The manifesto of the right philosophy

Igor D. Nev­vazhay
Sara­tov State Law Acad­e­my

The man­i­festo of the right phi­los­o­phy

Abstract. The man­i­festo of right phi­los­o­phy claims a project of pos­si­ble devel­op­ment of con­tem­po­rary non-clas­si­cal phi­los­o­phy. In post­mod­ern phi­los­o­phy a num­ber of fun­da­men­tal ideas of clas­si­cal phi­los­o­phy was sub­ject­ed to shat­ter­ing crit­i­cism. In this paper two ideas of clas­si­cal phi­los­o­phy became a sub­ject of crit­i­cal judg­ment. First, it is the meta­phys­i­cal idea about exis­tence of self-iden­ti­cal being. Sec­ond­ly, the idea of exis­tence of “pri­ma­ry” grounds of objec­tive knowl­edge about the world. The non-clas­si­cal phi­los­o­phy is a phi­los­o­phy of dif­fer­ence. I sug­gest inter­pret­ing the fun­da­men­tal dif­fer­ence as a uni­ty of the des­ig­nat­ed and the des­ig­nat­ing. This dif­fer­ence pro­duces var­i­ous oppo­si­tions, in par­tic­u­lar, a dis­tinc­tion between the observed and the observ­ing, so a sign is a bor­der between them. From this point of view, the con­scious­ness does not pre­cede lan­guage, and lan­guage is not an expres­sion of a cer­tain val­ue as the men­tal con­tent of con­scious­ness. Oth­er ideas of the right phi­los­o­phy is the dis­tinc­tion between fact and right and the demon­stra­tion that non-clas­si­cal phi­los­o­phy uses argu­ments which are not estab­lished facts and indis­putable axioms, but opin­ions which can be acknowl­edged as legit­i­mate and have to be modal (deon­tic) judg­ments. It means that philo­soph­i­cal rea­son has to focus on cre­ation of norms (think­ing, expe­ri­ence, action) which pro­vide an effec­tive inter­ac­tion of a per­son (human soci­ety) with the world around and con­di­tion the sus­tain­ing and repro­duc­tion of human nature in a per­son. Hence, phi­los­o­phy will be capa­ble of solv­ing a new task – to sub­stan­ti­ate human rea­son rights and cre­ate a rel­e­vant leg­is­la­tion. The right phi­los­o­phy is not a tra­di­tion­al legal phi­los­o­phy (phi­los­o­phy of law), but a spe­cif­ic philo­soph­i­cal move­ment which is sub­or­di­nat­ed to idea of right. It is an attempt to make phi­los­o­phy semi­otic, nor­ma­tive, com­mu­nica­tive, right, and legit­i­mate.

Key­words: pres­ence meta­physics, phi­los­o­phy of dif­fer­ence, dif­fer­ence and lan­guage, being and right, semi­otic of norms, leg­is­la­tion of rea­son.

DOI: 10.5840/dspl20181327

Ref­er­ences:

