Category of fairness in socio-philosophical interpretations of the contemporary system of international relations

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Category of fairness in socio-philosophical interpretations of the contemporary system of international relations

S.P. Kharchenko

Central Ukrainian State Pedagogical University named after V. Vinnichenko

Abstract

The phenomenon of "fairness" as the fundamental category in contemporary philosophy, ethics, axiology, philosophy of politics, political ethics, philosophy of law, is conceptualized on the basis of cultural, politico-cultural, linguistic, comparative approaches. Its social philosophical deconstruction in the paradigm of the classical model of international relations is carried out. It is shown that this model provides for the formulation of equitable approaches to enable all the representatives of the international community is equivalent positions to build their own lives, taking into account the cultural traditions, mentality, nuances of national economy and education.

Key words: fairness, morality, morals, right, good and evil, international relationships.

Категорія справедливості у соціально-філософських інтерпретаціях сучасної системи міжнародних відносин

С.П. Харченко

Анотація

Феномен справедливості, являючись фундаментальною категорією в сучасній філософії, етиці, аксіології, філософії політики, політичній етиці, філософії права, концептуалізується на основі підходів - соціокультурного, політико-культурного, лінгвістичного, компаративного, Здійснюється його соціально-філософська деконструкція в парадигмі класичної моделі міжнародних відносин. Показано, що саме така модель передбачає вироблення справедливих підходів, що дозволять усім представникам міжнародного співтовариства рівноцінно вибудовувати власне життя, враховуючи культурні традиції, особливості менталітету, нюанси національної економіки та освіти.

Ключові слова: справедливість, моральність, мораль, право, добро, зло, міжнародні відносини.

Категория справедливости в социально-философских интерпретациях современной системы международных отношений

С.П. Харченко

philosophical justice international community

Аннотация

Феномен справедливости, являясь фундаментальной категорией в современной философии, этике, аксиологии, философии политики, политической этике, философии права, концептуализируется на основе подходов - социокультурного, политико-культурного, лингвистического, компаративного, осуществляется его социально-философская деконструкция в парадигме классической модели международных отношений. Показано, что именно такая модель предусматривает выработку справедливых подходов, позволяющих всем представителям международного сообщества равноценно выстраивать собственную жизнь, учитывая культурные традиции, особенности менталитета, нюансы национальной экономики и образования.

Ключевые слова: справедливость, нравственность, мораль, право, добро, зло, международные отношения.

Statement of the problem

It is very difficult to consider the category of "fairness" as such in isolation from other complex categories like "society", "state", "right", as well as "good" and "evil". Theory of State and law reiterates the need to implement legislation to regulate relations between people in society. In turn, theological concept explains the essence of the highest ideals of Justice, divine laws and forms a deep moral foundation in order to build harmonious life.

We can also define a measure of Justice, assessing the quality of relationships among people. Historically, such relationships became more sophisticated as a result of the modernization of the means of production, sustaining wealth, accumulation and redistribution of capital, establishing trade unions. Often the socio-historical and political upheavals were painful. Therefore, today the inter-ethnic, religious and other conflicts, clashes, social revolutions, wars no longer occur within a particular country, and between the two countries, groups of countries or even between continents, and it is disturbing trend.

Modern globalized world with multicultural core became a key project for the development of global society, constructed by Western gauges. Today globalization processes determine the quality of international relations and the key vectors of development of civilization as such. But it should be noted that this model does not provide the formulation of equitable approaches to enable all the representatives of the international community to build their own lives equivalently, taking into account the cultural traditions, mentality, the nuances of the national economy and education.

Analysis of publications

Attention to the socio-philosophical studios recently focused on the issue of fairness. This is due to a loss of morality in modern society. Thus, many of the classic concepts again become relevant.

In this article, the author used the works of classics that were recognized by the history of philosophy and of some contemporary prominent philosophers- theorists.

In particular, Aristotle in his book "the Nicomachean Ethics" describes the so-called distributive justice, which shows the distribution of wealth, honors, material rewards, different kinds of benefits. This theory illustrates the procedure for distribution of appreciated merits and achievements. Aristotle's approach assumes that we have installed on the recognition of the fair only proportional share.

This concept was revised by Th. Hobbes, who showed that the price of things, which are the object of the Treaty, should be measured by the desire of the contracting parties, and a fair price. This price is that these parties agree to give.

