This paper is concerned with one of the most prominent examples of German intellectual history at the beginning of the 20th century, the George circle. The study identifies three principles which are crucial for the “political theology” of the George circle – the principle of covenant, the principle of the charismatic leader and the principle of dominance and service. The main hypothesis is that the George circle was an ideologically integrated group of intellectuals who sought to reform politics by means of aesthetics, and influenced the language and ideology of the “conservative revolution” in Weimar Germany.
The story "Life Basil Thebes" offers great material for research and interpretation. The philosophical and cultural ideas, which can be easily discovered in the work - questions of faith and irreligion, human and God, miracle and the absurd (putting in a radical and uncompromising form) – show the deep connection between Andreev and the traditions of existential philosophy from Kierkegaard to Heidegger and Camus. These central questions of Andreev’s literary-artistic world, certainly, deserve careful hermeneutic analysis. In this case, at the heart of the story we find an attempt to answer the key question of existential philosophy: "... Is it possible to live without being called from on high."
The article discusses the philosophical and historical optics of Turgenev’s novels, and his special analytical method in research of Russian culture. The author examines the philosophical debate on Turgenev-novelist and thinker. According to critics, Turgenev's novels are an encyclopedia of Russian life. However, the Turgenev’s method of depicting the phenomena of Russian reality can not be considered only a literary technique. His skill is not limited to the definition “psychological realism”. Still there are no studies that would consider Turgenev's novels within the framework of the philosophy of Russian history and culture in contemporary Humanities. This fact gives additional difficulties in studies on Turgenev. I analyze the Russian intellectual discourse in dialogue with the Western tradition Turgenev’s studies. The paper reconstructs Turgenev's intellectual profile as a philosopher of history and social analyst. The article formulates a thesis the possibility of interpretations of his novels as essay on social and philosophical problems of Russian society and Analytics of Russian history and culture. The article discusses the philosophical and historical meaning of the writer's novels, as well as the horizon of Turgenev-thinker's social prognostics.
In his article the author considers one of the key phenomenon of the Russian intellectual culture – university as the condition of Russian elite entering the level of a European civilization, and moreover as the element, that contributed to Europeasation of the whole country. The tragedy of Russian education can clearly be seen in the fate of Russian universities. The autocracy tried to limit the freedom of science, and Bolsheviks simply exiled the Russian professorate from the country.
In the article the results of analysis of Sanskrit word vyavahāra and its logico-epistemological functions in «Tattvopaplavasiṁha» by Jayarāśi Bhaṭṭa (VIII–IX cen.) are presented. In the text vyavahāra plays the role of the universe of discourse and universe of verification of knowledge, but the characteristics of the universe in Indian tradition only partially coincide with the characteristics of the «universe of discourse» in Western epistemology and logic. The main difference is that in the Western tradition of discourse the universe is understood as an area of certain objects, and in Indian tradition the two main meanings of vyavahāra (as daily practices and as conventional usage of words) are not restricted by the requirement of certainty of the universe of discourse.
Novel biotechnologies drastically enhance human capacities. However, initial optimism concerning new methods of therapy and body modification gradually gives way to fears that technologies can easily get out of hand and alter human nature in an undesirable way. Philosophers approach bioethical discussion from various assumptions and perspectives: while some of them believe that new technologies enhance and better human beings, others are concerned those technological innovations can be perilous. This paper overviews the discussion between utilitarians and bioconservatives on the extent to which human enhancement technologies should be permitted. I suggest an alternative communitarian approach to consider human beings primarily as members of political communities and recognition-seekers. I take the debate on doping legalization in sports to demonstrate how communitarianism doesn’t reject new technologies and still argues for making them work for preservation and flourishing of human communities. All major decisions on regulating biotechnologies should be made by communities themselves in a democratic way and drawing on bioethical expertise.
The main goal of the article is to offer and schematically elaborate the idea of performative media as a basic model of contemporary phenomenological-hermeneutical philosophy, which is aimed at exploration of the processes described in transcendental phenomenology as “constituting activities”. The performative medium embraces meaningful, spatial, and processual aspects of the human experience of the world, is able to play a part of the theoretical model offering the interesting opportunities for both further development of phenomenological project and productive dialogue between phenomenology and contemporary social sciences.
