Образы современности в XXI веке: планетаризм Кристиана Морару
In modern society at the disposal of the control system remains little opportunity powerful direct impact on society. But the possibility of expanding the soft control impact on the controlled system. Current forms and meanings of such influence will be in the future associated with post-post-modernism.
The author examines the delicate relationship between such phenomena as philosophy and popular culture. After formulating three attitudes of philosophers working with popular culture (left-critical, right-critical and left-objectivistic), the author proposes the term «crossroad» to show at what point of evolution of philosophy of culture and social theory during the XXth century converged popular culture and philosophy. This «crossroad» turned out to be post-modernism in such representation in which the American Marxist philosopher Fredric Jame-son began to talk about. Postmodernism before Jameson was understood as a trend in art, and only Jameson came up with the idea to extend it to the entire culture that dissolved in during the 1970s in the economy. It was Jameson who first stated the thesis that nowadays high and popular culture represent a single space. Briefly describing Jameson's approach, the author shows what this synthesis of postmodern philosophy and popular culture has led to. Recog-nizing popular culture as legitimate, and its then state as «postmodern», social philosophers began to develop the idea of expansion of culture into the social sphere, however, not in everything agreeing with Jameson. The author emphasizes the idea that the beginning of the XXI century was marked by a surge of philosophical interest in popular culture.
Any promo message includes a pragmatic component (goods-related discourse) and a social-cultural component (social-cultural discourse). Within the scope of direct advertising social-cultural discourse often becomes a latent source of social conflict. For instance, in the whole of Russia only 9% of population earn incomes above the “middle-class threshold”, while federal TV channels constantly broadcast barely affordable goods and lifestyles onto this low-income audience. This creates an urgent social need in diversification of promo campaigns’ content, methods and promotion techniques, which would also allow for an integrating effect. Content of such communications may be built on post-post-modern basis that is currently displacing disintegration and eclectics of post-modernism. This basis includes virtualization, techno-images, glocalization, neo-conservative axiology. The greatest challenge in this list for Russia appears to be associated with development of a glocal style of promo messaging and communications as a whole.
The processes of the growing societal complexity, emergence of new forms of social and political inequality, formation of pre-state or complex stateless polities belong to the most intriguing subjects of Anthropology and Social Philosophy.
Social Evolution & History has consistently published the research articles devoted to these issues. The chiefdom concept plays a special role within the theories that try to account for the transition from simple social systems to systems of greater complexity. Following its emergence in the 1950s this notion became an important heuristic means to advance Anthropology and Archaeology. It was also subjected to vigorous debates within which the participants denied the methodological significance of chiefdoms and the very notion of the chiefdom. These debates are becoming even more vigorous in connection with the rapid accumulation of information on ancient societies (see the dispute over chiefdoms between Timothy Pauketat and Robert Carneiro in 9.1). There is also much discrepancy in the definition of ‘chiefdom’ as some scholars consider it a standard phase of cultural evolution, a natural transition between the ‘Big Man’ society and the states of the ancient world.
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.