Cieľom článku je nanovo reflektovať činnosť jednej z najslávnejších ženských filozofiek, Hip­parchie z Maróneie. Naším zámerom je ukázať, prečo sa stala v porovnaní s inými ženami antiky taká významná a v mnohom signifikantná pre ďalší vývoj procesu ženskej eman­cipácie. Hlavným svedectvom je pre nás fragment SSR V I 1 od Diogena Laertského, ktorý kladieme do súvislosti s ďalšími antickými správami o Antisthenovi a raných kynikoch. Dve hlavné témy Diogenovho svedectva sú Kratétova svadba s Hipparchiou a spor Hipparchie s Theodórom. Vo (...) výklade poukazujeme na momenty, v ktorých je filozofická osobnosť Hip­parchie nadčasová a inšpiratívna aj pre súčasnosť. (shrink)

Budući da je, za razliku od manipulacije, moguć samo kao su-djelovanje u slobodi, odgoj se zbiva tamo i jedino se tamo može zbivati gdje se poštuje i razvija osobnost onih koji u odgoju sudjeluju, tj. koji međusobno odgojno djeluju. To upravo znači da je odgoj djelovanje utemeljeno u poštivanju drugog kao drukčijeg, samosvojnog, autonomnog, slobodnog bića. To nadalje znači da je odgoj u bîti uvijek odgoj za pluralizam vrijednosti, pretpostavki, vjerovanja, mišljenja, odnosno načine života koje ljudi razvijaju kao svoje i (...) u kojima se očituje njihova osobnost. Ali kao su-djelovanje u slobodi to poštovanje mora biti uzajamno.Odgajati dakle znači razvijati drugoga kao drukčijega, koji drži do svoje osobnosti, ali koji isto tako drži i do osobnosti drugih ljudi. I to ne samo zato što misli da pravo na vlastitu osobnost mora platiti pravom drugima da budu drukčiji, nego zato što je svijestan da je osobnost u bîti moguća tek s različitošću ljudi koji se u svojoj različitosti ipak međusobno uvažavaju i komuniciraju otvarajući kroz tu komunikaciju, baš svojom posebnošću, drugima nove mogućnosti osobnog razvoja. Drugim riječima, odgoj se zbiva tamo i tada gdje se zbiva drugi i drukčiji čovjek kojem je drugi i drukčiji čovjek najveća potreba, te sam biva čovjekom pomažući drugome da to bude.Since education, unlike manipulation, is possible only as a co-action in freedom, it occurs, andcan occur only at the point where educational co-actors’ personalities are being respected and developed. That implies that the education is an actionfounded in respecting the Other as different, autonomous and free human being. Furthermore,that figures that the education is essentially always an education for pluralism of values, presuppositions,beliefs, thoughts, ways of life that people develop as their very own and through which theymanifest their personalities. But, as the co-action in freedom, that respect has to be mutual.Therefore, educating means developing the Other as different, as one that respects his own personality,but also respects Others’ personalities. And not only because one considers that as a way ofpaying for the right to his own personality by means of Others’ rights to be different, but because ofbeing conscious that the personality is essentially possible only among different people who developmutual respect exactly through their differences. Through that kind of communication, particularlyby their singularity, they render new possibilities of personal development to Others. In other words,education takes place only there and then where other and different human beings occur, and assuch have the greatest need for different Others, being themselves the human beings by helpingOthers to be ones. (shrink)

