Author shows how and why the method of radical interpretation proposed by D. Davidson can solve the problems that are ormulated in a variety of skeptical scenarios. In particular, the method of radical interpretation renders the Cartesian skeptical scenario (both in its traditional and recent versions) obscure and even deprives it of its status of a philosophical problem as such. Appealing to the diberence between intended and unintended lies, one can see how the global skeptical scenario gets solved in both cases. This paper also extends Willard Van Orman Quine’s argument for an expanded version of a naturalized epistemology by introducing social factors to this approach. In addition, there are always at least two necessary limitations imposed by communication on our hypotheses about knowledge and delusion.
The article is devoted to the analysis of different aspects of representation of past and future wars, as well as the portrayal of the enemies in the “Pioneer” magazine. In the 1930s, these subjects and images became an important element of Soviet education, forming the official narrative. They were repeated in the summaries of party and state documents presented to the readers. Furthermore, they invaded works of fiction and the speech patterns of the pioneers themselves. As a result of this—by the time the war started—a whole generation acquired an understanding of what they were fighting for, who the enemy was and what was at stake. Using materials from the “Pioneer” magazine from 1932–1941, one can see how publications aimed at children were educating their readers, forming their consciousness, and preparing the youth to fight a war with the capitalist states. Magazines published for Soviet pioneers in the 1930s have not yet been researched to a satisfactory degree. Researchers usually focus their attention on the continuity vis-a-vis previous traditions and practices, pointing to trends that were common for pre-revolutionary and post-revolutionary publications. These studies are usually limited to the period of the early 1930s and do not cover events of the second half of that decade, putting emphasis on the formation of the pioneer press instead. This article is broadening our view of Soviet press for children, helping to better understand the causes of heroic behavior of the young generation mobilized to defend their country during the Great Patriotic War.
In this paper, I offer a reading of Shaun Monson’s documentary Earthlings to analyse ideological assumptions and philosophical contradictions the arguments for vegetarianism presented in this film. I approach the documentary using the concept of the social contract between the film and the viewer. The contract includes the following three statements: firstly, the process of film perception leads to a particular emotional reaction; secondly, this reaction implies that the viewer takes on a particular ethical stance; thirdly, this ethical stance becomes a precondition for action. The film’s authors naturalize the connection between these three positions.
In addition, I analyse the philosophical assumptions that form the basis of the argument for vegetarianism. Those assumptions are the following: the differences between animals and humans are not relevant for ethics and appeal to fact can lay the foundation for ethical imperatives. I argue that the first assumption is logically wrong and that the second assumption contains hidden speciesism even though it is supposed to combat it. I also argue that the film’s authors propose the viewer no detailed description of alternative attitudes to animals while those explanations are able to help the viewer to take an ethical stance and act accordingly regarding currently accepted ways of dealing with animals.
The paper is based on the research that was funded by the Faculty of Philosophy of the National Research University Higher School of Economics in 2013.
The paper focuses on the paradox embedded in conceptual logics of the Left and Right thought, that is the semantic amalgam of the concepts of sovereignty and legitimacy. Through the conceptual deconstruction of Carl Schmitt and Michelle Foucault theories we demonstrate the actual identification of sovereignty and legitimacy in political discourse. Since this identification forms the international legal framework, we perceive the power as legitimate one by recognizing the sovereignty. We reveal the similarities in power’s perception and conceptualization of the most radical representatives of the Right and Left political thought and explain it through the merge of legal and sacral in concept of sovereignty and perception of the power’s technic as independent political value.