Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Wednesday, 18 March 2015

Arts & Humanities: Philosophy: “Question: Napoleon: Despot or Prince?” plus 5 more

Arts & Humanities: Philosophy: “Question: Napoleon: Despot or Prince?” plus 5 more


Question: Napoleon: Despot or Prince?

Posted: 18 Mar 2015 09:26 AM PDT

The day of Napoleon's coronation, an imaginary conversation would have recorded a dialogue along these lines:
"Let's go see Napoleon being crowned emperor."
"Why? He is just another dictator."
"So what? He is still Napoleon."

Your answer should rely upon relevant philosophers' framework / criteria of establishing characteristics of (non)-despotic regimes.

Can anyone give me an answer to this question?

Question: Was Nietzsche against nihilism?

Posted: 18 Mar 2015 09:23 AM PDT

Nietzsche was vehemently against nihilism. One of his main concerns was that Western society and philosophy would not be able to present a compelling option to nihilism. And that was really what his main goal was as a philosopher.

Nietzsche ultimately proposed his idea of the Ubermensch (Over-man; Super-man) as the only viable option to what nihilism would eventually produce: what he called the Letzte-Mensch (Last Man).

Question: How do philosophers explain an individual’s or society’s predisposition to accept a tyrannical rule, whether autocratic or totalitarian?

Posted: 18 Mar 2015 09:00 AM PDT

I don't know what "philosophers" think, but I'll give you my opinion. Humans are genetically predisposed to follow strong leaders. This has been the case since we were the various species of pre-human ancestors.
The "silverback" phenomena.

When we started to become civilized enough to live in small villages and cities and tribes, there was always a strong leader. Chief, headman, "strong" man, whatever. All the way up to the present day.

A tyrannical leader may have many faults, but what they often offer is security. Go along with the program, and you'll get along. Buck the tide, off you go to Siberia.
This is the reason given by people in the Middle East who live under ISIS or the Taliban. The conventional government is ineffectual and corrupt. Nasty as these people are, they offer security and order.

Question: What is similar, and what is different, between Arendt’s and Freud’s view of the future of tyrannies?

Posted: 18 Mar 2015 08:58 AM PDT

Report Abuse

Additional Details