No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Is Nationalism Legitimate? A Sociological Perspective on a Philosophical Question1
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2020
Extract
To answer, or even consider, the question ‘Is nationalism legitimate?', whether from the sociological or ethical, philosophical point of view, it is first necessary to define what nationalism is or, in other words, to understand its nature and the source of its appeal. As concerns nationalism's definition, there are several points, in regard to which there exists among the students of the phenomenon more or less general agreement, but which, nevertheless, should be emphasized at the outset:
Nationalism is a modem phenomenon: for most of its recorded history humanity has not known it; it emerged quite recently and therefore cannot be seen as an automatic response to some universal need; its very historicity presupposes that it is essentially a cultural and not a psychological phenomenon, and that, as any cultural phenomenon, it can develop, take various forms within certain limits, and disappear.
- Type
- PART 1: Methodological Turnings
- Information
- Canadian Journal of Philosophy Supplementary Volume , Volume 22: Rethinnking Nationalism , 1996 , pp. 93 - 108
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Authors 1996
References
2 See extended discussion in Greenfeld, , Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1992), specifically in the Introduction.Google Scholar
3 Zernatto, Guido, ‘Nation: The History of the Word,’ Review of Politics 6 (1944) 351-66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 Greenfeld, Liah, ‘Transcending the Nation's Worth,’ Daedalus (Summer 1993), 47–62Google Scholar. See also my review of Talman's, JacobMyth of the Nation and Vision of Revolution in History and Theory 32:3 (October 1993) 339-49.Google Scholar
5 Greenfeld, ‘Transcending the Nation's Worth’
6 Smith, Adam, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Raphael, D.D. and Macfie, L.A., eds. (Indianapolis: Liberty Classics 1982), 57Google Scholar
7 Voltaire, , ‘Reflexions sur l'histoire,’ and’ Annales de l'empire,’ in Oeuvres completes, v. XXV, 170; v. XIII, 513Google Scholar; Raynal, Guillaume-Thomas-François de, Histoire philosophique et politique des établissements et du commerce des Européens dans les deux Indes (Geneva: 1775), v. V, 10Google Scholar; Duclos, Charles-Pinot, ‘Considerations sur les moeurs de ce siède’ in Oeuvres diverses (Paris: Dessesartes 1802), 10Google Scholar
8 Gooch, G. P., Germany and the French Revolution (New York: Russell and Russell 1966), 33–34Google Scholar; Kohn, Hans, ‘The Paradox of Fichte's Nationalism,’ Journal of the History of Ideas 10:3 (June 1949) 321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9 Weber, Max, Economy and Society (Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press 1978), v. 1, 214Google Scholar
10 See, in particular, E. Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, but also Division of Labor in Society and Rules of Sociological Method.
11 The classical argument behind this proposition is Weber, Max, ‘Objectivity in Social Sciences,’ 50–112Google Scholar in Weber, Max, The Methodology of the Social Sciences (New York: The Free Press 1949).Google Scholar
12 These ideas were first developed in Greenfeld, and Chirot, , ‘Nationalism and Aggression,’ Theory and Society 23 (February 1994) 79–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar