Informace o publikaci
The Legal-Philosophical Terms of Havel’s Thought in Current Legal Discourse.
| Název česky | Právně-filozofické pojmy z Havlových myšlenek v současném právním diskurzu |
|---|---|
| Autoři | |
| Rok publikování | 2017 |
| Druh | Článek ve sborníku |
| Konference | Argumentation 2017 |
| Fakulta / Pracoviště MU | |
| Citace | |
| Obor | Právní vědy |
| Klíčová slova | Václav Havel; Legal-Philosophical Thought; Current Legal Discourse |
| Přiložené soubory | |
| Popis | “I think it can safely be assumed that the overwhelming majority of shopkeepers never think about the slogans they put in their windows, nor do they use them to express their real opinions.” (V. Havel, The Power of the Powerless, 1977) Havel´s legal-philosophical concepts concerning justice, morality, ideology, and mainly, the subjects of freedom, power and living in truth are key terms of his literary work. They had an enormous impact on dissidents, academics, dominant state power and transforming part of the society not only back at the time of publishing but also during following revolutionary years. Living in truth is supposed to be the key maxim of Havel’s writings. It is the impetus behind his plays, political essays or his dissent as such. Living in truth is living outside of the coercions of ideology according to his view; being open to all possible appearances rather than focusing on a single mode of appearance (Brennan, 2016). This phenomenological view influenced by Jan Patočka has also a link to Havel´s distrust of the manipulative nature of political, resp. legal language; shown implicitly in his plays and descriptively in words of his essays. Havel´s influence on recent political or philosophical history, use of language and legal heritage is undoubtable. This contribution goes beyond the historical explanations; it rather focuses on how the above-mentioned key terms of Havel´s legacy are used in current legal and political discourse. It shows connotations, philosophical influence and contemporary applications of his main literary thoughts within the contemporary legal public debate. |