragmatics of Language, and the Conflict-Freedom Principle
No full textThe purpose of the presented paper is to showcase the links between Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s libertarian argumentation ethics and Karl-Otto Apel’s transcendental pragmatics with a special reference to the consensus theory of truth proposed by the latter thinker. More specifically, the author contends that Hoppe’s theory is logically contingent on Apel’s views on truth in that some crucial gaps in Hoppe’s grounding of the so-called “a priori of communication and argumentation” are filled by Apel’s original arguments. Additionally, the paper provides a case for interpreting Hoppe's ethics as a theory of rational conflict-freedom, which seems to cohere best with the transcendental-pragmatist approach. Finally, the author offers a few remarks on how the most common objections against Hoppe's theory can be overcome on the basis of the transcendental pragmatics and the conflict-freedom principle.Celem prezentowanego artykułu jest wskazanie związków zachodzących pomiędzy Hansa-Hermanna Hoppego libertariańską etyką argumentacyjną a transcendentalną pragmatyką Karla-Otto Apla ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem zaproponowanej przez tego ostatniego myśliciela konsensualnej teorii prawdy. Dokładniej rzecz ujmując, zdaniem autora teoria Hoppego jest logicznie zależna od Apla poglądów na kwestię prawdy. Oryginalne argumenty Apla wypełniają bowiem kluczowe luki w dokonanym przez Hoppego ugruntowaniu tzw. "a priori komunikacji i argumentacji". Dodatkowo, artykuł zawiera argumentację na rzecz interpretowania etyki Hoppego jako teorii racjonalnej wolności od konfliktów, czemu najlepiej odpowiada właśnie podejście transcendentalno-pragmatyczne. Wreszcie, autor wysuwa kilka uwag odnośnie do najpopularniejszych obiekcji przeciwko teorii Hoppego, które przezwyciężyć można na bazie transcendentalnej pragmatyki i zasady wolności od konfliktów
The State, Democracy, and Class Rule: Remarks on the Hoppean Approach
No full textThe subject-matter of the paper is the theory of class struggle proposed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, one of the leading representatives of libertarian political philosophy in the radical tradition of Murray N. Rothbard. The author reconstructs and critically comments on the theory at hand. The author's remarks focus on the ethical and methodological background of Hoppe's approach, the main question being whether the latter theory is consonant with the thinker's positions on ethics and methodology, as well as with his political standpoint. The author argues that not only does class analysis not contradict other core beliefs of Hoppe but it also represents an indispensable element of his libertarian philosophy. There is, however, a significant tension between the class approach and Hoppe's secondary philosophical position – his historical idealism. The article is concluded by indicating some further issues in the Hoppean theory of class that, in the author's opinion, should be subject to future inquiry.Przedmiotem artykułu jest teoria walki klas zaproponowana przez Hansa-Hermanna Hoppego, jednego z głównych przedstawicieli libertariańskiej filozofii politycznej utrzymanej w radykalnej tradycji Murraya N. Rothbarda. Omawiana teoria zostaje przez autora zrekonstruowana i opatrzona krytycznymi komentarzami. Uwagi autora skupiają się na etycznym i metodologicznym tle stanowiska Hoppego, przy czym zasadnicze pytanie dotyczy tego, czy podejście klasowe zgodne jest z poglądami myśliciela na etykę i metodologię, a także jego stanowiskiem politycznym. Zdaniem autora, teoria klasowa nie tylko nie przeczy innym zasadniczym przekonaniom Hoppego, ale wręcz stanowi nieodzowny element jego libertariańskiej filozofii. Istotne napięcie zachodzi jednakże między podejściem klasowym a drugorzędnym poglądem filozoficznym Hoppego, jakim jest jego historyczny idealizm. Artykuł wieńczy wskazanie kilku dalszych zagadnień Hoppeańskiej teorii klas, które powinny zdaniem autora stanowić przedmiot dalszych badań
Is the Austrian School Value-Free? On the Dependence of Austrian Economics on Political Philosophy
Get PDFThis research was funded in whole or in part by the National Science Centre,
Poland, grant number 2020/39/B/HS5/00610. For the purpose of open access, the
author has applied a CC-BY public copyright license to any author-accepted manu-
script version arising from this submission.Austrian economists tend to declare that their economics is value-free.