K. Marx proposed the concept of sharing as an initial operation in which the right to property periodically expresses. However, for one of the parties this mechanism is only the visibility of the Exchange, because it functions as part of the capital, which trade on live work force, on the one hand, itself is a foreign labor, and, on the other hand, it should be abundantly recovered by live. In this case the notion of "sharing" is replaced or is a visibility.

P. Ricker suggested the approach, according to which justice is relevant to social institutions, which can be evaluated in terms of the distribution of tasks, benefits, roles, or losses that make members of the community suffer, if they subject to a "will to live together", accumulating artifacts of culture, building the nucleus of civilization.

Also the author of this article used the theory of deconstruction of J. Derrida. In main works of J. Derrida the concepts of Justice and fairness have become increasingly relevant in the face of global changes.

The purpose of the article is the conceptualization of the phenomenon of fairness, its socio-philosophical deconstruction in the paradigm of the modern model of international relations.

The main part of the article

In the charming style of postmodern aesthetics, which does not provide for a clear division of categories of morality on the ambivalent thesis and antithesis, analyzing the creative legacy of F. Nietzsche, V. Podoroga metaphorically depicted the configuration of “border”, which separates fair and unjust, good and evil, high and low. In his view, the peripheral area of culture is marginal and partial-removed from the Center, but there, on the periphery, anyone is unable to find where the liminal spaces are. Liminal does not mean marginal, it does not take a specific position relative to the Center, it is not a part of the whole, and it does not have its own "territory". There, where a man moves from the periphery to the Center of culture as a "cultural person"; there can be nothing but knowledge, lack of signs of any position; there a man of border, who is unidentified by its time starts his journey. His movement as liminal human being creates worlds free of normative cultural experience and "nostalgia" for the largest Centre, paralyzing by accident of their offsets the powerful teleology of European culture [5, с. 143]. Human being itself embodies the dichotomy of good and evil, which dominate in the Center of its nature. It spawns injustice and this is happening at a moment when it requires fairness only for itself. This is the desire to embody its mercenary egocentric "will to power". Therefore political power often is understood as an instrument of subjugation, pressure, enrichment, rather than as an instrument of governance.

Postmodern tradition exclude the idea of moral choice as such, because this choice limits natural mundane needs of people, but weighs everyday life with additional spiritual meanings. In such a paradigm people are managed by someone else more difficultly. Instead, some comprehensive pluralism of a variety of perspectives and value judgments, involving choice in a purely utilitarian sense of the word (choice of apartments, resort, and accessory) is proposed. Also carriers of these traditions consider irony as their main value. This technique makes possible to ridicule the sacred symbols of Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the Prophet Muhammad.

On the other hand apologists of postmodernism and globalization project require that there is only one option - unification of life styles, points of view, and social standards. That is, we can talk about the lack of choice at all.

In this regard, S. Mendes, analyzing such kind of pluralism, which denies the existence of the only correct system of moral values, insists on multiplicity and incompatibility systems of moral values, which are typical for the history of European culture [3, с. 97-98]. But just the criteria of morality historically lined with common to all cultures universal moral system which can combine any incompatible traditions. This is especially true in the sphere of international relations and global politics.

We do not agree with P. Riker, that the categories of morality have only instrumental value. In his view, a moral reflection, self-discovery, understanding of human destiny are accumulated from a certain point of view as an instrument of life. There is a moral and spiritual experience of mankind, which is piled like a treasure. Works of art, monuments, liturgy, books on the culture, spirituality, piety and charity form the defined separate "world", which is included in the real world, and serve us as the backbone as sites like things that are outside of us [7, с. 89]. We are convinced that the moral imperative indeed exists as a sacrament having purely sacred nature and particular ontological-ontic significance.

R. Aron is also quite simplistic in explaining of the phenomenon of morality. In his view, societies are never rational in the sense of the word, in which machinery, established by scientific way, is rational. Culture shapes social behaviors, institutions - family, work. There is also a distribution of power and prestige as the many forms of solidarity with metaphysical beliefs or practices approved by the tradition. The difference between the types of phenomena is embedded in the simplest societies by a philosophy observer, but it is presented in potency, while the family is always subjected to the complex and harsh rules, everyday customs have never been abandoned, the hierarchy is always alleged by world concept [1, с. 131]. Any prevailing concept becomes the political ideology which is dominated at the moment. But ideologies change from time to time, and then the qualitatively different systems of values begin to dominate. Note that some Western ideologies are stored for centuries and there are both sort of dogma - ideology of colonialism, liberalism.

