Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
The author or concept searched is found in the following 5 entries.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Darwinism | Kropotkin | Brocker I I26 Darwinism/Kropotkin: Kropotkin saw himself as a Darwinist, but rejected the evolution theorist from his students. According to Kropotkin, Darwin was "quite right when he saw in the social characteristics of man the main factor for his further development, and Darwin's vulgarizing successors are completely wrong when they claim the opposite". (1) VsKropotkin/VsSocial Darwinism: 1. Both are guilty of naturalistic failure: to derive a "shall" from being. Darwin himself, on the other hand, only tried to provide a description and explanation for the emergence and development of life in nature, and not to derive instructions for action from it. CantzenVsKropotkin: 2. Both Kropotkin and the social Darwinism he criticized appear with the claim of a natural science and try to present mutual help as a law of nature. Kropotkin does not reflect on the relationship between the natural environment and the social environment. However, this is a historical relationship and not a law of nature. (2) 1. Pjotr Alexejewitsch Kropotkin, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, London 1902. Dt.: Peter Kropotkin, Gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt. Mit einem Nachwort neu herausgegeben von Henning Ritter, Frankfurt/M./Berlin/Wien 1975, S. 113.f. 2. Rolf Cantzen, Weniger Staat – mehr Gesellschaft. Freiheit – Ökologie – Anarchismus, Frankfurt/M. 1987 , S. 23. |
Kropot I Peter Kropotkin Gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt Frankfurt/Berlin/Wien 1975 |
| Selection | Kropotkin | Brocker I 28 Selection/GouldVsKropotkin/Kropotkin/Gould: Kropotkin did not realize that natural selection refers to benefits for the individual being, no matter how it fights. The struggle for existence can lead to cooperation instead of competition, but according to the Darwinian explanation, mutual help must benefit the individual organism. (1) Gould pro Kropotkin: However, Kropotkin has also recognized that selection in favour of mutual help benefits each individual in his own fight for personal success. In this Gould saw an insight of the original Darwinian thinking that is still important today. GouldVsKropotkin: Kropotkin projects his anarchistic desires into nature.(2) 1.Gould 1994, S. 389f. 2.Ebenda S. 387. |
Kropot I Peter Kropotkin Gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt Frankfurt/Berlin/Wien 1975 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| State (Polity) | Kropotkin | Brocker I 29 State/Kropotkin: Thesis: In the centuries after the Middle Ages, the states on the continent and in the British Isles systematically eradicated all institutions in which the tendency towards mutual assistance had previously found its expression. […] The usurpation of all social functions by the state had to promote the development of an unbridled, mentally limited individualism. (1) VsKropotkin: 1. He does not identify the real enemy here: the states do not act, they are always groups of people. This leads him to an idealized and unhistorical representation of social life. VsKropotkin: 2. He falls into a dualism of repressive state on the one hand and a life context based on mutual solidarity on the other. That there could also be freedom in the state and oppression in the community was obviously beyond his imagination. 1. Pjotr Alexejewitsch Kropotkin, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, London 1902. Dt.: Peter Kropotkin, Gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt. Mit einem Nachwort neu herausgegeben von Henning Ritter, Frankfurt/M./Berlin/Wien 1975, S. 210f. |
Kropot I Peter Kropotkin Gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt Frankfurt/Berlin/Wien 1975 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| Utopia | Rousseau | Brocker I 27 Utopia/KropotkinVsRousseau/Rousseau: Kropotkin criticized Rousseau as the protagonist of a positive-optimistic image of the human. (See also Anarchism/Kropotkin, Darwinism/Kropotkin.) VsKropotkin: Overall, however, "Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution" (1) seems like a biological interpretation ((s too) under positive-optimistic signs, despite a few inserts to the contrary: Behaviour in the sense of solidarity and support are regarded as suphistoric constants of human social behaviour, which are ultimately natural and inherent in all individuals. 1. Pjotr Alexejewitsch Kropotkin, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, London 1902. Dt.: Peter Kropotkin, Gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt. Mit einem Nachwort neu herausgegeben von Henning Ritter, Frankfurt/M./Berlin/Wien 1975. |
Rousseau I J. J. Rousseau Les Confessions, 1765-1770, publ. 1782-1789 German Edition: The Confessions 1953 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| Utopia | Kropotkin | Brocker I 27 Utopia/KropotkinVsRousseau/Rousseau: Kropotkin criticized Rousseau as the protagonist of a positive-optimistic image of the human. (See also Anarchism/Kropotkin, Darwinism/Kropotkin.) VsKropotkin: Overall, however, "Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution" (1) seems like a biological interpretation ((s too) under positive-optimistic signs, despite a few inserts to the contrary: certain ways of behaviour in the sense of solidarity and support are regarded as suphistoric constants of human social behaviour, which are ultimately natural and inherent in all individuals. 1. Pjotr Alexejewitsch Kropotkin, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, London 1902. Dt.: Peter Kropotkin, Gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt. Mit einem Nachwort neu herausgegeben von Henning Ritter, Frankfurt/M./Berlin/Wien 1975. |
Kropot I Peter Kropotkin Gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt Frankfurt/Berlin/Wien 1975 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
| |||