Асимметрия радикальной интерпретации
This paper considers the problem of direct knowledge about oneself as a prerequisite of a self"consciousness. The explanation of the asymmetry between first and third person that is characteristic for such a knowledge could shed the light on the nature of self-consciousness as a natural phenomenon. The key to the problem is the asymmetry Donald Davidson proposed as the main feature of the process of interpretation. However, this solution is often either not fully appreciated or misunderstood as a kind of linguistic asymmetry. The paper argues that this asymmetry has a causal nature, and this is the first reason for irreducibility of our mentalist vocabulary and thereby for the necessary use of such concepts as selfconsciousness
The research for this article took place at the intersection of art and science in the period of early Soviet modernism. The article focuses on the conceptualization of “plastika” in theatre arts and how actors used it as a means of self-expression in theatre at the end of the 1910s and beginning of the 1930s. But in the area of Behaviorist science at this time, the term “plastika” carried not only a different meaning but in fact, it carried an opposite meaning. Plastika was used in Behaviorist science in relation to the study of primitive human instincts and reflexes that used external and material causes and relations to explain internal workings (for instance, the psyche). Against the background of Behaviorist rhetoric which was ubiquitous in the 1920s and 1930s, plastika expression in theatre arts appeared an anomaly for its time. This article argues for the counter-culture of theatrical plasticity in the Soviet modernist era.
This paper is aimed to show crucial points of Quine’s language acquisition conception that were criticized by Noam Chomsky. Willard Van Orman Quine tried to build a language theory in a behavioristic way using such terms as: stimulus, reaction and reinforcement. He thought that language acquisition by children could be explained as the process of ontogenesis of reference. N. Chomsky mainly objected to behaviorism and showed its weak explanatory force in language theory.
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.