Систематизация традиционного знания в индийской культуре
Main issue of the article is the problem of knowledge classification in traditional Indian culture as it presents in authoritative sanskrit texts like Chāndogyopanishada, Mundakopanishada, Mānavadharmaśāstra, Arthaśāstra, Lalitavistara, Kāmasūtra and others. Author used some concepts of social epistemology and pointed out the relations between cognitive practice, educational practice and religious one.
The system of traditional sciences (vidyā, śāstra) and principia of their classification were created by brahmans. Non-brahmans did import here nothing, because they were opponents with brahmanical tradition in the whole. But Jainas and Buddhists were the successors of brahmans in educational sphere and brahmanical classifications of knowledge also. Two main criteria for knowledge classification in brahmanical tradition were pragmatic one and the presence on traditional lists of sciences.
This study used basic personal values to elucidate the motivational meanings of “left” and “right” political orientations in 20 representative national samples from the European Social Survey (2002–2003). It also compared the importance of personal values and sociodemographic variables as determinants of political orientation. Hypotheses drew on the different histories, prevailing culture, and socioeconomic level of three sets of countries—liberal, traditional, and postcommunist. As hypothesized, universalism and benevolence values explained a left orientation in both liberal and traditional countries and conformity and tradition values explained a right orientation; values had little explanatory power in postcommunist countries. Values predicted political orientation more strongly than sociodemographic variables in liberal countries, more weakly in postcommunist countries, and about equally in traditional countries.
is volume is dedicated to the 75th anniversary of dr. yaroslav V. Vassilkov, chief Research fellow in the department of south and southwest asia of the mae, Ras. a world-renowned scholar, outstanding indologist, philologist, and ethnographer, he keeps up and expands the best traditions of the saint Petersburg school of south asian studies.
e volume contains multiple sections that re ect the scope of Prof. Vassilkov’s fundamental research interests. each section includes articles by Russian and international experts in the indo- european and Vedic studies, ancient south asian epics and culture, history of indian philosophy and buddhology, ethnography and folklore of india, as well as the history of scholarship. Because Prof. Vassilkov has for many years been developing the methodology of the Russian school of historical and typological folklore research, special attention is paid to the study of the indian epics.
The article considers the Views of L. N. Tolstoy not only as a representative, but also as a accomplisher of the Enlightenment. A comparison of his philosophy with the ideas of Spinoza and Diderot made it possible to clarify some aspects of the transition to the unique Tolstoy’s religious and philosophical doctrine. The comparison of General and specific features of the three philosophers was subjected to a special analysis. Special attention is paid to the way of thinking, the relation to science and the specifics of the worldview by Tolstoy and Diderot. An important aspect is researched the contradiction between the way of thinking and the way of life of the three philosophers.
Tolstoy's transition from rational perception of life to its religious and existential bases is shown. Tolstoy gradually moves away from the idea of a natural man to the idea of a man, who living the commandments of Christ. Starting from the educational worldview, Tolstoy ended by creation of religious and philosophical doctrine, which were relevant for the 20th century.
This important new book offers the first full-length interpretation of the thought of Martin Heidegger with respect to irony. In a radical reading of Heidegger's major works (from Being and Time through the ‘Rector's Address' and the ‘Letter on Humanism' to ‘The Origin of the Work of Art' and the Spiegel interview), Andrew Haas does not claim that Heidegger is simply being ironic. Rather he argues that Heidegger's writings make such an interpretation possible - perhaps even necessary.
Heidegger begins Being and Time with a quote from Plato, a thinker famous for his insistence upon Socratic irony. The Irony of Heidegger takes seriously the apparently curious decision to introduce the threat of irony even as philosophy begins in earnest to raise the question of the meaning of being. Through a detailed and thorough reading of Heidegger's major texts and the fundamental questions they raise, Haas reveals that one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century can be read with as much irony as earnestness. The Irony of Heidegger attempts to show that the essence of this irony lies in uncertainty, and that the entire project of onto-heno-chrono-phenomenology, therefore needs to be called into question.
The article is concerned with the notions of technology in essays of Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger. The special problem of the connection between technology and freedom is discussed in the broader context of the criticism of culture and technocracy discussion in the German intellectual history of the first half of the 20th century.