D. Lilleker rightly argues that the notion of "domination" linked to the notion of "imperialism", and through the theory of communication shows that certain ideas dominate over others. The concept of "dominant model of communication" means that the elites of society decide what ideas will dominate in the public sphere. It can be bombastic stories about racial superiority, capitalism, or even about the nature of democracy or the nature of morality, the nature of the institution of the family and other social norms [2, с. 123]. "The dominant model of communication" also promotes moral pluralism and promotes hard formatting language norms and rules of conduct, introduces new systems of taboo.

Native researcher M. Popovich stressed that society with the priority of right has its disadvantages, which can be described as "reverse side" of the idea of Justice. Equality and fairness to all members of society demonstrate, in turn, indifference to everyone in particular. Suspension from needs and personal pleasures or the suffering of the individual as a result of targeting to equity means the priority of collective interest concerning personal interests, values, estimates. Institutions become fair because they aren't engaged in someone's private and personal interests, they also are impartial and indifferent. Justice requires fairness, and this means that public services, which care about fairness, must be still whether it hurts or not hurt those with whom they are dealing [6, с. 127]. It is a question of legal institutions, which by definition should ensure the development of effective specific tools for society's management and adopt practical actions that imply maximum protection of citizens' rights and freedoms. Then the political and legal knowledge should be reconsidered and filled with new conceptual approaches in a manner of commensurate with the needs of modern society and acute political, economic, financial, historical challenges.

On the one hand, in a globalized world, the various States are integrated or trying to be incorporated into existing alliances (e.g., European Union). On the other hand, geopolitical space feels fragmentation, it means that the society is atomizing. L. Orokhovskaya explained these trends, linking them with electronic mass media, which have become the factors that increase the social phenomenon of atomization as the dissolution of social ties, promoted the emergence of new virtual communities, forms of socialization, lifestyles and forms of social activity [4, с. 29]. Thus, universal ethical canons that were formed historically and were repeatedly tested in practice in the sphere of international relations must remain intact; since they take into account the cultural diversity of the various players, their mentality, and their denominational affiliation, they develop common approaches demanding to respect the positions of the partners.

Conclusions

Category of “fairness” is fundamental in modern philosophy, ethics, and axiology, philosophy of politics, political ethics, and philosophy of law. However, the notion of “fairness” is enough ancient and almost everyone understands it in philosophical and common sense. Since childhood we have formed the so-called sense of Justice, and therefore people are keenly experiencing the unjust actions towards themselves and towards others. Naturally, every individual psychologically cares primarily about personal experiences, interests, purposes. But in the process of socialization, the historical transformation of the archetype, spiritual reproduction and self-identification in Genesis of nature and society, the human person acquires other qualities. She is capable of the feat and sacrifice, empathy for others.

References

1. Aron R. Opij intelektualiv : [Per. z fr. G. Filipchuka]. - К.: Junivers, 2006. - 272 s.

2. Lilleker, D. Politicheskaja kommunikatsija. Kluchevije kontsepti : [Per. s angl. S. I. Ostnek]. - H.: Izd-vo “Gumanitarnij tsentr”, 2010. - 300 s.

3. Mendus S. Politika ta moral. - Kijiv:TEMPORA, 2010. - 156 s.

4. Orohovska L.A. Atomizatsija suspilstva jak dominujucha tendentsija v sotsiokulturnij dinamitsi informatsijnoji dobi // Visnik natsionalnogo aviatsijnogo universitetu. Serija: Filisofija. Kulturologija: Zbirnik naukovih prats. - Vip.1 (25). - К.: NAU, 2017. - S. 29-34.

5. Podoroga V. Na visote Engadina Fridrih Nitsshe // Virazhenije i smisl, Landshaftnije miri filosofii: Seren Kirkegor, Fridrih Nitsshe, Martin Haidegger, Marsel Prust, Frants Kafka. - Moskva, Ad Marginem, 1995. - 427 s.

6. Popovich M. Buti ludinoju. - K.: Vidavnichij Dim Kijivo-Mogiljanska akademija, 2011. - 223 s.

7. Riker P. Istorija ta istina / [Per. z fr. V.J. Shovkuna]. - K.: Vidavnichij Dim “КМ Academia”, Universitetske vidavnitstvo “Pulsari”, 2001. - 396 s.

Размещено на Allbest.ru