ON THE CHARACTER OF SOCIAL COMMUNITIES, THE STATE AND THE PUBLIC DOMAIN
The view that organized social communities or associations differ from unorganized communities by having a kind of government or management exerting authority over the community appears almost obvious. Nevertheless it contradicts Dooyeweerd’s view, distinguishing organized communities from natural c...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
Brill
2004
|
In: |
Philosophia reformata
Year: 2004, Volume: 69, Issue: 2, Pages: 125-139 |
Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) |
Summary: | The view that organized social communities or associations differ from unorganized communities by having a kind of government or management exerting authority over the community appears almost obvious. Nevertheless it contradicts Dooyeweerd’s view, distinguishing organized communities from natural communities because of their being founded in the technical relation frame (or modal aspect) respectively the biotic one. This paper discusses the dual character (or structure of individuality) of associations, requiring the introduction of a new relation frame. Determined by authority and discipline, the political relation frame succeeds the frames of social intercourse and economic relations, and precedes the frames of justice and loving care. It qualifies the generic character of any association, founded in that of social intercourse. Besides, each association has a specific character, distinguishing various types of associations. These insights shed new light upon the dual character of a state as the guardian of the public domain. Constituting various networks of human relations, the public domain does not have the character of a community. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2352-8230 |
Contains: | In: Philosophia reformata
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/22116117-90000321 |