Tolstoy: Anarşizm mi, Süregiden Felsefe mi?
Künye
Tümkaya, Ahmet Selim, Tosun, Cengiz Mesut.(2020).Tolstoy: Anarşizm mi, Süregiden Felsefe mi?.B e y t u l h i k m e A n I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l o f P h i l o s o p h y,10(2),639-662.Özet
In this paper, we criticize a well-known remark in the anarchist literature, i.e., ‘Tolstoy, the Anarchist’, and we claim that this naming is, in fact, an
oxymoron. As a theory having related itself to many movements throughout its
historical development, anarchism presents considerable uncertainties in its
theoretical structure that formed within the process. And as far as Tolstoy is
concerned, even some of its proponents reject the claim that he was an anarchist. Departing from Albert Melzer’s view on Tolstoy, this paper tries to
show that Meltzer was right in claiming that Tolstoy ‘had never been an anarchist’. In addition to these criticisms coming from the anarchist movement itself, this rejection is mainly grounded in the traditional roots of the concept of
an ‘ideal’ religion, a religion of love that would encompass all humanity. When
taken into consideration, these traditional roots to which Tolstoy devoted all
his life intellectually and spiritually must bring him closer to the Perennial Philosophy; as a result, we claim that Tolstoy must be viewed as a ‘perennialist’ rather than an ‘anarchis
