Civic Friendship and Liberal Community [Dr. Nebojša Zelic (Rijeka)] - Einzelansicht

Funktionen:

Veranstaltungsart	Seminar	Veranstaltungsnummer
SWS	2	Semester	SoSe 2018
Einrichtung	Institut für Philosophie	Sprache	deutsch
Weitere Links	Kommentar
Belegungsfristen	03.04.2018 - 10.05.2018 Belegung über PULS
Belegungsfristen	03.04.2018 - 20.05.2018 Belegung über PULS

Gruppe 1:

Vormerken: jetzt belegen / abmelden

	Tag	Zeit	Rhythmus	Dauer	Raum	Ausfall-/Ausweichtermine
Seminar	Mo	12:00 bis 14:00	wöchentlich	30.04.2018 bis 28.05.2018	1.08.0.59	21.05.2018: Pfingstmontag
Seminar	Mo	14:00 bis 16:00	wöchentlich	30.04.2018 bis 28.05.2018	1.08.0.59	21.05.2018: Pfingstmontag
Seminar	Di	12:00 bis 14:00	wöchentlich	08.05.2018 bis 29.05.2018	1.08.0.59
Seminar	Di	14:00 bis 16:00	wöchentlich	08.05.2018 bis 22.05.2018	1.08.0.59

Kommentar	Für weitere Informationen zum Kommentar, zur Literatur und zum Leistungsnachweis klicken Sie bitte oben auf den Link "Kommentar". BITTE BACHTEN SIE: Dieses Seminar wird von Dr. Nebojša Zelić (Rijeka) im Kontext der Förderung von Dozentenmobilität (staff mobility) des Erasmus-Projekts in englischer Sprache als Blockveranstaltung unterrichtet. Eine Auflistung aller Kurstermine finden Sie weiter unten in dieser Beschreibung. ATTENTION: This seminar will be taught as a compact course by Dr. Nebojša Zelić (Rijeka) in the context of the Erasmus + staff mobility program. Please see below for detailed information on the course dates. The basic content of this class is a critical analysis and application of the idea of civic friendship (or fraternity) under modern political, social and economic circumstances. First of all, we will discuss Aristotle’s view of friendship and political friendship in particular. In addition, we will discuss his ideal of society that includes leisure as an important site of civic relations. We will place a particular focus on his ideas of social equality under conditions of economic inequality and on his distinction of productive work, preparing the way for a theory of work as an end in itself. We will see if Aristotles approach can relate to the distinction between work in the economic sphere and work as social labour focused on maintaining civic relations. Then we will elucidate the liberal (mainly Locke’s) definition of work as appropriation of property that gives priority to economically productive work over social labour. We will then concentrate on Marx’s idea of productive work as estranged labour under the circumstances of capitalis and on his idea of real appropriation of work, whereas in truly human production the individual can be seen to exercise his capacities for her or his own sake. Here, we will try to find certain Aristotelian elements in Marx that can furnish us with a consistent notion of social labour of maintaining relations as particularly important for the capacity of civic friendship. We will question this hypothesis in further discussion. We will proceed then to a discussion of the influential liberal theory of John Rawls, trying to fathom the influence of Aristotle and Marx on his conceptions of human motivation (an Aristotelian principle), social union and division of labour. We will specifically deal with his "difference principle" as an articulation of the idea of fraternity. Two interpretations of this principle will be examined. Gerald A. Cohens critique of Rawls is centered upon Locke’s idea of incentives that cannot, according to Cohen, realize the idea of fraternity. Another critique is preocuppied with Rawlesian notions such as self-respect, focussing not solely on income and being more open to the notion of social labour. In a final sequence, we will address certain recent articulations of civic friendship, for instance Derek Edyvane’s concept of political friendship as a specific account of companionship that does not presuppose any "thick" moral agreement, but rather a certain form of basic care for well-being of others in liberal polity. Also, Andrew Lister’s idea of public justification based on shared (although not same) reasons as constitutive for political relation we can call civic friendship will be of interest to us. Finally, we will discuss Sibyl A. Schwarzenbach’s understanding of civic friendship as socially reproductive labour, that has been historically identified with the sphere of the private that has been traditionally performed by women. At this juncture, we will enter into a discussion about the realization of civic friendship through political institutions. In the end, we will discuss certain proposals concerning the realization of civic friendship through economic institutions. We will discuss Wright’s explanations of existing practices of social empowerment. In particular, we will look at social economy as one important aspect of supplying public services based on the moral norm of care. In this context, we will also discuss certain problems of putting the burden of provision of such services on the NGO sector by emphasizing the distinction between charity and rights. Add to this that we will discuss consequences of property-owning democracy and justice in production as particularly important aspects of developing capacity for civic friendship. Termine Montag, 30.04. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h Montag, 07.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h Dienstag, 08.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h Montag, 14.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h Dienstag, 15.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h Dienstag, 22.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h Montag, 28.05. 2018, 14h-16h und 14h-16h Dienstag, 29.05., 12h-14h Dates Monday, April 30, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h Monday, May 7, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h Tuesday, May 8, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h Monday, May 14, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h Tuesday, May 15, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h Tuesday, May 22, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h Monday, May 28, 2018, 14h-16h and 14h-16h Tuesday, May 29, 12h-14h
Literatur	Aristotle, Politics M. Nussbaum, “Aristotelian Social Democracy” in Liberalism and the Good, Routledge, 1990. K. Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 J. Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, 1971/1999. G.A. Cohen, If Youre an Egalitarian, How Come Youre So Rich?, Harvard University Press, 2001. S. Schwartzenbach, On Civic Friendship: Including Women in the State, Columbia University Press, 2009. D. Edyvane, Community and Conflict: The Sources of Liberal Solidarity, Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. A. Lister, Public Reason and Community, Bloomsburry, 2013. M. O’ Neill and T. Williamson (ed.) Property-Owning Democracy: Rawls and Beyond, Blackwell, 2012.

