Advertisement

Philosophia

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 337–354 | Cite as

Cruelty, Singular Individuality, and Peter the Great

  • Amihud GileadEmail author
Article

Abstract

In discussing cruelty toward human beings, I argue that disregarding the singularity of any human being is necessary for treating her or him cruelly. The cruelty of Peter the Great, relying upon the intolerance of any human singular individuality, serves me as a paradigm-case to illustrate that. The cruelty of Procrustes and that of Stalin rely upon similar grounds. Relating to a person’s singularity is sufficient to prevent cruelty toward that person. In contrast, a liberal state of mind or solidarity is insufficient to prevent cruelty and, under some circumstances, may even cause it.

Keywords

Cruelty Singular individuality Pscyhical private accessibility Intersubjectivity Interpresonality Self Person Dignity Solidarity Liberalism Despotism Deontology Values Equality Civilization Love Envy Humiliation Torture Slavery Classical Russian literature Originality Plagiarism Immanuel Kant John Kekes Richard Rorty Peter the Great 

References

  1. Anemone, A. (2000). The monsters of peter the great: the culture of the St. Petersburg Kunstkamera in the eighteenth century. The Slavic and East European Journal, 44, 583–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anisimov, E. V. (1990). Progress through violence: from peter the great to Lenin and Stalin. Russian History, 17, 409–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldwin, T. (2000). Death and meaning—some questions for Derrida. Ratio, 13, 387–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baruchello, G. (2004). Cesare Beccaria and the cruelty of liberalism: an essay on liberalism of fear and its limits. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 30, 303–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berlin, I. (1978). Russian Thinkers. London: The Hogarth Press.Google Scholar
  6. Berlin, I. (1990). The crooked timber of humanity: chapters in the history of ideas. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  7. Conant, J. (2000). Freedom, cruelty, and truth: Rorty versus orwell. In R. B. Brandom (Ed.), Rorty and his critics (pp. 268–342). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Cracraft, J. (2003). The revolution of Peter the great. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. de Madariaga, I. (1987). Book review of the image of peter the great in Russian history and thought by Nicholas V. Riasanovsky. The Journal of Modern History, 59, 644–646.Google Scholar
  10. Gilead, A. (2003). Singularity and Other Possibilities: Panenmentalist Novelties. Value Inquiry Book Series, vol. 139. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  11. Gilead, A. (2004). “Philosophical Blindness: Between Arguments and Insights,” Review of Metaphysics 58, pp. 147–170.Google Scholar
  12. Gilead, A. (2005). “Torture and Singularity,” Public Affairs Quarterly 19, pp. 163–176.Google Scholar
  13. Gilead, A. (2008). “A Humean Argument For Personal Identity,” Metaphysica 9, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
  14. Gilead, A. (2011). The Privacy of the Psychical. Value Inquiry Book Series, vol. 233. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  15. Gilead, A. (2014). “We Are Not Replicable: A Challenge to Parfit’s View. International Philosophical Quarterly doi:  10.5840/ipq201410720. Accessed 8 Oct 2014.
  16. Graves, R. (1960). The Greek Myths (1st ed.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  17. Kekes, J. (1996). Cruelty and liberalism. Ethics, 106, 834–844.Google Scholar
  18. Kuipers, R. A. (1997). Singular interruptions: Rortian liberalism and the ethics of deconstruction. In J. H. Olthuis (Ed.), Knowing other-wise: philosophy at the threshold of spirituality (pp. 105–130). New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Massie, R. K. (1980). Peter the great: his life and world. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
  20. Nordlander, D.J. (2015). The Gulag as a Reinvention of Serfdom in Soviet Russia. http://www.yale.edu/glc/events/cbss/Nordlander.pdf.
  21. Nordlander, D. J. (1998). Origins of a gulag capital: Magadan and Stalinist control in the early 1930s. Slavic Review, 57, 791–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Parfit, D. (1987). Reasons and persons. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  23. Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schneiderman, L. (2000). Alternative medicine or alternatives to medicine? A physician’s perspective. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 9, 83–97.Google Scholar
  25. Shklar, J. (1984). Ordinary vices. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Wall, J. (2003). Phronesis, poetics, and moral creativity. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 6, 317–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, Eshkol TowerUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations