Filozofija i društvo / Philosophy and Society 2018-04-02T21:06:36+00:00 Secretary of Editorial Board Open Journal Systems <p>&nbsp;<em>Filozofija i društvo </em>/ <em>Philosophy and Society</em> is a peer reviewed, open access academic journal established in 1987 and published&nbsp;quarterly by the <a href="" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory</a>, University of Belgrade. The journal was founded by members of the Belgrade ‘Praxis School’. The journal strives to cover and present key tendencies of contemporary theory and, at the same time, to encourage research in studies of philosophy and the humanities. It promotes innovative and critical thinking, open and constructive debate, creating in this way a clear space for an ongoing dialogue about questions of intellectual and social reality within the international academic community.&nbsp;<em>Contributions of high quality</em> – regardless of their tradition, school of thought or disciplinary background – are welcome. The journal covers a wide breadth of philosophical and social questions that are theoretically orientated. In accordance with this, the editorial board equally values disciplinary and interdisciplinary oriented studies.</p> <p>The highest quality of editorial standard is ensured by the international membership and disciplinary expertise of the editorial board.</p> Targeted Killing with Drones? Old Arguments, New Technologies 2018-04-02T21:05:05+00:00 Tamar Meisels <p>The question of how to contend with terrorism in keeping with our preexisting&nbsp;moral and legal commitments now challenges Europe as well as&nbsp;Israel and the United States: how do we apply Just War Theory and<br>International Law to asymmetrical warfare, specifically to our counter&nbsp;terrorism measures? What can the classic moral argument in Just and&nbsp;Unjust Wars teach us about contemporary targeted killings with drones?<br>I begin with a defense of targeted killing, arguing for the advantages of&nbsp;pin pointed attacks over any alternative measure available for combatting&nbsp;terrorism. Assuming the legitimacy of killing combatants in wartime, I&nbsp;argue, there is nothing wrong, and in fact much that is right, with targeting&nbsp;particular terrorists selected by name, as long as their assassinations can&nbsp;be reasonably expected to reduce terrorist hostilities rather than increase&nbsp;it. Subsequently, I offer some further thoughts and comments on the&nbsp;use of remotely piloted aircrafts to carry out targeted killings, and address&nbsp;the various sources for discomfort with this practice identified by Michael&nbsp;Walzer and others.</p> 2018-03-29T00:00:00+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Comments and Responses to Tamar Meisels’ “Targeted Killing with Drones? 2018-04-02T21:05:16+00:00 <p>COMMENTS ON TAMAR MEISELS’ “TARGETED KILLING&nbsp;WITH DRONES? OLD ARGUMENTS, NEW TECHNOLOGIES”<br>(A. Pavlović, C. Burelli, A. Fatić, P. Krstić, O. G. Loddo, M. Ivković, P. Bojanić,&nbsp;D. Pala, M. Cano Abadía , S. Prodanović, J. Pavlović, A. Zaharijević)</p> 2018-03-29T00:00:00+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Depersonalisati on Of Killing. Towards A 21st Century Use Of Force “Beyond Good And Evil?” 2018-04-02T21:05:21+00:00 Srđan T. Korać <p>The article analyses how robotisation as the latest advance in military&nbsp;technology can depersonalise the methods of killing in the 21st century&nbsp;by turning enemy soldiers and civilians into mere objects devoid of moral&nbsp;value. The departing assumption is that robotisation of warfare transforms&nbsp;military operations into automated industrial processes with the aim of&nbsp;removing empathy as a redundant ‘cost’. The development of autonomous&nbsp;weapons systems raises a number of sharp ethical controversies related&nbsp;to the projected moral insensitivity of robots regarding the treatment of&nbsp;enemies and civilian population. The futurist vision of war as a foreign&nbsp;policy instrument entirely ‘purified’ of the risk of morally wrong actions&nbsp;is in opposition with the negative effects of the use of drones. The author&nbsp;concludes that the use of lethal robots in combat would eventually remove&nbsp;enemy soldiers and civilians from the realm of ethical reasoning and<br>deprive them of human dignity. Decision to kill in military operations&nbsp;ought to be based on human conscience as the only proper framework&nbsp;of making decisions by reasoning whether an action is right or wrong.</p> 2018-03-29T00:00:00+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## „Sorge um die erkannte Erkenntnis“. Das ontische Versäumnis des Daseins als Möglichkeit des Explizierens seiner positiven Bestimmungen 2018-04-02T21:05:34+00:00 Željko Radinković <p>Der Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit Heideggers frühen Konzeptionen des&nbsp;Existentials Sorge, in denen er allmählich zu der Auffassung der Sorge&nbsp;als der Faktizität des Vollzugs der eigenen Existenz bzw. der eigenen<br>Seinsmöglichkeiten gelangt. Dabei wird sichtbar, inwiefern sich Heidegger&nbsp;an dieser Stelle von den abstrakten Postulierungen von Sorge als der&nbsp;„Sorge um Gewissheit“ (Descartes), der „Sorge um die erkannte Erkenntnis“,&nbsp;aber auch von der Abstraktheit der phänomenologischen Ansätze wie&nbsp;etwa der von ihm selbst verwendeten formalen Anzeige abgrenzt. Von&nbsp;zentralen Bedeutung ist die Hervorhebung seiner Einsicht in den Umstand,&nbsp;dass solche Auffassungen der Sorge, die vor allem mit dem mathematischen<br>Verständnis der Gewissheit durchsetzt sind, den ursprünglichen Zugang&nbsp;zu der Seinsfrage verdecken. Die Vorherrschaft des Theoretischen und&nbsp;die Idee der absoluten Geltung und der Evidenz bezeichnet Heidegger<br>als das „Versäumnis“, die Seinsfrage zu stellen.