Abstracts of 477 works of 758 young researchers and lectures of leading scientists are published from 144 organizations 75 cities of Russia, as well as Austria, Belarus, Germany, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, China, Moldova, USA, Tajikistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan. Works devoted to relevant fundamental and applied issues of experimental, clinical, preventive medicine and related medical and biological Sciences.
This review is an attempt to read the main ideas of Catherine Malabou’s book Before Tomorrow: Epigenesis and Rationality, with a particular emphasis upon the problem of the modifiability of the transcendental and the rejection of the a priori dimension of subjectivity within scientific and philosophical thought of a materialist orientation. Malabou’s thesis of the epigenesis of pure reason evinces the dynamical dimension of the transcendental, integrating structural and evolutionary conceptions of reason. Epigenesis secures the stability of the phenomenal world and allows for the possibility of a contingent metamorphosis of reason, thereby establishing an economy of transcendental contingency. In general, Malabou’s work has many affinities with recent phenomenological thought, although it makes few explicit references to phenomenological philosophers as such.
In this paper, I try to demonstrate how critical empiricism and philosophical reasoning intertwine with each other and affected the development of medicine. It is a case study considering the problems of generation and semen in the writings of Aristotle and Galen via relationship between such concepts as matter, form, movement, change, causes and some others. The main question addressed in the paper is the reason of Galen’s return to Hippocratic paradigm of two-semina (male and female). I argue that the reason is two-fold: 1) Different philosophical reasoning and erroneous understanding of some aspects of Aristotle’s embryological model by Galen. 2) Empirical discoveries, which proved to be wrong. I demonstrate that Galen’s understanding of form/matter relationship, and his view on matter as an underling principle conditioned his understanding of the notion of physical change, that allowed him to speak about conception only as quantitative mixture between equal substrata. Finally, I show that Galen’s view on teleology and his limited understanding of formal/final vs efficient causes and their relationship forced him to claim the inadequacy of Aristotle’s biology and necessitated Galen to introduce emendations in definitions of seminal faculties of genders and reproductive fluids.