В истории восприятия интеллектуального наследия Оригена русскими богословами и философами последних столетий выделяются несколько ключевых моментов и несколько ключевых фигур. Это, прежде всего, Григорий Сковорода (1722–1794), Владимир Соловьёв (1853–1900), Сергей Булгаков (1871–1944), Николай Бердяев (1874–1948) и Георгий Флоровский (1893–1979). Значимость этих авторов для нашего исследования определяется сочетанием трёх обстоятельств: (1) ключевой ролью названных мыслителей в эволюции русской богословской и философской мысли и (2) тем фактом, что их собственная интеллектуальная эволюция, а также (3) восприятие их идей современниками и/или более поздними исследователями осуществлялись в тесной связи с проблемой Оригена. Таким образом, процесс восприятия интеллектуального наследия Оригена в России оказался в существенной степени обусловлен теми спорами, которые велись и ведутся вокруг ключевых представителей так называемой «русской религиозной философии».
The formation of the Afroeurasian world-system was one of the crucial points of social evolution, starting from which the social evolution rate and effectiveness increased dramatically. In the present article we analyze processes and scales of global integration in historical perspective, starting with the Agrarian Revolution. We connect the main phases of historical globalization with the processes of the development of the Afroeurasian world-system. In the framework of the Afroeurasian world-system the integration began a few thousand years BCE. In this world-system the continental and supracontinental links became rather developed long before the Great Geographic Discoveries and thus, they could quite be denoted as global (albeit in a somehow limited sense). As some researchers are still inclined to underestimate the scale of those links in the pre-Industrial era, it appears necessary to provide additional empirical support for our statement. It also turns necessary to apply a special methodology (which necessitated the use of the world-system approach). We analyze some versions of periodization of globalization history. We also propose our own periodization of globalization history using as its basis the growing scale of intersocietal links as an indicator of the level of globalization development.
The article deals with the problem of normative evaluation of war and mass violence. The doctrines of Realism, Pacifism, Militarism, Realism and Just War are the most widely used theoretical and normative tools of this evaluation and normative practice. The latest developments have brought the Just War theory to the fore. The peak of popularity of the Just War Theory may prove, nevertheless, to be its swan's song. The recent theoretical findings as well as the political applications of this ethical theory in Kosovo and Iraq, have proved to be somewhat less then adequate, to say the least. Theoretically it hovers uneasily in between Militarism and Pacifism, pragmatically it may work as a smoke screen for the most hideous forms of agression and an instrument of the wide scale information war. The author of this article is holding that we must not put aside the idea of the morally constrained war, it may be modified. The result of this modification may be entitled Necessary War doctrine. The necessary war differs significantly from the just war, it is closer to pacifism and less prone to theoretical critisism. The foundations of this doctrine has been laid by Russian philosopher Ivan Ilyin.
The article discusses the design praxis in relation to the Peircean semiotics. It approaches the product as sign. The product should communicate its functions; it should emit its message. Its own form communicates. So to transmit messages in a creative way through the design is necessary to work the associations by similarity more intensely to obtain object-signs riches in information and analogies.
Mikhail Bakhtin’s term “participative reason” (uchastnoe myshlenie) means “reason that acts”—a way of thinking in which a person participates because it is not indifferent to the fate of the Other. The article considers two main trends in the understanding of participative reason. The first is connected with the co-being of I and the Other, the second develops the idea of obligation and non-alibi in being. The article aims to show that the unity of these two interpretations could make “participative reason” a basis for a more decent human world.
Keywords: participative reason, responsibility, non-alibi in being, philosophy of the act, Mikhail Bakhtin.
In this article, we discuss the pragmatic relationship between semiosis and communication in order to characterize transmedia dynamics as a pragmatic offshoot of semiosis in media, a perspective that accounts for the incompleteness of the interpretant in its meditated actions. The theoretical approach is based on the communication perspective of the sign developed by Charles Sanders Peirce and his contemporary commentators, such as Parmentier (1985), Colapietro (1995, 2004), Santaella (1992, 1995, 2003, 2004), and Bergman (2000, 2003, 2007). In addition, transmedia dynamics are explored according to Jenkins (2001, 2006, 2013), Göran (2012), and Jansson (2013). We discuss the notion of media as sign mediation and transmedia dynamics as an improvement of semiosis, based on the pragmatic approach to the latter. Transmedia narratives refer to integrated media experiences that unfold across a variety of platforms, attracting audience engagement and offering new and pertinent content. Moreover, the productive incompleteness of the interpretant is taken as a conceptual parameter for understanding the way in which media consumption regulates habits and delineates the transmedia narrative in the sign process of network associations. In conclusion, we stress how the semiotic operation of representation, associating new signs and collateral experience, without losing the narrative reference (semiotic operation of determination), emerged in transmedia environments.
