Filippov Alexander

Main Page ~ Authors ~ Filippov Alexander
  • 4, 2009

    • RELEVANCY OF THOMAS HOBBESS PHILOSOPHY (II)

      In the last 100–150 years not only has the uniform understanding of Hobbes failed to prevail, but moreover, the stable tendency of permanently rethinking his doctrine has emerged. Today this tendency is only becoming stronger. A.Philippov thinks that the never-ceasing interest in Hobbes can be primarily explained by the fact we are still occupied with the same problems that occupied the mind of the philosopher who lived several centuries ago. In the second part of his article published in this issue (for the first part see Politeia, 2009, 2) Philippov demonstrates that most questions arising while one is reading Hobbes are left without answers in the works by Hobbes himself. Reading his works thoroughly we come across a rather curios phenomenon. The whole construction erected by Hobbes is sort of vibrating, but doing it latently. On the surface one can see clear, easily understandable constructions thought out as triumph of coherence and inexorable logic, but going deeper one will find not so much inconsistency as exactly a field of questions left without answers. According to the author’s conclusion, the dynamic unstable world described by Hobbes is different from what it seems to be. It fascinates an observer and demands new research studies.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2009-55-4-158-172

  • 2, 2009

    • RELEVANCY OF THOMAS HOBBES PHILOSOPHY (I)

      The past 100–150 years not only failed to establish a unified interpretation of Hobbes, but also formed a firm tendency towards continuous reinterpretation of his doctrine. This tendency is only increasing today. According to A.Filippov, never-ceasing interest in Hobbes can be primarily explained by the fact that we are still occupied by the same problems that occupied the mind of the philosopher who lived several centuries ago. In the first part of the article published in this issue A.Filippov makes a critical analysis of main approaches to the interpretation of Hobbes’ views and offers a key to understanding his politico-philosophical constructs. He believes that what Hobbes has in mind when speaking about natural condition is not an absolute beginning of history. Natural condition, indeed, precedes social and political condition, but at the same time political life, sociality are fraught with the natural condition – they are the wrong side of each other. Conclusions made on the bases of such interpretation of Hobbes will be given in the second part of the article.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2009-53-2-141-157

  • 2, 2002

    • Political sociology. Fundamental problems and main concepts. (part 2)

      This thorough article counted for two issues reviews the subject matter of political sociology and its place in the context of general sociology. The author outlines the field of research and breaks it down into main categories (power, legitimacy, charisma, and conflict.) In the tissue of his presentation A. Philippov gives an excursus to the history of political thought. Critically analyzing the common ideas of political sociology he reasons about the pros and the contras of understanding it as one of the branches of sociology.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2002-25-2-97-117

      Pages: 97-117

  • 1, 2002

    • Political sociology. Fundamental problems and main concepts. (part 1)

      This thorough article counted for two issues reviews the subject matter of political sociology and its place in the context of general sociology. The author outlines the field of research and breaks it down into main categories (power, legitimacy, charisma, and conflict.) In the tissue of his presentation A. Philippov gives an excursus to the history of political thought. Critically analyzing the common ideas of political sociology he reasons about the pros and the contras of understanding it as one of the branches of sociology.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2002-24-1-146-169

      Pages: 146-169

  • 1, 1999

    • Y.Luzhkov and his regional policy

      The article deals with Y. M. Luzhkov’s contacts with Russian regional leaders. In the author’s opinion the main reason for the mayor’s particular attitude to the construction of the system of his relations with the regional ruling elite is the political regime in Moscow, founded by Y. M. Luzhkov, which creates some obstacles for him to consolidate federal elite around himself. The article examines the possibilities Luzhkov’s regional policy has and its restrictions. The author believes that Luzhkov has to chose either to found regional clientele or to form a coalition with the regional leaders. If the mayor of Moscow chooses the second variant, it can lead to the further decentralisation of Russia.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-1999-11-1-73-94

      Pages: 73-94