Монография предназначена для специалистов в области социальной философии, социологии и истории, а также для широкого круга читателей.

t. 1. Vlastʹ kli︠u︡cheĭ -- t. 2. Na vesakh Iova.

Издание адресовано научным работникам, преподавателям, студентам и аспирантам, а также практикам, интересующимся вопросами истории философии, эстетики, религиоведения и смежными проблемами.

для научных работников, преподавателей, аспирантов, студентов юридических вузов и факультетов.

Книга вводит читателей в круг современных междисциплинарных тенденций исследования научного познания. Для специалистов.

The controversies in Bristol, Alder Hey and elsewhere in the UK surrounding the removal and retention of human tissue and organs have led to extensive law reform in all three UK legal systems. This paper reports a short study of the reactions of a range of health professionals to these changes. Three main areas of ethical concern were noted: the balancing of individual rights and social benefit; the efficacy of the new procedures for consent; and the helpfulness for professional practice (...) of the new legislation and regulation. Recognition of these concerns may help in forging a new partnership between professionals and patients and their families. (shrink)

Delo filosofii -- ch. 1. Spory evropeĭskoĭ kulʹtury. Ėpicheskiĭ iskhod. Otkrytie soznanii︠a︡. Drevnegrecheskai︠a︡ tragedii︠a︡ i filosofii︠a︡. Afiny i Ierusalim. Novat︠s︡ii︠a︡ Kopernika i kopernikanskai︠a︡ revoli︠u︡t︠s︡ii︠a︡ -- ch. 2. XX vek: k ontologii spornosti. Sofii︠a︡ i chert. Kant pered lit︠s︡om russkoĭ religioznoĭ metafiziki. O vtorom izmerenii myshlenii︠a︡: L. Shestov i filosofii︠a︡. Na poli︠a︡kh "I︠A︡ i Ty".

In the past twenty years, all the key authors who wrote about the state of postmodernity either began to be engaged in other research areas (Fredric Jameson) or declared that the postmodernism is dead (Linda Hutcheon). Since 2000, when the fatigue from the postmodernism became evident to everyone, various researchers, critics and theorists began to offer their concepts of our era. However, all these theories, emphasizing the change of cultural paradigms, interpret culture traditionally not paying attention to total digitalization and (...) the introduction of new technologies into our lives. However, in two concepts of our time these processes become central. These are the concepts of the digimodern and automodern. The focus of this article is the idea of automodernism, proposed by the American social theorist Robert Samuels in 2007/2009. He believes that our world is characterized by two contradictory tendencies – automation and the desire for autonomy (personal freedom). From his point of view, the former often does not allow to reach the latter due to certain circumstances. Samuels, using the example of a car, a personal computer, the Internet, etc., shows what exactly our culture is in the broadest sense. Analyzing the concept of “digital youth,” he also pays attention to the formation of a new subjectivity of the era of automodernity. Finally, the most interesting part of the concept of automodernism, which is most relevant today, is the criticism of leftwing social and philosophical concepts (Slavoj Žižek, Jameson) and cultural theories (Henry Jenkins). At the end of the article, the author mentions Adam Greenfield’s latest book Radical Technologies: The Design of Everyday Life. Thanks to this book, Samuels’ theory can be verified. (shrink)

The publication presents the initial passages of the famious Pali Brahmajālasuttanta with the corresponding parts of its traditional commentary Sumaṅgalavilāsinī as a sample of the ancient hypertext. It is meant as a valuable source to such fundamental philological and hermeneutical questions as what is commented ans what is disregarded by the commentator; how, why and whatfore is in commented.

The paper proves that a historical method in Marxism is not identified to a dialectical method. The logic of history and the logic of its analysis in Marxism do not always coincide. The Logical coincides with the Historical only in eternity as it actually occurs in the works by G.V.F. Hegel. Eternity which has already witnessed everything does not know history any more. In the same way, history also begins there where the eternity comes to an end. Therefore, artificial identification (...) of the Logical with the Historical in Marxism led sometimes to actual mistakes. It is no wonder that it has always caused discussions in Marxism. They are mainly explained by the fact that the deductive, abstract-to-concrete method in which the “General” appears before the “Concrete” is an anti-historical method in its Nature. In real human history the “General” which is generalization of many “Concrete” could not appear before the latter in any way. For this reason, the real historical materialism needs an inductive method of knowledge. Only in that case historical materialism will cease to remain the soviet “histmat” and becomes the real form of a new world outlook. The author is of the opinion that the Party spirit of the Soviet philosophy promoted preservation of the anomalies mentioned in Marxism. The open discussion could help to find valid but not inherited from Hegel relation of historical and logical methods in Marxism. (shrink)