Abstract
A soberania é um conceito cuja definição remete para o absoluto e o incondicionado, pese embora a sua génese se situar na modernidade, o que significa ter de se prescindir, na sua formulação, de qualquer recurso de natureza transcendente, como os que serviam de lastro à legitimação do poder nas concepções antiga e medieval. É objectivo do presente artigo analisar este paradoxo, sempre presente no Estado contemporâneo, evidenciando, a partir dos escritos de Fernando Gil sobre o tema, o modo como a soberania alberga em simultâneo duas dimensões conceptuais que são antagónicas e, no entanto, inalienáveis.
Sovereignty is a concept, whose definition refers to the absolute and unconditioned power, although its genesis is in modernity, which means we have to manage in its formulation without any transcendent resource, as it was usual for legitimate power in the ancient and medieval conceptions. This paper aims at analysing such paradox, always present in contemporary state, looking at the writings on the issue by Fernando Gil and trying to show how sovereignty accommodates two conceptual dimensions that are antagonistic despite inalienable.
Sovereignty is a concept, whose definition refers to the absolute and unconditioned power, although its genesis is in modernity, which means we have to manage in its formulation without any transcendent resource, as it was usual for legitimate power in the ancient and medieval conceptions. This paper aims at analysing such paradox, always present in contemporary state, looking at the writings on the issue by Fernando Gil and trying to show how sovereignty accommodates two conceptual dimensions that are antagonistic despite inalienable.
Original language | Portuguese |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 15-29 |
Number of pages | 15 |
Journal | Cultura |
Volume | 35 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2016 |
Keywords
- empire
- state
- law
- ground
- will
- Império
- Estado
- absoluto
- fundamento
- vontade