This paper discusses design process as a creative activity along with conceptual correlations of the semiotics developed by Charles Sanders Peirce. The central aim of this paper is to examine one of the most important concepts in Peirce’s theory related to design praxis: the concept of abduction. Abduction is the driving force behind creation and a way of producing new ideas. Peirce’s original concept is fundamental in order to maintain constant commitment to innovation required by design. To transmit messages in a creative way it is more efficient to intensely work with associations by similarity in order to obtain signs rich in information and analogies. Design communicates by all its constituent elements: shape, function, colour, material, technique, technology, etc. Therefore, signs of design share peculiar values of artistic signs as well as those of communicative ones. The associated information is as much aesthetic (shape) as it is semantic (content). The appropriation of Peircean concepts contributes to the understanding of the creative process, which in turn is crucial for understanding new possibilities by means of design.
This article reconstructs and analyzes the philosophical hermeneutics of the political events of perestroika and regime change in Russia in 1991 as well as the political and economic atmosphere of the “wild 90s” proposed in the works of Russian philosopher Vladimir Bibikhin. Bibikhin’s attention to this theme owes as much to the traditional themes of Russian philosophy as to Heidegger’s thesis on historical factuality of thought. An examination of Bibikhin’s philosophy is impossible if these two sources are separated: it is only by mutually enriching each other that they contributed to the specificity of Bibikhin’s philosophical work linked with contemporary events. Characteristically, while recognizing the significance of historical context for Bibikhin’s thought different researchers often propose opposite interpretations of the philosopher’s reaction to current events. While Artemy Magun believes that Bibikhin fully shared the political enthusiasm of the pioneers of perestroika, Mikhail Bogatov discerns Bibikhin’s critical attitude to such enthusiasm. Looking at the whole body of Bibikhin’s texts it becomes clear that the reason for such a wide spread of possible interpretations was the complexity of Bibikhin’s attitude to the events referred to. On the one hand, the philosopher, while being highly critical of the scale of privatization, was also very sensitive to the change of ideology; on the other hand, Bibikhin recognized the significance of the events that happened and urged intellectuals to think about them deeply. Bibikhin believed that the only adequate response to the newly available freedom was philosophical work that links the interpretation of historical context to eternal themes of the original philosophy. At the same time, he stressed the significance of the Russian philosophical tradition for such interpretation and therefore perceived perestroika and the 1990s as a new chance for the evolution of Russian philosophy. His main intent was the search for non-ideological thinking.
One peculiarity of XIX-XX cent. Russian philosophy consists in its treating communication as a self-value. Shpet projects this attitude onto the methodology of humanities, thus opening its new dimension - that of “historical semasiology”. While reconstructing methodological programs of science, he rejects the alternative of both experience and pure logic as possible supports in order to reveal, by means of phenomenological procedure, the real domain where logic and experience correspond to each other in performing the main function of cognition. This is the domain of “expression” or “presentation” (“communicative aspect of cognition”). Shpet’s intent “to distinguish nominative function of the word, resp. its nominal object-relatedness, from its semasiological function, resp. its object-relatedness to meaning ” is of vital importance for humanities today.
Aufgrund der strikten Unterscheidung zwischen den kognitiven und den außerkognitiven Bewusstseinsstrukturen kritisiert der Beitrag die Idee des unbestimmt extensiven Verstehens von Erkenntnis. Die Religion wird dementsprechend als unkognitives Gefühl (Glaube) betrachtet, das über die Existenz Gottes nichts aussagt und die Merkmale der Religion als Effekte dieses Gefühls betrachtet. Dieses Gefühl wird durch seine Intention (als Kommunion, Weltlichkeit, Gleichmässigkeit) und nicht durch irgendein vom Denken vorgestelltes Objekt (Gott) spezifiziert.