论文部分内容阅读
伊里因以强力抗恶思想的提出源于对托尔斯泰勿以暴力抗恶思想的批判,源于对俄罗斯知识分子未能使俄罗斯摆脱恶的侵害后的反思。通过对善与恶外化本性的分析,伊里因论证了以强力抗恶的必要性;为了防止抗恶的强力变成滋生恶的暴力,他又严格规定了以强力抗恶的前提条件。与托尔斯泰不同,伊里因主张通过内在精神措施和外在强制措施相结合的方式去抵抗恶,这两种方法各有侧重、不可偏废。外在强制措施服务于内在精神措施,需要谨慎对待强制措施,但面对恶行要勇于应战。伊里因与托尔斯泰在如何抗恶这一问题上的分歧与他们二人不同的政治取向密切相关,托尔斯泰是否定国家政权的无政府主义者,而伊里因则是主张建立强大国家政权的国家主义者。
The reason why Irin put forward his strong anti-evil thought stems from the criticism that Tolstoy should refrain from violent anti-evil. It stems from the reflections on the Russian intellectuals’ failure to rid Russia of evil. By analyzing the nature of the good and evil being externalized, Irin argued the necessity of a strong anti-evil campaign. In order to prevent the anti-evil forces from becoming violent ones that arouse evil, he also strictly stipulated the prerequisite for a strong anti-evil. Unlike Tolstoy, Ilin advocates resistance to evil through a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic coercive measures, both of which focus on and can not be neglected. External coercive measures to serve internal measures, the need to be cautious about coercive measures, but in the face of evil should have the courage to fight. The disagreements between Irin and Tolstoy on how to resist the evil are closely related to their different political orientation. Tolstoy denied the anarchist of the state power, while the Irish advocated the establishment of a strong Nationalist nationalist.