Svaka djelatnost iskazuje identitet djelatnika. U autobiografiji se reprezentira pluralni identitet pisca autobiografije. U njoj otkrivamo ono što je neka osoba. U autobiografiji njen pisac traga za sobom, za svojim osobnim identitetom. U pitanju o identitetu osoba u autobiografiji zapravo pita što je događaj njenog života. Autobiografija je svijest o sebi. Sjećanje i iskustvo izgrađuje i oblikuje osobnu svijest, potvrđuje znanje o vlastitom identitetu, o identitetu koji nije dan nego nastajući, jer tek kroz sjećanje i iskustvo osoba istodobno gradi imaginarnu (...) stvarnost prošlog i postaje ono što jest. U svaku osobnu priču se utka sve što je iskustvo te osobe, iskustvo koje nikako nije samo osobno iskustvo, nego i iskustvo jedne kulture, jezika, obrazovanja, drugih… Autobiografija je tekst u kojem pisac gradi svoj identitet, pokazuje svoju »osobnu kartu« i retušira svoju sliku koju će u njoj priložiti. U pisanju autobiografije pisac ponovo izgrađuje svoj identitet, sebe sama. U svakom djelu stvaralac stvara i sebe samog. U svakoj biografiji je moguće raspoznati mnoga filozofiji relevantna pitanja, od pitanja identiteta do pitanja reprezentiranja subjekta. U onim koje su pisali filozofi posebno. U odluci da piše u prvom licu filozof iskazuje svoju senzibilnost, a iznad svega potvrđuje da je osobno odgovoran za ono što se u njegovom djelu tvrdi, da to nije neka apersonalna, božanska riječ ili kaza anonimnog narodnog mudraca, nego njegova temeljna riječ, filozof sam. Subjekt govori. Presudan je Ego Cogito, koji postaje Osobnost, Ja Pisanja, Autorstvo. Filozofsko djelo je osobna karta filozofa. U autobiografskom tekstu autor otkriva, potvrđuje i definira svoj identitet, ali na kraju ono njegovo uistinu osobno nije njegovo Ja, jer njegovo Ja zapravo postaje junak osobne priče. Pisac autobiografije na kraju postane Ja teksta.Every activity reflects the identity of the person who is engaged in it. In an autobiography a multiple identity of the autobigrapher is displayed. It discloses everything that a person is or was. And no other can do it better than the person in question. In an autobiography, the writer is searching for himself, his own identity. In the identity question of the autobiography , the person asks what has been the crucial event in his or her life. Autobiography is awareness of the self. Memories and experience develop and shape a personal conscience, they attest the awareness of the personal identity, identity which is not a given, but is ever evolving. It is only through remembering and experiencing that a person simultaneously develops the imaginary reality of the past and evolves into what he or she is. Every personal story consists of the experience of that particular person, experience that is not only a personal one, but also experience involving a particular culture, language, education, and contact with others… An autobiography is a text in which a writer develops his own identity, displays his “identity card” and retouches his own image. When writing an autobiography, the writer reinvents his own identity, his own self. In every creative work the creator creates himself, as well. In every biography it is possible to recognize many relevant philosophical issues, from the question of identity to the question of representation of a subject, especially those written by philosophers. By deciding to write in the first person singular, a philosopher expresses his sensitivity, confirming that the philosophy he embodies belongs to him, affirms that he is personally responsible for what he claims in his work, that is certainly not an apersonal, divine sentence or a tale of an anonymous folk sage, but his own quintessential sentence. A subject speaks. This is Ego Cogito that becomes personality, the I of the writing. Authorship. A philosophical work is an identity card of a philosopher. In an autobiographical text, the author discloses, develops, affirms and defines his own identity, but in the end his personal I is not his own I, because his I becomes a protagonist of a personal story. The writer of an autobiography becomes I of the text, in the end. (shrink)

I have conducted a similar investigation on a text by a different author. The results of this investigation, which was performed on a text passage of 100,000 letters, are presented in the following tables from which one can see how and to what extent the limit theorems of the calculus of probability actually become evident.

We investigate to what extent theorems about quantum mechanical or classical entropy can be generalized to functionals of the type ρ→Tr f(ρ), or ψ→∫f(ψ)dμ, respectively, wheref is an arbitrary concave function.

Presentation of the thesis that Kumāril Bhaṭṭa and Dharmakīrti, 7th cent., Sanskrit philosophers, were Assamese by birth, contrary to the traditional belief that they are from South India.

Buddhist connections in Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy; a study.

Upshot: Since all my commentators express some reservation about the distinction between the cognitive and non-cognitive aspects of knowledge in general, and its applicability and relevance in the domain of religious belief in particular, I will address the question of why this distinction is important and whether these two modes of knowledge can be communicated. Further questions I try to address include: Can a radical constructivist be an atheist, or alternatively a religious believer? What exactly would these designations mean? Is (...) it at all possible to discuss meaningfully the question of whether God exists? Can two or more people ascertain whether they in fact share their concept of a God? (shrink)