</p> 2018-04-02T21:00:47+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Utilitarianism and the Idea of University. A Short Ethical Analysis 2018-04-02T21:05:48+00:00 Nenad Cekić <p>The standard objection to the utilitarian vision of morality is that utilitarian&nbsp;so-called “Greatest-Happiness Principle” could justify counter-intuitive&nbsp;practices such as punishing and sacrifice of innocents, breaking of promises&nbsp;and manipulation. The underlying presumption is that the greatest cause&nbsp;(general utility, “happiness”) must be capable of justifying causing suffering&nbsp;of the few. The fact is that, in the upbringing and education of humans&nbsp;(children), some degree of manipulation is needed. Instead, in that process,&nbsp;we use concepts which belong to deontological prescriptions (“obligations,”&nbsp;“duties”) such as “Do not lie” or “Do not steal.” Our question is: Can we&nbsp;imagine the University guided by the simple utility principle. We&nbsp; must&nbsp;remember that a University is for adults, not for children. Why now not&nbsp;be open and at the University say that everything we do we do for the&nbsp;sake of hedonistic “happiness,” not for the sake of duty. That seems&nbsp;suspicious for several reasons. Maybe the most noteworthy objection is&nbsp;that Mill’s version of the utilitarianism tends to divide humanity into two&nbsp;classes: moral aristocracy, which seeks “higher pleasures,” and others&nbsp;who do not. Does that mean that utilitarians must organize secret utilitarian&nbsp;universities for moral aristocracy? Does it mean that moral aristocracy,&nbsp;according to the utility principle, should organize “deontological,”&nbsp;manipulative public universities for lower classes?</p> 2018-04-02T21:02:02+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Suicide, euthanasia and the duty to die: A Kantian approach to euthanasia 2018-04-02T21:05:52+00:00 Marina Budić <p>The paper addresses the issues of euthanasia and thoroughly analyses Kantian response to the practice in question. In reference to Kant’s views on many related issues, such as murder, suicide, autonomy, rationality, honor and the value of human life, the main goal of this paper is to offer an explanation for one probable Kantian view on euthanasia in general, as well as an explanation for a specific form of euthanasia with regard to those patients suffering from dementia. The author’s arguments, according to which Kant could even argue that those persons who have begun suffering from dementia have a <em>duty to die</em>, have all been given special importance in this paper. The question is could and should this specific moral ever be allowed to become universal when considering the patients’ willingness to commit suicide once they start suffering from dementia or perhaps once they start experiencing a loss of rationality? Should suicide even become a patient’s <em>duty? </em>Furthermore, if a patient shows absolutely no intention or willingness of taking her/his own life, ‘should’ the doctor perform a non-voluntary euthanasia over the patient? This paper analyses the author’s arguments which are actually in favor of aforementioned questions, and aims to examine the plausibility of the act as well as to criticize it. The issue of euthanasia is very important, because the key question is what in fact constitutes the fundamental value of human life, which lies at the heart of this problem.</p> 2018-04-02T21:02:34+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Conversation with Antonio Negri 2018-04-02T21:06:13+00:00 Mark Losoncz <p>Mark Losoncz<br>CONVERSATION WITH ANTONIO NEGRI</p> <p>Antonio Negri: Political Philosopher, Paris.<br>Mark Losoncz: Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of Belgrade</p> 2018-04-02T21:04:21+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Roberto Navarrete Alonso, Los tiempos del poder: Franz Rosenzweig y Carl Schmitt, Escolar y Mayo editores, Madrid, 2017. 2018-04-02T21:06:17+00:00 Petar Bojanić, Miloš Ćipranić <p>ROBERTO NAVARRETE ALONSO, <em>LOS TIEMPOS DEL PODER:</em><br><em>FRANZ ROSENZWEIG Y CARL SCHMITT</em>, ESCOLAR Y MAYO EDITORES,&nbsp;MADRID, 2017.<br><br></p> 2018-03-29T00:00:00+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Marc Nicolas Sommer, Das Konzept einer negativen Dialektik, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, 2016. 2018-04-02T21:06:25+00:00 Marko Novaković <p>Marc Nicolas Sommer, <em>Das Konzept einer negativen Dialektik</em>, Mohr Siebeck,&nbsp;Tübingen, 2016.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> 2018-03-29T20:54:21+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Athena Athanasiou, Agonistic Mourning. Political Dissidence and the Women in Black, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 2017. 2018-04-02T21:06:29+00:00 Adriana Zaharijević <p>ATHENA ATHANASIOU, <em>AGONISTIC MOURNING. POLITICAL DISSIDENCE&nbsp;AND THE WOMEN IN BLACK,</em> EDINBURGH UNIVERSITY PRESS,&nbsp;EDINBURGH, 2017.<br><br></p> 2018-03-29T21:04:49+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Pregled tribina i konferencija u Institutu za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju u 2017. 2018-04-02T21:06:36+00:00 Olga Nikolić i Igor Cvejić <p>Pregled tribina i konferencija<br>Conferences, symposia, lectures, round tables…</p> 2018-03-29T21:08:03+00:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement##