TY  - JOUR
AU  - Deretić, Irina
PY  - 2015
UR  - http://rifdt.instifdt.bg.ac.rs/123456789/346
AB  - In this paper I will discuss Aristotle’s controversial philosophical views on women. I will critically examine three main interpretations of his claim that women have deliberative faculty “without authority”. According to the first line of interpretation, Aristotle has in mind that women’s incapacity of advice-giving and decision-making in public afairs are determined by conventions in the political context of his time. I will attempt to point out the disadvantages of this kind of interpretation. Furthermore, I will put forward the reasons why is implausible the more recent interpretation, given by Marguerite Deslauriers. According to her reading, the lack of authority of deliberative faculty in women means nothing else than the tasks over which women have authority are for the purpose of the tasks put forth by men. The prevailing interpretation among scholars is that, in Aristotle’s view, women are naturally inferior to men, due to the fact that they are all too frequently over-ruled by the irrational “forces” of their nature. I will argue that this line of interpretation elucidates what Aristotle presumably has in mind, although it makes his account of women and their rationality, if not inconclusive, then indisputably problematic. In other words, I attempt to prove that, if the prevailing line of interpretation is correct, such view of women produces some philosophically “insurmountable” problems for Aristotle. The aim of the last section of the paper is to point out how some of these problems could eventually be resolved.
PB  - Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju
T2  - Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society
T1  - Why Does a Woman's Deliberative Faculty Have No Authority? Aristotle on the Political Role of Women
SP  - 902
EP  - 916
DO  - 10.2298/FID1504902D
ER  - 

@article{
editor = "Jovanov, Rastko",
author = "Deretić, Irina",
year = "2015",
abstract = "In this paper I will discuss Aristotle’s controversial philosophical views on women. I will critically examine three main interpretations of his claim that women have deliberative faculty “without authority”. According to the first line of interpretation, Aristotle has in mind that women’s incapacity of advice-giving and decision-making in public afairs are determined by conventions in the political context of his time. I will attempt to point out the disadvantages of this kind of interpretation. Furthermore, I will put forward the reasons why is implausible the more recent interpretation, given by Marguerite Deslauriers. According to her reading, the lack of authority of deliberative faculty in women means nothing else than the tasks over which women have authority are for the purpose of the tasks put forth by men. The prevailing interpretation among scholars is that, in Aristotle’s view, women are naturally inferior to men, due to the fact that they are all too frequently over-ruled by the irrational “forces” of their nature. I will argue that this line of interpretation elucidates what Aristotle presumably has in mind, although it makes his account of women and their rationality, if not inconclusive, then indisputably problematic. In other words, I attempt to prove that, if the prevailing line of interpretation is correct, such view of women produces some philosophically “insurmountable” problems for Aristotle. The aim of the last section of the paper is to point out how some of these problems could eventually be resolved.",
publisher = "Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju",
journal = "Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society",
title = "Why Does a Woman's Deliberative Faculty Have No Authority? Aristotle on the Political Role of Women",
pages = "902-916",
doi = "10.2298/FID1504902D"
}

Jovanov, R.,& Deretić, I.. (2015). Why Does a Woman's Deliberative Faculty Have No Authority? Aristotle on the Political Role of Women. in Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society
Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju., 902-916.
https://doi.org/10.2298/FID1504902D

Jovanov R, Deretić I. Why Does a Woman's Deliberative Faculty Have No Authority? Aristotle on the Political Role of Women. in Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society. 2015;:902-916.
doi:10.2298/FID1504902D .

Jovanov, Rastko, Deretić, Irina, "Why Does a Woman's Deliberative Faculty Have No Authority? Aristotle on the Political Role of Women" in Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society (2015):902-916,
https://doi.org/10.2298/FID1504902D . .

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Koprivica, Časlav
PY  - 2014
UR  - http://rifdt.instifdt.bg.ac.rs/123456789/268
AB  - U ovom tekstu djelo srpskog književnika Stanislava Krakova, iz- među dva rata znamenite, a kasnije, zbog ideoloških podjela, potisnute i za- boravljene figure, posmatramo kroz prizmu filosofije egzistencije i fenomenologije. „Filosofski“ značaj Krakovljeve autobiografske, ratne proze, koja je u estetskom, naročito formalnom inovativnom pogledu, predstavljala vrhunac tog žanra srpske književnosti, jeste u tome što se ona može posmatrati kao prvorazredni dokument fenomenološke introspekcije čovjeka koji se nalazi u životnoj situaciji borbe, a po izvjesnim dometima, bez pretjerivanja, uporediv sa Jingerom. No povrh autentične dokumentarnosti, Krakovljevo pisanje odlikuju brilijantni uvidi, koje od filosofski dokučenih istina ponekad razlikuje maltene samo drugačiji žanrovski kontekst. Zato se, s jedne strane, Krakov može posmatrati kao mislilac rata i tjelesnosti avant lettre, kao što, na drugoj strani, interpretativno kontekstualizovanje njegove proze unutar pomenute filosofske tradicije pomaže da se bolje razumije njegova književnost.
PB  - Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju
T2  - Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society
T1  - Stanislav Krakov : fenomenologija unutrašnje svijesti borbe
SP  - 323
EP  - 342
DO  - 10.2298/FID1403323K
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Koprivica, Časlav",
year = "2014",
abstract = "U ovom tekstu djelo srpskog književnika Stanislava Krakova, iz- među dva rata znamenite, a kasnije, zbog ideoloških podjela, potisnute i za- boravljene figure, posmatramo kroz prizmu filosofije egzistencije i fenomenologije. „Filosofski“ značaj Krakovljeve autobiografske, ratne proze, koja je u estetskom, naročito formalnom inovativnom pogledu, predstavljala vrhunac tog žanra srpske književnosti, jeste u tome što se ona može posmatrati kao prvorazredni dokument fenomenološke introspekcije čovjeka koji se nalazi u životnoj situaciji borbe, a po izvjesnim dometima, bez pretjerivanja, uporediv sa Jingerom. No povrh autentične dokumentarnosti, Krakovljevo pisanje odlikuju brilijantni uvidi, koje od filosofski dokučenih istina ponekad razlikuje maltene samo drugačiji žanrovski kontekst. Zato se, s jedne strane, Krakov može posmatrati kao mislilac rata i tjelesnosti avant lettre, kao što, na drugoj strani, interpretativno kontekstualizovanje njegove proze unutar pomenute filosofske tradicije pomaže da se bolje razumije njegova književnost.",
publisher = "Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju",
journal = "Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society",
title = "Stanislav Krakov : fenomenologija unutrašnje svijesti borbe",
pages = "323-342",
doi = "10.2298/FID1403323K"
}

Koprivica, Č.. (2014). Stanislav Krakov : fenomenologija unutrašnje svijesti borbe. in Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society
Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju., 323-342.
https://doi.org/10.2298/FID1403323K

Koprivica Č. Stanislav Krakov : fenomenologija unutrašnje svijesti borbe. in Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society. 2014;:323-342.
doi:10.2298/FID1403323K .

Koprivica, Časlav, "Stanislav Krakov : fenomenologija unutrašnje svijesti borbe" in Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society (2014):323-342,
https://doi.org/10.2298/FID1403323K . .