„Iné“ nemusí znamenať nepriateľské
„Other“ does not necessarily mean hostile

Summary/Abstract: The specific research on the issue “other” is not intensive currently of the present time. Usually more attention pay to conception enemy. The aim of the study is to point out that "other" does not always mean hostile. At the same time, one must bear in mind that the line between hostility and tolerance is not really clear enough. The author's intention is to clarify and document concepts such as "other", “the enemy”, “identity”, "we", "they", “minority” or “majority”. "Other" is perhaps the most neutral term for describing something unacceptable, as I attempt to prove in the current study. Their analysis involves some degree of comparison and interpretation. The questions raised in the study are also a subject of research of political philosophy, among other disciplines. Without the description, explanation, interpretation of texts, i.e., processes that are indispensable for understanding and comprehension, one cannot arrive at a satisfactory outcome. I have attempted to offer a holistic view on the problem under discussion while providing the context, for such research is inseparable from man and his actions, as emphasised e.g. by Leo Strauss. Addressing this topic clearly demonstrates that conflict is part of any human action, including political activity.

• Details
• Contents