Justifying the subordinated position of women in society by appealing to biological sex diferences has a long history and is popular today, too. In this article the author aims to reconstruct some counter-arguments against such kind of legitimisation of gender inequality developed by Harriet Taylor Mill and John Stuart Mill in the 19th century. These philosophers articulated the problem of women’s subjection, and in line with their liberal position argued for women’s liberation on the grounds of freedom and social justice as well as on those of ethical utilitarism. The author argues that the arguments of these philosophers merit attention even today., Mariana Szapuová., Poznámky na s. 12, Nesrovnalost křestního jména Mariana Szapuová, Obsahuje bibliografii, and Resumé o klíčová slova anglicky na str. 3
This polemical reflection critically investigates the likewise polemical article by Ladislav Hohoš, published in the Filosofický časopis, No.5/2013: “Is social critique exclusively a question of neo-Marxism?”. This piece was itself responding to my polemical study “Social criticism as a problem of neo-Marxism” (Filosofický časopis, No.2/2013). I take Hohoš’s main objections against my polemic in turn, and I reply to them. To this end, I focus on Hohoš’ reproduction, and partial reinterpretation, of Marx’s ideological doctrine of historical materialism, on the basis of which he presents his standpoint. In my polemic I point to the overall unsustainability of his objections, demonstrating the unsustainability of the foundations of Marxist doctrine itself., Miloslav Bednář., and Obsahuje poznámky a bibliografii