- Home page
- Researchers
- Dr. Višnja Stojadinović
Dr. Višnja Stojadinović
- Address: /
- Email: [email protected]
- Telephone: /
- LinkedIn: /
Researcher
Institute for Political Studies
2010-
Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy, Belgrade University
PhD
2020
Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy, Belgrade University
BS
2008
Višnja Stojadinović is a Research Associate of the Institute for Political Studies, editorial secretary of the journal: Nacionalni interes (National Interest). Her research centers on modern history of ideas and political ideologies, especially history and theory of liberalism. She published several papers in national journals and foreign collections of papers (Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu).
POSITIVE VS. NEGATIVE UNDERSTANDING OF LIBERTY: POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS
The subject of this paper is the analysis of the political implications of the distinction between positive and negative understanding of liberty. The author first explains the relevance of this topic within the framework of contemporary theoretical and political discussions. The starting point of this paper is Berlin's distinction between the concepts of positive and negative liberty. In the first part of the paper, the author will deal with the implications of this difference regarding the type of socio-political system and political culture. In this sense, the author will try showing the democratic concept of liberty is positive liberty, while the classical liberal understanding of liberty is negative. In other words, the relationship between positive and negative liberty reflects on the relationship between democracy and liberalism; this relationship implies possible compatibility, but also potential opposition. In the second part of the paper, the author deals with the implications of the difference between the two concepts of liberty concerning distinctive models of democracy. Referring to Riker's thesis, the author's goal is to show how a positive understanding of liberty leads to a populist model of democracy. On the other hand, a negative understanding leads to a liberal model. The difference between these models of democracy is also reflected in the attitude about whether democracy has instrumental or intrinsic value.
DEFINING THE CONCEPT OF LIBERTY: THREE DIFFERENT APPROACHES
The subject of this paper is a thorough consideration of the concept of liberty. The starting point is Berlin’s distinction between positive and negative understanding of liberty. In this sense, Berlin’s definition of positive and negative liberty is presented first, as well as the reasons on the basis of which these concepts can be considered logically independent. The author then analyzes MacCallum’s critique on Berlin’s thesis on the existence of two different concepts of liberty as well as MacCallum’s thesis on the existence of only one concept of liberty. MacCallum’s understanding of liberty as a triadic relation and his thesis on possibility of a unique formal presentation of all eligible statements about liberty are being examined. After MacCallum’s critique, the author analyzes another relevant critique of Berlin’s point of view: Skinner’s thesis on the existence of a third concept of liberty. In this sense, Skinner’s understanding of liberty as the absence of political and social dependence is being discussed. In light of above-mentioned considerations, the author concludes that MacCallum’s and Skinner’s critiques are unsuccessful and, consequently, Berlin’s thesis on the existence of two different concepts of liberty is justified. Finally, the author points out that defining liberty is not merely academic topic, moreover – it has relevant political implications.
BERLIN’S UNDERSTANDING OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VALUE PLURALISM AND MORAL AND CULTURAL RELATIVISM
The subject of this paper is thorough analysis of value pluralism and moral and cultural relativism, as different meta-ethical theories. The focus of the analysis is Berlin’s understanding of value pluralism, distinction between value monism and pluralism, as well as the implications of this distinction. This topic is connected with other key issues, such as the concepts of freedom and human nature, therefore it is of great importance in the field of moral and political discussions. Drawing on the analysis of Berlin’s view on value pluralism, the authors examine the most relevant critiques of this view, which interpret Berlin’s understanding as radical pluralism, subjectivism, moral and cultural relativism and postmodernism. In that respect, the main purpose of this paper is to distinguish value pluralism from the above-mentioned standpoints. The authors will attempt to demonstrate that these critiques consist of wrongly derived implications of Berlin’s understanding. In the light of the mentioned considerations, the authors conclude that the recognition of the existence of the minimal core of universal human nature and morality is what distinguishes value pluralism from subjectivism and relativism.
Djordje Stojanović, Živojin Djurić, Anatomija savremene države (Anatomy of the Modern State), Institut za političke studije, Beograd, 2012.
Book review: Djordje Stojanović, Živojin Djurić, Anatomija savremene države (Anatomy of the Modern State), Institut za političke studije, Beograd, 2012.