Koktysh Kirill

Main Page ~ Authors ~ Koktysh Kirill
  • 2, 2019

    • English Concept of Freedom: Experience of Deconstruction

      The article attempts to deconstruct the English concept of freedom. Having documented the multi-layered structure of this concept, which can be represented as a set of shells that consistently embrace the nuclear concept, the author traces the history of the formation of its key components, such as Anglicanism, individualism, property, trade, and etatism. It took over one hundred years to combine all these components into the concept of freedom, after which it entered the stage of the applied implementation. According to the author, it was the English concept of freedom that 

      formed the basis of the British Empire, as well as the international legal order that developed in the 19th century, and the British national character.

      It is noteworthy that the British Empire was built on formally anti-imperial value foundations. It is primarily about the concept of free trade that allowed England to fully utilize the advantages of possessing the most developed industry in the world at that time. Although in theory free trade provides freedom to everyone, in practice England was the only beneficiary because free trade reduced many politically motivated costs for England. The analysis conducted by the author reveals that in fact the liberal free-trade theory contains class approach, which was used to justify the right of the possessing class to dominance. The world order, for its part, was based on the “metaphysical essence of the world market”, which de facto structured the international legal space of the 19th and 20th centuries.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2019-93-2-48-65

      Pages: 48-65

  • 1, 2017

    • Onthology of Rational (IV)

      The paper puts forward a hypothesis that it is distribution of social statuses that sets criteria for what is rational in social reality. The corporation views as reasonable something that contributes to its expansion into the semantic space of the society as a whole, and deems unreasonable something that prevents such expansion. At an individual’s level, reasonable is something that contributes to one’s attainment of social status. To support his statement in more details, K.Koktysh refers to the analysis of the formation and transformation of the languages of Political Science because it is Political Science that from the moment if its inception claimed to determine whether this or the other knowledge can be viewed as rational, either legitimizing its introduction into the social structure, or, on the contrary, declaring it a prejudice. The history of Europe has witnessed several such languages that replaced one another. In the concluding part of the article published in this issue (for the first three parts see Politeia, 2016, 2, 3 and 4), the author analyzes the evolution of concepts in the epoch of Enlightenment.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2017-84-1-46-71

  • 4, 2016

    • Ontology of Rational (III)

      The paper puts forward a hypothesis that it is distribution of social statuses that sets criteria for what is rational in social reality. The corporation views as reasonable something that contributes to its expansion into the semantic space of the society as a whole, and deems unreasonable something that prevents such expansion. At an individual’s level, reasonable is something that contributes to one’s attainment of social status. To support his statement in more details, K.Koktysh refers to the analysis of the formation and transformation of the languages of Political Science because it is Political Science that from the moment if its inception claimed to determine whether this or the other knowledge can be viewed as rational, either legitimizing its introduction into the social structure, or, on the contrary, declaring it a prejudice. The history of Europe has witnessed several such languages that replaced one another. In the third part of the article published in this issue (for the first and second parts see Politeia, 2016, 2 and 3), the author analyzes the language of politics in the epoch of Modernity.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2016-83-4-6-24

  • 3, 2016

    • Ontology of Rational (II)

      The paper puts forward a hypothesis that it is distribution of social statuses that sets criteria for what is rational in social reality: the corporation views as reasonable something that contributes to its expansion into the semantic space of the society as a whole, and deems unreasonable something that prevents such expansion. At an individual’s level, reasonable is something that contributes to her attainment of social status. To support his statement in more details, K.Koktysh refers to the analysis of the formation and transformation of the languages of Political Science because it is Political Science that from the moment if its inception claimed to determine whether this or the other knowledge can be viewed as rational, either legitimizing its introduction into the social structure, or, on the contrary, declaring it a prejudice. In the history of Europe there were several such languages that replaced one another. In the second part of the article published in this issue (for the first part see Politeia, 2016 2), the author analyzes the Roman and Christian languages for describing politics.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2016-82-3-6-30

  • 2, 2016

    • ONTOLOGY OF RATIONAL (I)

      The paper puts forward a hypothesis that it is distribution of social statuses that sets criteria for what is rational in social reality: the corporation views as reasonable something that contributes to its expansion into the semantic space of the society as a whole, and deems unreasonable something that prevents such expansion. At an individual’s level, reasonable is something that contributes to one’s attainment of social status. To support his statement in more details, K.Koktysh refers to the analysis of the formation and transformation of the languages of Political Science because it is Political Science that from the moment of its inception claimed to determine whether this or the other knowledge can be viewed as rational, either legitimizing its introduction into the social structure, or, on the contrary, declaring it a prejudice. In the history of Europe there were several such languages that replaced one another. In the first part of the article published in this issue the author analyzes the antique language for describing politics.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2016-81-2-33-54

  • 2, 2009

    • CIVILIZATIONAL MEANINGS AND INTERNAL MARKETS: EXPERIENCE OF STRUCTURAL MODELING

      The article makes an attempt to distinguish on the basis of notional models stable types of civilizations with their special models of societies’ integration. Proceeding from the postulate that civilizational live meanings have to be reflected in the existing institutional architecture that in essence conducts formal consolidation and redistribution of social statuses, K.Koktysh focuses his attention on political architecture that is constituted by interaction of power, normative and economic institutions. The author’s analysis of possible types of political architecture demonstrates the existence of four types of civilizations with proper world views and life meanings, which determine ultimate goals of economic, cultural and political production. The author compares these four speculative types with the existing civilizations – Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Dao-Confucian and Hindu-Buddhist ones.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2009-53-2-39-59

  • 3, 2008

    • SYMMETRIES AND ASYMMETRIES OF POWER ONTOLOGIES IN BELARUS AND RUSSIA

      The article presents a comparative study of ontological bases of Russian and Belarusian regimes. Having made a detailed analysis of values and world views of Russian and Belarusian power elites, K.Koktysh comes to a conclusion that with all its asymmetry (monetary context as the world view basis in Russia and public and political one in Belarus) they are quite symmetrical at the level of macro-constructs. In both cases we see a certain symbiosis of mutually controversial logics of decision-making and decision-legitimation, but the logic of legitimization of a decision rejects in essence the logic of making such a decision, and therefore its use will inevitably lead to an erosion of the very system of decision-making. According to the author, such situation manifests that both countries equally have not finished the “transition”, they are passing the inter-project stage, and the range of failure options of the “transition” as such has enlarged due to the fact that a number of more favorable scenarios have been missed.

      DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2008-50-3-125-137