  1. Anisov, A.M. Sovre­men­naya logi­ka [Mod­ern Log­ic]. Moscow: Insti­tut filosofii rossiskoi akademii nauk, 2002. 273 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  2. Anscombe, G.E.M. Ethics, Reli­gion and Pol­i­tics. Oxford: Oxford Basil Black­wel, 1981. 161 pp.
  3. Deleuze, J. Razlichiye i pov­tore­nie [Dif­fer­ence and Rep­e­ti­tion]. St. Peters­burg: ТОО ТК Petrop­o­lis, 1998. 384 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  4. Der­ri­da, J. De la gram­ma­tolo­gie [Of Gram­ma­tol­ogy]. Paris: Minu­it, 1967. 450 pp.
  5. Gas­paryan, D.E. Vve­de­nie v ne-klas­sich­eskuyu filosofiyu [Intro­duc­tion into Non-clas­si­cal Phi­los­o­phy]. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2011. 398 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  6. Kant, I. Kri­ti­ka chis­to­go razu­ma [Cri­tique of Pure Rea­son]. Moscow: Mysl, 1994. 489 pp. (In Russ­ian).
  7. Kasavin, I.T. Text. Diskurs. Kon­text. Vve­de­nie v sot­sial­nuyu epis­te­mologiyu yazy­ka [Text. Dis­course. Con­text. Intro­duc­tion in a Social Epis­te­mol­o­gy of Lan­guage]. Moscow: Canon +, 2008. 437 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  8. Knyaze­va, E.N. Enak­tivizm: novaya for­ma kon­struk­tiviz­ma v epis­te­mologii [Enac­tivism: New Forms of Con­struc­tivism in Epis­te­mol­o­gy]. Moscow, St. Peters­burg: Tsen­tr human­i­tarnyh init­sia­tiv; Uni­ver­sitet­skaya kni­ga, 2014. 352 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  9. Luh­mann, N. Vve­de­nie v sis­tem­nuyu teoriyu [Intro­duc­tion into the Sys­tem The­o­ry]. Moscow: LOGOS, 2007. 360 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  10. Malk­i­na, S.M. Post-metafizich­eskie kon­fig­urastii ontologii [Post-meta­phys­i­cal Con­fig­u­ra­tions of Ontol­ogy]. Sara­tov: Izda­tel­st­vo Sara­tovsko­go Uni­ver­site­ta, 2015. 268 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  11. Nev­vazhay, I.D. Svo­bo­da i znanie [Free­dom and Knowl­edge]. Sara­tov: Sara­tovskaya gosu­darstven­naya akademiya pra­va, 1995. 204 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  12. Nev­vazhay, I.D. Pra­vo na pra­vo kak matrit­sa evropeiskoj tra­dit­sii pra­va [Law to Law as the Matrix of Euro­pean Tra­di­tion of Law], Pravove­de­nie. Izvestiya vysshyh ucheb­nyh zave­denij, 2013, no. 3, pp. 257–262. (In Russ­ian)
  13. Nev­vazhay, I.D. Seman­tic Con­cept of Norm and the Rule-Fol­low­ing Prob­lem, in: Sle­dovanie prav­ilu: ras­suzh­de­nie, razum, rat­sion­al­nost [Fol­low­ing to the Rule: Rea­son­ing, Rea­son, Ratio­nal­i­ty], ed. by E.G. Dra­gali­na-Cher­naya, V.V. Dol­go­rukov. St. Peters­burg: Aleteia, 2014, pp. 302–313. (In Russ­ian)
  14. Nev­vazhay, I.D. Kak vos­mozh­na obschaya teo­ria norm? [How is Pos­si­ble the Gen­er­al The­o­ry of Norms], in: Mir che­love­ka: nor­ma­tiv­noe izmere­nie – 5. Pos­tizhe­nie nor­ma­tivnos­ti I nor­ma­tivnost poz­naniya [Human World: Nor­ma­tive Dimen­sion – 5. Com­pre­hen­sion of Nor­ma­tiv­i­ty and Knowl­edge of Nor­ma­tiv­i­ty]. Col­lec­tion of papers of the inter­na­tion­al con­fer­ence (Sara­tov, June 12–14, 2017), ed. by I.D. Nev­vazhay. Sara­tov state law acad­e­my. Sara­tov: SGYuA pub­lish­ing house, 2017, pp. 7–22. (In Russ­ian)
  15. Nev­vazhay, I.D. Obscha­ia teo­ria pravovyh norm v svete idej L. Petrzhit­sko­go o sin­tetich­eskoj teorii pra­va [The Gen­er­al The­o­ry of Rules of Law in the Light of L. Petrazhitsky’s Ideas about the Syn­thet­ic The­o­ry of Law], Pravove­de­nie. Izves­tia vysshyh ucheb­nyh zave­denii, 2017, no. 6, pp. 68–86. (In Russ­ian)
  16. Nyman, E.A., Surovt­sev, V.A. (eds.). Inten­stion­al­nost i tex­tu­al­ism. Filosof­skaya mysl Frantsii XX veka [Inten­tion­al­i­ty and Tex­tu­al­ism. Philo­soph­i­cal Thought of France of the 20th Cen­tu­ry]. Tom­sk: Izda­tel­st­vo “Aquar­ius”, 1998. 320 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  17. Spencer Brown, G. Laws of form. New York: E.R. Dut­ton, 1979. 141 pp.
  18. Sha­lak, V.I. Ocher­ki osno­vanij logi­ki [Sketch­es on the Basics of Log­ic]. Moscow: Insti­tut filosofii rossiskoj akademii nauk, 2017. 135 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  19. Utiya­ma, R. K chemu prish­la fizika [To What Physics Came]. Moscow: Znanie, 1986. 224 pp. (In Russ­ian)

Comments are closed.