The history of confrontation with fascism or National Socialism in the interwar period can be basically regarded as a history of erroneous estimates. Successes of both movements were conditioned not least by inability of their opponents, but also by inability of their allies, to understand their character. Not least because of this, analysts, who could timely recognize the nature of this challenge, deserve special attention. This article is devoted to one of these analysts. It is a German-Russian social democrat Alexander Schifrin, whose acute analyses of fascism in the time when the National Socialists achieved one success after another, were paid insufficient attention in previous researches both in East and West.
To approve a single suggestion, mouse over it and click "✔"
Click the bubble to approve all of its suggestions.
Enactivism as a radical conceptual turn or a paradigm shift in non-classical epistemology and cognitive science is under consideration in the article. Enactivism is not a new hypertheory, but rather a system of theoretical notions rooted in bioepistemology (naturalistic epistemology), because in the frames of enactivism consciousness and its functions are studied in the context of the understanding of complexity and of nature of complex formations in the world. Consciousness is viewed as an active and interactive, embodied and situated, its cognitive activity occurs by building-into environment, i.e. by enacting the environment. The contributions of Francisco Varela, Evan Thompson, Alva Noe to the development of enactivism are retraced in the article. It is shown that enactivism can be considered as a form of constructivism in epistemology
The rapid transformation of modernity and even more rapid attempts of methodological programs to theoretically grasp and comprehend what is happening led throughout the XX century to the extraordinary fragmentation of ideas about social reality which, in fact, issued
a theory’s symbolic rejection of the claim to find out the basic structure of society, to deter- mine the laws of social development. The fluidity of sociality is divided into the study of
cultural studies, sociology, philosophy and a number of other disciplines and sub-disciplines. At the same time, each of these branches of knowledge has its own research approaches and attitudes, sometimes extremely different and independent from each other. Nevertheless, the question of the fundamental methodology of social-humanitarian knowledge cannot and should not be abolished. In an attempt to find a common denominator for understanding social reality in its wholeness, the author refers to the legacy of two thinkers of the first half of the twentieth century: Ernst Cassirer and Gustav Shpet. The central thesis defended in the article is that the understanding of culture and cultural forms based on historicity and language in the works of two philosophers in their relation to history and sociality can act as a basis for rethinking sociality in its completeness and integrity, not just not relativising the overall picture of understanding, but enriching it.
It seems that two so different Russian thinkers as Nikolay Chernyshevsky and Vladimir Solovyov couldn’t have the common ideas, but this statement is wrong, Solovyov, who was thirty years younger than Chernyshevsky and according to his own statement refers to the opposite ideological camp, wrote the article “The first step to a positive aesthetic”, in which the philosopher has supported the concept of aesthetic Chernyshevsky, calling it “the first word of the true aesthetics”.
The author analyzes concepts of intersubjectivity and dialigue in the philosophy of the XX-th century - for example, of M. Buber. What is offered in this research is the attempt to change a little the view and to add to the binarity of "I-Thou" and "I-It" one more measurement, irreducible neither to that, nor to another and presupposing the deconstruction of classical subject of Western philosophy. This measurement is long ago and widely known (under different terms and metaphors - "nausea", "envy", "alienation", "rejectedness", etc.) in works of J.-P. Sartre, A. Camus, A. Malraux, etc., however still not considered as a marker of "anti-dialogue".
The article is devoted to the ethnological teachings of Yanagit Kunio, which became popular in post-war Japan.
Along with M. Heidegger and E. Husserl, F.M. Dostoevsky can be called one of those thinkers who greatly influenced the philosophy of Jan Patocka, a Czech phenomenologist and public figure of the 20th century, and this influence is especially noticeable in Patocka’s later works. The references to the work of Dostoevsky are scattered throughout many works by Patocka: they allow to shed light on both the Patocka’s philosophy and the ideas of Dostoevsky himself. The main purpose of this article is to analyze the interpretation of Dostoevsky’s philosophy by Patocka and a brief demonstration (by virtue of the format of the article) of the relationship between Patocka’s philosophy and Dostoevsky’s ideas.
The article deals some specific style of the work by Ilyenkov, which discribes his personality more realy than his philosohical ideas.