The present article argues that it is not. As we show, the basic conceptual
framework employed by Austrian economists in their putatively value-free
studies is actually embedded in libertarian political philosophy. Specifically, a
major notion of Austrian economic analysis—that is, the notion of free (voluntary)
exchange—presupposes Lockean property rights. Accordingly, Austrians define all
concepts derivative of free exchange (e.g., free market, socialism, interventionism,
calculational chaos, monopoly, social welfare) in terms of just distributions of ownership titles. However, instead of eschewing the value-laden component of
their economics, Austrians may openly embrace it, for their theory is naturally
predisposed to axiological nonneutrality.Narodowe Centrum Nauki/National Science Centre
This research was funded in whole or in part by the National Science Centre,
Poland, grant number 2020/39/B/HS5/00610. For the purpose of open access, the
author has applied a CC-BY public copyright license to any author-accepted manu-
script version arising from this submission
Dwa argumenty na rzecz libertarianizmu w teorii prawa naturalnego Murraya Rothbarda
Get PDFThe purpose of the presented paper is the presentation and critical assesment of the two arguments for the principleof self-ownership raised by the founding father of libertarianism – an economist and political philosopher Murray Newton Rothbard (1926-1995). As author points out, both arguments are rooted in the theory of natural law and natural rights. He argues that this theory, in addition to being untenable per se, is incompatbile with the ethics of libertarianism and therefore every libertarian argument set on its stone must inevitably fail. However, according to the author, Rothbard’s second argument – that is, the argumentum a contrario, is logically indipendent of the natural law theory and, thus, can be defended on different philosophical grounds, although Rothbard himself derived it from the erroneous natural law premises
Ludwig von Mises as a Philosopher of Science. Towards Epistemological Foundations of Praxeology
No full textPrezentowany artykuł naświetla metodologiczne podejście do nauki ekonomii rozwinięte przez jednego z najbardziej wpływowych przedstawicieli austriackiej szkoły ekonomicznej Ludwiga von Misesa. Ponieważ głównym zamysłem autora było dokonanie charakterystyki Misesa jako filozofa, jego wkład w dziedzinę metodologii zostały opisany ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem fundamentów filozoficznych (w szczególności: epistemologicznych), z których wyrasta. Z artykułu wyłania się obraz głębokiego myśliciela, który pozostawił po sobie myśl autentycznie wielowątkową, obejmującą zagadnienia takie jak: właściwa metoda ekonomii, metodologiczny monizm i pluralizm, autonomia nauk o człowieku oraz ich epistemologiczny status i wreszcie - klasyczne problemy filozofii Zachodu, a mianowicie pytania o źródła i granice ludzkiej wiedzy, realizm i idealizm, determinizm i indeterminizm, istnienie wolnej woli czy problem ciało-umysł. Mimo że sam Mises uważał się jedynie za ekonomistę i wiele spośród sformułowanych przezeń uwag filozoficznych przybiera w jego dziełach postać zaledwie sugestii, wydaje się on w pełni świadom skomplikowanej filozoficznie materii, na której wspiera się nauka ekonomii. W zakresie metodologii nauk humanistycznych, w szczególności ekonomii, Mises wypracował nowe rozumienie metody apriorycznej jako systemu twierdzeń logicznie wyprowadzanych z oczywistego aksjomatu działania, który stał się odtąd punktem wyjścia dla analizy ekonomicznej prowadzonej w ramach szkoły austriackiej. Zająwszy stanowisko metodologicznego dualizmu, Mises wprowadził wyraźne rozróżnienie pomiędzy domenami nauk przyrodniczych i ekonomicznych, z czym wiązała się jego ostro krytyczna recepcja neopozytywistycznego ideału nauki zunifikowanej. W odniesieniu do fundamentalnych problemów filozofii, Mises prezentuje się jako zwolennik kantowskiego transcendentalizmu. Niemniej jednak autor artykułu uznaje jego stanowisko za zmodyfikowane w oparciu o kilka innowacji wywodzących się z prakseologii. Na przykład rozumienie apriorycznych form jako narzędzi działania czy też hipoteza o ich ewolucyjnej genezie. W opinii autora daje to podstawę do scharakteryzowania Misesa jako „aktywistycznego kantysty".Presented paper highlights the methodological approach towards economic science elaborated by one of the most influential proponents