Что такое Антипросвещение?
This article is dedicated to the problem of the origin of economics. The socio-cultural conditions for the emergence of a new science are considered: the accumulated practical knowledge that accompanied the development of trade, industry, and eventually led to the emergence of a market economy; theoretical and practical knowledge from rich literary sources; the Ancient, Medieval and Modern Time philosophers interest in the ongoing economic processes, posing questions about these processes, revealing the problems of meaning and signifi cance of economic events for the society. The article especially focuses on the Scottish philosophers of the 17 and 18th centuries F. Hutcheson, D. Hume and A. Ferguson, the socio-economic views of the latter being of special importance as well as the views of Adam Smith, whose ideas show close affi nity between the thinkers.
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.
The article describes a problem to transit the creative by Leo Tolstoy from enlightenment to Philosophy of Life
The article makes a professional image rekonstruiruktsiya teacher. The author believes that the main advantage and at the same time the main function of the teacher - to serve the people. Its content is the enlightenment of the ministry, decorated in a messianic view. The messiah means complete self-denial and penance.
The Realist interpretation of 'War and Peace' - articulated by Martin Wight and Stanley Hoffmann - is based on Tolstoy's understanding of history as it is elaborated in his account of the Napoleonic invasion in the second epilogue of the book. There Tolstoy puts forward a mechanistic view of international relations which are assumed to be governed by inexorable laws of history determining human behaviour and limiting man's exercise of free will. However, Tolstoy's subjection of man to the workings of impenetrable laws of history in the second epilogue is at variance with a multiplicity of conscious moral choices that his three main characters - Nikolay Rostov, Andrey Bolkonsky and Pierre Bezukhov - make throughout the book. It is argued that the different treatment of the freedom vs. necessity problem in the fictional and historical narrative can only be understood contextually, i.e. from within Tolstoy' rejection of the Enlightenment tradition of scientific and moral inquiry.
This article investigates eighteenth-century Russian legal thought on the criminalisation of sex and sexualities in light of Western European scholarship on the same themes. It reveals the background to and preconditions for the transfer of knowledge and intellectual frameworks that structured societal understandings of sexuality and, at the same time, created the mechanisms of social and legal control over such behaviour. The study shows that the absence of developed Russian legal philosophy did not prevent the development of a criminal law with the same goals as more developed jurisdictions. Commentaries on and classification of sex crimes in Russia followed patterns familiar to Western Europe and used similar definitions rooted in Christian moral philosophy and canon law. The concern with the proper, rational and orderly development of state and society, central to the era, meant that laws relating to the criminalisation of sex and sexuality were not liberalised.