Kommentar

Für weitere Informationen zum Kommentar, zur Literatur und zum Leistungsnachweis klicken Sie bitte oben auf den Link "Kommentar".

BITTE BACHTEN SIE: Dieses Seminar wird von Dr. Nebojša Zelić (Rijeka) im Kontext der Förderung von Dozentenmobilität (staff mobility) des Erasmus-Projekts in englischer Sprache als Blockveranstaltung unterrichtet. Eine Auflistung aller Kurstermine finden Sie weiter unten in dieser Beschreibung.

ATTENTION: This seminar will be taught as a compact course by Dr. Nebojša Zelić (Rijeka) in the context of the Erasmus + staff mobility program. Please see below for detailed information on the course dates.

The basic content of this class is a critical analysis and application of the idea of civic friendship (or fraternity) under modern political, social and economic circumstances. First of all, we will discuss Aristotle’s view of friendship and political friendship in particular. In addition, we will discuss his ideal of society that includes leisure as an important site of civic relations. We will place a particular focus on his ideas of social equality under conditions of economic inequality and on his distinction of productive work, preparing the way for a theory of work as an end in itself. We will see if Aristotles approach can relate to the distinction between work in the economic sphere and work as social labour focused on maintaining civic relations.
Then we will elucidate the liberal (mainly Locke’s) definition of work as appropriation of property that gives priority to economically productive work over social labour.

We will then concentrate on Marx’s idea of productive work as estranged labour under the circumstances of capitalis and on his idea of real appropriation of work, whereas in truly human production the individual can be seen to exercise his capacities for her or his own sake. Here, we will try to find certain Aristotelian elements in Marx that can furnish us with a consistent notion of social labour of maintaining relations as particularly important for the capacity of civic friendship. We will question this hypothesis in further discussion.

We will proceed then to a discussion of the influential liberal theory of John Rawls, trying to fathom the influence of Aristotle and Marx on his conceptions of human motivation (an Aristotelian principle), social union and division of labour. We will specifically deal with his "difference principle" as an articulation of the idea of fraternity. Two interpretations of this principle will be examined. Gerald A. Cohens critique of Rawls is centered upon Locke’s idea of incentives that cannot, according to Cohen, realize the idea of fraternity. Another critique is preocuppied with Rawlesian notions such as self-respect, focussing not solely on income and being more open to the notion of social labour.

In a final sequence, we will address certain recent articulations of civic friendship, for instance Derek Edyvane’s concept of political friendship as a specific account of companionship that does not presuppose any "thick" moral agreement, but rather a certain form of basic care for well-being of others in liberal polity. Also, Andrew Lister’s idea of public justification based on shared (although not same) reasons as constitutive for political relation we can call civic friendship will be of interest to us. Finally, we will discuss Sibyl A. Schwarzenbach’s understanding of civic friendship as socially reproductive labour, that has been historically identified with the sphere of the private that has been traditionally performed by women. At this juncture, we will enter into a discussion about the realization of civic friendship through political institutions.

In the end, we will discuss certain proposals concerning the realization of civic friendship through economic institutions. We will discuss Wright’s explanations of existing practices of social empowerment. In particular, we will look at social economy as one important aspect of supplying public services based on the moral norm of care. In this context, we will also discuss certain problems of putting the burden of provision of such services on the NGO sector by emphasizing the distinction between charity and rights. Add to this that we will discuss consequences of property-owning democracy and justice in production as particularly important aspects of developing capacity for civic friendship.

Termine

Montag, 30.04. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h
Montag, 07.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h
Dienstag, 08.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h
Montag, 14.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h
Dienstag, 15.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h
Dienstag, 22.05. 2018, 12h-14h und 14h-16h
Montag, 28.05. 2018, 14h-16h und 14h-16h
Dienstag, 29.05., 12h-14h

Dates
Monday, April 30, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h
Monday, May 7, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h
Tuesday, May 8, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h
Monday, May 14, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h
Tuesday, May 15, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h
Tuesday, May 22, 2018, 12h-14h and 14h-16h
Monday, May 28, 2018, 14h-16h and 14h-16h
Tuesday, May 29, 12h-14h

Literatur

Aristotle, Politics

M. Nussbaum, “Aristotelian Social Democracy” in Liberalism and the Good, Routledge, 1990.

K. Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844

J. Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, 1971/1999.

G.A. Cohen, If Youre an Egalitarian, How Come Youre So Rich?, Harvard University Press, 2001.

S. Schwartzenbach, On Civic Friendship: Including Women in the State, Columbia University Press, 2009.

D. Edyvane, Community and Conflict: The Sources of Liberal Solidarity, Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

A. Lister, Public Reason and Community, Bloomsburry, 2013.

M. O’ Neill and T. Williamson (ed.) Property-Owning Democracy: Rawls and Beyond, Blackwell, 2012.

Strukturbaum

Keine Einordnung ins Vorlesungsverzeichnis vorhanden. Veranstaltung ist aus dem Semester SoSe 2018 , Aktuelles Semester: SoSe 2024