of the Austrian School of Economics, Ludwig von Mises. Since author's main attempt was to consider Mises as a philosopher, his contributions to methodology are described with a special regard to their philosophical, particularly epistemologicalfoundations. An image ofMises that emergesfrom the article is the one of a profound thinker who came up with a truly wide-ranging thought, covering issues such as the proper method of economics, methodological monism and pluralism, an autonomy of the humane sciences as well as their epistemological status, and - finally - classical problems of western philosophy, namely the questions of the sources and limits of human knowledge, realism and idealism, determinism and indeterminism, the existence of a free will, and the body-mind problem. Even though Mises declared himself to be just an economist and many philosophical remarks are given in his works merely as hints, it seems as if he was fully aware of the complex matters which the economic science relies upon. In terms of the methodology of humane sciences, primarily economics, Mises invented a new understanding of the a priori method: the system of claims logically derived from the self-evident action axiom that has become a starting point of the contemporary Austrian School of economic analysis ever since. Having taken the position of a methodological dualism, he introduced the distinction between the realms of natural and humane sciences, which was the reason for his sharply critical assessment of the neopositivist ideal of an unified science. In the field offundamental questions ofphilosophy, Mises appears to be supportivefor Kantian trancscendentalism, nonetheless authorfinds his standpoint modified around a couple ofinnovationsfollowingfrom the Misesian praxeology, for instance a theory of a priori forms as tools of action or the hypothesis of their evolutionary genesis. In author's opinion, it makes Mises a so called "activist kantian"
Monarchy as private property government. A chiefly methodological critique
No full textHans-Hermann Hoppe famously argued that monarchy is superior to democracy insofar as property rights protection is concerned. The present paper calls this claim into question, with much of the heavy lifting being done by methodological ponderings. More specifically, it is demonstrated that instead of a priori, praxeological truths, Hoppe’s monarchy theory offers an ideal type of the politician bestowed with an inheritable title to the throne. Against this background, the ideal type in question is shown to be faulty in that it treats monarchs as capitalist landowners of sorts, thereby overlooking strictly political incentives they face, which can predictably push them in directions inimical to free markets
THE ORIGIN OF THE UKRAINE WAR IN LIGHT OF A MARKET-ANARCHIST THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Get PDFThe article undertakes two major tasks. First, the position labeled here as a market-anarchist theory of international relations (MATIR) is reconstructed. Second, the conception is applied to international politics in Central-Eastern Europe with special regard to the Ukraine war. The overarching aim of this endeavor is to highlight MATIR’s explanatory power. The central question posed in the article is: Who, in light of MATIR and some fairly uncontroversial facts, bears the main responsibility for the outbreak of the war? This research problem breaks down into two further questions: (1) How likely is it that the Ukraine war has been triggered chiefly by the West’s eastward expansion? (2) Were policies adopted by parties to the conflict reasonable given the circumstances? The upshot of the inquiry is that (1) on MATIR, Russia would have been quite likely to invade Ukraine even absent the latter’s pro-NATO foreign policy, and (2) that while Ukraine was conducting a textbook (albeit risky) policy of defensive balancing, Russia is guilty of a greatly overdone response to an exaggerated threat. Thus - John Mearsheimer and some leading proponents of MATIR such as Walter Block and Hans-Hermann Hoppe to the contrary notwithstanding - it is Russia that should be blamed for the present war. An original contribution of the article, then, lies also in putting the libertarian discourse on the Ukraine war on the right track. In terms of methodology, the paper offers purely theoretical investigations based on a rational reconstruction of the theory under discussion
- …
