Просвещение как критика
The article concentrates on Chicherin, a Russian philosopher and lawyer, and his views on the correlation between liberty, law and morality. The author comments on Chicherin's ideas in the context of other views existing at the turn of the 19th and the 20th centuries. These are the views of such representatives of the Russian socially political, legal and philosophical ideas as Kavelin, Novgorodtsev, Struve, Alekseev and others, including modern researchers. Special reference is maid to Chicherin and Solovyov's polemics, which is important step in the history of Russian philosophy. Pointing out a constant connection between law and morality, that often complement each other on the basis of common values, Chicherin strongly insisted on differentiating between these notions. He was sure that the only way to a moral ideal was freedom, not an outward compulsion. And our past historical experience is the best confirmation of this idea. The work also focuses on the fact that the peculiarity of Russian law philosophy is its concentration on the questions of morality and law, the attempt of becoming closer to a moral ideal.
The complex phenomena of the individual creative activities as well as the historical development of scientific knowledge are under consideration from the point of view of the theory of self-organization (synergetics) in the book. Synergetics is characterized as a new research programme in a wide philosophical, cultural and historical context. The synergetical reinterpretations of some peculiarities of the creative thinking, such as the alternative ways and the scenarios, the latent attitudes and the predeterminations, the self-completing of whole images, are proposed here. The synergetical view of historical development of scientific knowledge is compiled in the book from the notions of the principal nonlinearity and cyclic character of science development,the inertia of the paradigmal consciousness in science, the value of marginal and archaic elements in science. For readers who are interested in evolutionary epistemology and the philosophical problems of synergetics.
The paper proposes an original research methodology in the field of intellectual history based on the theoretical achievements of the tradition of philosophy of language and philosophy of action, as well as the "pragmatic turn" in social sciences. The paper develops the concept of "thought style" as describing a possible object of historical research. As an illustration of this historical method, the paper analyzes the concepts of "Enlightenment" and "society" as applied to the Russian intellectual history of the late 18th - early 19th centuries.
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.