Phenomenological reduction assures the scientific standing of the phenomenological investigations. But it is also an existential situation, where philosophizing subject finds out that he is put into question. The splitting of the I generates not only “original phenomenon of the world” as well as transcendental subjectivity that constitutes it; it is also a recursive act of auto-affection which irreversibly transforms the agent.
Demonstrating uncertain broadened understanding of epistemology as common ground of phenomenology and phenomenology of religion the article criticises it to propose new more strict variants of understanding of these disciplines.
The article shows none-phenomenological quality of G. van der Leeuw’s Religionsphänomenologie and doubts thus of the quality of phenomenology in religious studies. His phenomenology is showed to be realized only as general understanding of humanities to stress the well-known cognitive ways (valuable neutrality, selection of facts, verification and hermeneutical circle) not only for knowledge but for faith, using pseudo-phenomenological knowledge as disguise. Thus Leeuw’s conception from the cognitive point of view is uncertain, it hesitates from science to theology.
In article the project of "synthesis philosophy" offered by M.N. Epstein is considered. The purpose of the project is in giving philosophies an innova- tive impulse, to save it from tautological infertility, to give it the status of the active participant informative (first of all research) processes. For this purpose it is necessary to redirect the main methodological installation of philosophy – "from the analysis to synthesis". It is not only about "analyti- cal philosophy", but about all range of the philosophical directions. The method of "synthesis" allows a set of interpretations: from synthesis of con- cepts before the synthesis of philosophical and scientific concepts taking place in a cross-disciplinary research of difficult, multiple-factor processes. In most cases the methodology of synthesis appears as transition, usual for science, from initial abstractions to concrete explanations which receives the generalized description and conceptualization. The problem consists in that how far there can be such generalization. The forecast about approach of such stage in development of philosophy when she acts as the supplier of alternative ontologies for various scientific pictures of the world, can be un- derstood as the romantic dream bringing in the academic discussions about the place of philosophy in culture live feeling and sympathy.
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.
The article is concerned with the study of the philosophy of technology of Hans Freyer (1887-1969), who was the fi rst representative of the academic sociology in Germany. His program developed in the essay Towards a philosophy of technology (1929) is discussed as the reactionary modernist response to the cultural criticism of the German Lebensphilosophie (L. Klages, G. Simmel, M. Scheler). From the positions of the sociology of culture and political sociology it aims to integrate the modern technology into the organic life of a modern nation. After the World War II H. Freyer has shifted his heroic-realistic position on technics developing the criticism of industrial society and technocratic modernity which has formed the philosophical discussion on technology in 1950s-70s and infl uenced the Ideologiekritik of the later Frankfurt school. H. Freyer's philosophy of technology is examined in the broader politico-ideological context of the conservative revolution.
The following paper examines the characteristic features and problems of the Russian translations of Hannah Arendt’s works and studies on her philosophy, evaluating the actuality and the future perspectives of the reception of her ideas in Russia. For a long time, Arendt’s name was little known to most Russian readers: first editions of her major works were published in the middle of the 1990s. As of now, most of Arendt’s major works have been translated, although the quality of Russian editions is lacking because of several objective and subjective factors. The situation with the reception of Arendt’s ideas is not less complicated: because of the mostly fragmentary character of Russian Arendt studies and the lack of fundamental publications, her name is still associated with many stereotypes. Although some of Arendt’s concepts are slowly turning obsolete due to methodological reasons, Arendt studies in Russia have good perspectives in the field of political and social philosophy, philosophical anthropology and philosophy of emotion.
The article is devoted to the analysis of N.V. Gogol’s novel “Viy” as a representation of his philosophical concepts of evil, human nature and society. We analyze its main character, the only philosopher in Gogol’s works. Thomas Brutus finds himself on the intersection of real world and fantastic reality, which makes him horrified. But we can describe this situation in terms of political philosophy, like Hannah Arendt’s concept of totalitarian society. It is not the reality of horror that deprives Thomas Brutus of the speaking ability and breaks his connection with the rest of society. Instead the society itself chooses not to confront obvious evil but to exclude the hero from its own ranks and to ignore his attempts to tell what is happening.