Show simple item record

Romanticizing or romantic denial of enlightenment?

dc.creatorKrstić, Predrag
dc.date.accessioned2018-04-07T22:11:19Z
dc.date.available2018-04-07T22:11:19Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.issn1821-4959 (elektronsko izdanje)
dc.identifier.urihttp://rifdt.instifdt.bg.ac.rs/123456789/1518
dc.description.abstractU članku se tvrdi da rani romantizam, artikulišući vlastito stanovište, upućuje prosvećenosti jednu „estetičku“ primedbu i da se ta primedba može protegnuti do duboko u dvadeseti vek. Autor rada je, posle Šlegela i njegove škole, pronalazi ne samo u Veberovoj dijagnostici institucionalizovane racionalnosti zapadne civilizacije, te u Dijalektici prosvetiteljstva Horkhajmera i Adorna i kritici ciljno orijentisanog ili instrumentalnog uma savremenosti koja je usledila, već i, na drugačiji način, kod Fukoa, braće Beme, pa čak i u fi lozofi ji postmoderne i neopragmatizma. Zaključuje se da je svim tim orijentacijama zajednička detekcija manjka samoprosvećenosti prosvetiteljstva, izostanak njegove autoreferentne korekcije, neobračunavanje troškova ogrešenja o ono njegovo „drugo“, što onda bilo nepovratno ili ipak nekako još ispravljivo, potkopava njegov izvorni kritički i emancipatorski program.sr
dc.description.abstractThe article argues that early Romanticism, articulating its own view, addresses to the Enlightenment an “aesthetic” remark which be traced deep into the twentieth century. The author of the work found it, after Schlegel and his school, not only in Weber ‘s diagnosis of institutionalized rationality of Western civilization, and in the Horkheimer’s and Adorno’s Dialectic of Enlightenment and the critique of the goal-oriented or instrumental reason of modernity that followed, but in a different way, also in Foucault, Böhme brothers, and even in postmodern philosophy and neopragmatism. It is concluded that all these orientations share detection of the lack od self-enlightenment of the Enlightenment and, consequently, the lack of its self-referential correction. These unaccounted costs of violations the Enlightenment committed to its “other”, irreversibly or somehow still recoverable, undermines its original critical and emancipatory program.sr
dc.language.isosrsr
dc.rightsopenAccesssr
dc.sourceArhesr
dc.subjectprosvetiteljstvosr
dc.subjectenlightenmentsr
dc.subjectromantizamsr
dc.subjectracionalnostsr
dc.subjectorganizacijasr
dc.subjectdominacijasr
dc.subjectumetnostsr
dc.subjectromanticismsr
dc.subjectrationalitysr
dc.subjectorganizationsr
dc.subjectdominationsr
dc.subjectartsr
dc.titleRomantizovanje ili romantičarsko osporavanje prosvetiteljstva?sr
dc.titleRomanticizing or romantic denial of enlightenment?sr
dc.typearticlesr
dc.rights.licenseBY-NC-NDsr
dcterms.abstractКрстић, Предраг; Романтизовање или романтичарско оспоравање просветитељства?; Романтизовање или романтичарско оспоравање просветитељства?; Романтицизинг ор романтиц дениал оф енлигхтенмент?; Романтицизинг ор романтиц дениал оф енлигхтенмент?;
dc.citation.issue23
dc.citation.volume12
dc.citation.spage177
dc.citation.epage199
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionsr
dc.identifier.fulltexthttp://rifdt.instifdt.bg.ac.rs//bitstream/id/3055/arhe.pdf


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record