The EU, Russia and the Manichean Trap
Conceptualizing the EU as a postmodern cooperative power that “transcends realism” provides ideological scaffolding for an exclusive conception of “Europe” and veils a zero-sum geopolitical project as “European integration”. Neoclassical realism considers assigning morally opposite political identities to the EU and Russia to be “rational” to the extent it strengthens internal cohesion and mobilizes resources to enhance security in accordance with the balance of power logic. Yet, the artificial binary construction can also produce a Manichean Trap when compromises required to enhance security are depicted as a betrayal of indispensable virtues and “Europe”. The ability to harmonize competing security interests diminishes as the conceptual space for comparing the EU and Russia is de-constructed. Competition is framed in uncompromising terms as “European integration” versus Russian “spheres of influence” and democracy versus authoritarianism.
The paper claims all metaphysical views could be divided in two classes: metaphysical moral exclusivism that is the idea of the otherworldly nature of morality, and metaphysical moral inclusivism that is the idea that morality is an intrinsic component of the reality. The originality of the proposed separation is justiﬁ ed by historical review and the comparison with known ethical concepts. We also consider how the metaphysical notions of morality should correlate with the methodology of the empirical study of moral consciousness. We show that asking the question about the place of morality in the structure of reality imposes some theoretical constraints upon the Is-Ought Problem.
The article introduces a special issue on studying EU-Russian relations. It overviews Russian- and English-language academic research to identify whether there is sufficient dialogue on issues studied, theories applied and categories used for a transnational epistemic community to emerge. This latter would allow the academic world to better contribute to the resolution of the present crisis in EU-Russian relations. Although an overlap is identified in issues, theories and categories the article exposes multiple differences in how they are approached in English- and Russian-language academic writings. These findings challenge the existence of a transnational epistemic community in EU-Russian relations. The article concludes by discussing steps to make for this community to develop, and introduces contributions to the special issue.
The problem of free will remains one of the primary unsolved problems of John Sealre’s philosophy. In his book ‘Freedom and Neurobilology’ (2007) Searle proposes two alternative hypothesis that would allow one to make sense of the nature of freedom, but ultimately finds both of them unsatisfactory. In this paper we propose a modified version of Searle’s argument, which attempts to reconcile the common sense intuitions with physiological determinism on the basis of Kahneman’s theory of cognitive systems. Specifically, we focus on the collision between the fast and the slow cognitive system as the basis for the experience of freedom.
The present catalogue contains abstracts for some 150 volumes, among which books, periodicals, miscellanies, published by the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the principal institute in Russia for academic research in all kinds of philosophical knowledge. These works, written by eminent Russian scholars, cover such fi elds as the history of Russian, Western and Oriental philosophy, ethics and aesthetics, synergetics and epistemology, social and political philosophy and concentrate on problems that have attained particular importance in the age of globalization and growth of national self-consciousness.
Angesichts der gegenwärtigen Belastungen in den Sozialsystemen, insbesondere in der Kranken- und Rentenversicherung, wird das Solidarprinzip, auf dem diese Systeme beruhen, in den aktuellen politischen Debatten mehr oder weniger radikal in Frage gestellt. Bei den Diskussionen um die Notwendigkeit des Abbaus bzw. des Erhalts der sozialen Solidarsysteme wird nur selten der systematische Stellenwert des rechtlichen wie ethischen Prinzips der Solidarität mit reflektiert. Die Beiträge des vorliegenden Bandes setzen sich teils mit der historischen Herkunft wie mit dem begrifflichen Bedeutungsspektrum von Solidarität , aber auch mit missbräuchlichen Verwendungen des Wortes auseinander. Teils reflektieren sie den Stellenwert, die begrifflichen Bestandteile und die Begründungsformen des Solidaritätsprinzips im Recht und in der Ethik. Und schließlich behandeln sie die Rolle des Solidaritätsprinzips in der Friedensforschung und in der Debatte um die politische Bedeutung der Kunst.
The article examines partnerships for modernisation between Russia, on the one hand, and the EU as well as 23 out of its 28 member states, on the other hand. In doing that it first identifies the difference between the Russian economic interpretation of modernisation and the EU's one based on political values. The article then demonstrates the ambiguity rather than singularity of the position that EU member states promote in their modernisation partnerships with Russia. To illustrate the difference among EU member states’ the article designs a scale of Russia’s sensitivity to various political aspects of modernization and then posits member states on this scale on the basis of their national partnerships for modernisation with Russia. As a result, a new classification of EU member states emerges; it is based on the extent, to which they are ready to defend the political definition of modernisation (and ultimately the EU's normative power) in their relations with Russia.
We address the external effects on public sector efficiency measures acquired using Data Envelopment Analysis. We use the health care system in Russian regions in 2011 to evaluate modern approaches to accounting for external effects. We propose a promising method of correcting DEA efficiency measures. Despite the multiple advantages DEA offers, the usage of this approach carries with it a number of methodological difficulties. Accounting for multiple factors of efficiency calls for more complex methods, among which the most promising are DMU clustering and calculating local production possibility frontiers. Using regression models for estimate correction requires further study due to possible systematic errors during estimation. A mixture of data correction and DMU clustering together with multi-stage DEA seems most promising at the moment. Analyzing several stages of transforming society’s resources into social welfare will allow for picking out the weak points in a state agency’s work.