Studia Philosophica

Na základě reflexe díla tří brněnských autorů (R. Těsnohlídek, J. Mahen a J. Tomeček) se text pokouší obhájit názor o kultivační roli přírodní prózy – v konfrontaci s kritickým pohledem J. Šmajse. Tato oblast umělecké tvorby představuje jednu z možností, jak čelit environmen­tálnímu žalu. Ten je jednou z významných charakteristik toho, jak lidé v současnosti vnímají stav světa a rizika pro budoucí existenční perspektivy.

The paper examines Robert Filmer’s arguments in defence of the divine right of kings in Patriarcha, or The Natural Power of Kings. Filmer argues that human beings are not born free by nature and, as a result, are expected to obey the kings/monarchs absolutely with­out questioning, due to the arbitrary power and the divine right bestowed upon the kings. This position defended by Filmer is antithetical to the notion of natural freedom of mankind defended by John Locke and other social contract theorists. Contrary to Filmer’s view, this paper suggests that Filmer exaggerated the power of kings. In this paper, I wish to critically examine Filmer’s arguments with which he supported his claim. The paper argues against Filmer’s divine right monarchy for the following reasons: (i) it lacks rational justification, (ii) it was founded on misinterpretation of the scriptures, and (iii) it fails to address the athe­ists’ question. In the final analysis, the paper concludes with the argument that the question of mutual exclusivity of the concepts in the discussion rests upon manifest misinterpreta­tions of divine right and the natural freedom of mankind.