N.M. Karamzin’s Philosophy of History in Russia’s Intellectual Culture
N.M. Karamzin’s multivolume work History of the Russian State occupies a special place in Russian culture. It could with good reason be considered a great intellectual and moral feat for the Russian thinker and historian. Karamzin rediscovered Russian history and returned it to the mainstream of national life. Inspired by philosophical ideas from the Enlightenment, Karamzin created a historical encyclopedia of the Russian people. As a heroic poem about Russia, Karamzin’s creation has deep moral meaning. According to Karamzin, by turning towards the events and customs of the past, society fosters in itself the sense of history as a basis for its moral and civic development in the present and future.
Articles and materials, gathered in this collective work, were presented in international scientific and educational seminar “Eschatos: Philosophy of history in context of “the Limit-conception” (Odessa, September-October 2011). Historians, philosophers, culturologists from Ukraine, Russia, Israel, France and Uzbekistan were involved in the discussions. Researches in this collective work are devoted to the concepts of disruption of time in Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and in Modernity. Especial block consists of materials of the round table devoted to the problem of “intellectual contraband”.
For a wide range of humanitarians who are interested in the problems of theory and philosophy of history, place of historical knowledge in contemporary world.
This paper outlines peculiarities of the use of organicistic allegories by representatives of the German historical school of law — F.K. Savigny and G.F. Puchta. On the wide range of texts on the philosophy of history and the history of law written by contemporaries (Fichte, Hegel) and precursors (Herder, Vico) it is shown how the comparison between history with human life can perform different functions depending on the methodological presumptions of the authors.
The author discusses the meaning of zhe term "the Middle Ages".
The evidence shows that the Tanzanian and Zambian university students representing the African by origin overwhelming majority of the countries' population are generally tolerant towards their compatriots of the non-African (European and South Asian) origins. However, the evidence also gives reason to argue that the level of tolerance among the Zambian students is higher than among Tanzanian. The examination of a number of factors that supposedly could lead to the Zambian educated youth's higher level of tolerance has shown that the most significant among them are those related to the two nations' history since the pre-colonial time, the memory of it, and the use and abuse of this memory by the post-colonial states. From the historical point of view the greatest essential difference between the two cases lies in the existence since pre-colonial time of the Swahili culture and language and of the minimal number of expansionist centralized polities on the contemporary state's territory as the background for autochthonous peoples' unity in Tanzania and lack of such a background in pre-colonial Zambia.
The special issue explores the manifold relations between history, memory, and anthropological research. Explicitly or not, history has always been a particular reference for anthropological research. First of all, anthropologists most often deal with the past not only when attempting to reconstruct past events and conditions, but rather to look at social change, innovation, and transformation, enabling then to position their findings in larger theoretical perspectives. Moreover, many anthropologists are primarily interested in the ways in which people perceive societal changes, experience and represent them and relate them to their various world-views at large. In these endeavors, the notion of history itself became the center of debate, which shifted the attention of many scholars away from an absolute or etic frame of reference to primarily an emic understanding of its meaning with regard to local issues and life-worlds. Thus, the interaction between History and Anthropology was not simple in the past and is not so today. Whatever the particular interest or approach to history for anthropologists may be, history is therefore not just a neutral domain. From a social-constructivist perspective, history is a part of a distinct local cultural and symbolic universe and represents the result of social processes of selection, remembrance and oblivion. The ‘memory boom’ in anthropology triggered many studies in Africanist scholarship as well, for example, on the way in which historical memories were used by both protagonists of colonialism and national-liberation movements; or as a means of state propaganda by postcolonial regimes.
The paper examines the history of dissemination in 14th-17th centuries in different european countries (especially in Eastern Europe), of one curious text, known as the "Privilege of Alexander the Great for the Slavs." Particular attention was given to the specifically Russian version of this text appeared in the latter half of the XVI century.
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.