The article focuses on the heritage of Alexey Alexeevich Borovoy, a Russian anarchist of the early 20th century. Today there is a growing interest to the works of this thinker. Particularly, researchers concede the breadth of his contribution to anarchist theory, and engage his project of personalistic anarchism, with its key concepts of personality and vital impulse. However, the author believes that there is another aspect of Borovoy’s creativity which has not been evaluated — his political theology, the reconstruction of (...) which is undertaken in this work. The analysis begins with an examination of Borovoy’s ethics of anarchism. Nietzsche was a key influence, with the concepts of the ethics of love for the near, and the ethics of love for the far. Borovoy highlighted the latter as the basis of revolutionary morality. Its main feature is the aspiration to the future — the revolutionaries are guided by an anarchist ideal, sacrificing the present for it. The main principles of this anarchist ideal are as follows: Firstly, the anarchist ideal involves the ongoing improvement of human nature and society. Secondly, anarchism believes in the freedom of the individual, which is the center of doctrine. Thirdly, the embodiment of anarchism into reality is possible through a radical break with the past, that is, a catastrophic revolution, as well as through the renewal of human nature. Finally, anarchism promises a secularized salvation — deliverance from violence. In this regard, Borovoy notes that anarchism is a faith that has replaced Christian religion. This allows us to assert that, at the implicit level, the main features of Borovoy’s anarchist project are a secularized form of Christianity. (shrink)

The article focuses on the concept of the state in the works of the German sociologist M. Weber and his contemporary, the anarchist G. Landauer. Specifically, it is commonly thought that Weber has a unique interpretation of the state, its nature, and inalienable characteristics. This Weberian approach did not fit into any of the traditions that existed at that time in Germany (for example, represented by H. Kelsen, G. Jellinek, and O. von Gierke). However, the author of the article tries (...) to demonstrate that three main Weberian aspects of the state — 1) the monopoly on legitimate physical violence, 2) the relationship of domination, which is accompanied by a minimum desire to obey, and 3) the chance for the regular reproducibility of these relationships — are consonant with Landauer’s concept of the state. This discovered conceptual affinity allows one to look at Weber’s sociology from new angles, without being impacted by the personal beliefs of the German scientist, who very critically treated anarchism as a socio-political movement. In the final section of the paper, the author discusses the modern project of “anarchist sociology”, which also uses Weberian methodology. The paper argues that “anarchist sociology” might be a promising social science with ts unique vision of several key sociological topics, such as domination, power, or social inequality. (shrink)

The article analyzes the issues of the philosophy and ideology of the future from the point of view of the theory of self-organization, or synergetics. This interdisciplinary approach allows researchers to focus their efforts on the key problems of the development of civilization and, in particular, on designing the future. In the theory of valuable information developed by D.S. Chernavsky, it is shown that there is a number of knowledge, skills, and abilities that increase the probability of their holders to (...) survive and convey essential information to the future generations. In the 21st century, civilizational choice and ideology will be such knowledge. Several “brief histories of the future” are currently popular, from S. Lem and A. Toffler to J. Attali and S.P. Huntington. All of them focus on the projection onto society of achieved or promising industrial technical changes. D. Bell’s theory of post-industrial development as well as the theory of the humanitarian and technological revolution, which is actively developing at the present time, show that this is not correct. The key factor will be the image of the desired future, which underlies the ideology adopted by the elites and public consciousness. The article shows that now a choice is being made between the society that adopts a new leftist ideology or the New Middle Ages. The current socio-economic and military-political instability in the world, which was clearly demonstrated by the situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, shows that without it the world will be dependent on the establishment and other centers of power pursuing their own, far from common, interests. (shrink)

The drama “Ressurection of the dead people”, written by the famous Orthodox hierarch saint Georgiy (Konys’kyj), presents the well-known monument of the old Ukrainian didactic literature. Even nowadays its impressive religious and ethical basis demands attention, popularization and further exploration.The aim of the article is pointing out the central moral and theological ideas of this work and making analysis of them.Georgiy (Konys’kyj’s) drama is connected with the biblical texts (with the evangelic parables of the Wheat and the Tares, (...) of the Sower and of the Rich Man and Lazarus, in particular). This connection is regular and strong enough. At the same time, the author uses some corresponding ethical senses, elements of subject line and images more or less creatively. As a result, his literary work can be interpreted as a perceptibly original one.As well as the Holy Writ and the Sacred Tradition of Church, the drama “Resurrection of the dead people” underlines the value of the different Christian virtues. Among them we find the diligence, the mercy, the making of peace, the gratefulness, the relying upon God’s Providence, the patience, the humility, the understanding of the eternal values priority, etc. Being a preacher of virtues, Ukrainian dramatist preaches down the numerous vices and sins. According to his ethical position, our struggle against the evil should be as righteous and legal as it possible.In spite of some loss of conformity to the moral theology in one episode, on the whole the drama by Georgiy (Konys’kyj) must be regarded as a successful artistic embodiment of the important ideas of the Christian ethics. (shrink)

Theofan Prokopovych and Georgiy Konyskyi are the most prominent professors of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in the 18th century. Their courses (1707-09 and 1749/51) are well regarded among the researchers and translated into Ukrainian in 1980 and 1990 respectively. Both texts generally have been considered as original. However, after a careful examination, it possible to notice a strong influence of Prokopovych on Konyskyi. This publication provides a comparative critical edition of a section from both courses on the same topic, on the (...) infinity. The section is published together with the available Ukrainian translations. The four text are synchronized, so it is easy to track the same passage in all the texts. Since the texts of both authors are based on several manuscripts, the publication is accompanied with the apparatus criticus. Because there is no tradition of publishing critical editions of Latin texts in Ukraine, a detailed explanation of the rules of apparatus criticus is provided here. -/- At this stage, it is too early to give a full account of the connection between Konyskyi’s and Prokopovych’ courses; nevertheless, based on the published section, it possible to say that Konyskyi used Prokopovych text mostly verbatim. He made some structural rearrangements, added some comments and clarifications. His text sounds more logical and more easily to apprehend. Considering the main goal of teaching activity – to pass a common knowledge, clarity of explanation is a higher value, than originality. (shrink)

The article deals with the analysis of Kyiv-Mohyla conceptions of intellectual cognition in the context of the European scholastic tradition. There were analysed Traktat o duszy [The Treatise on Mind] by Kasian Sakovych, and handwritten philosophical courses by Inokentiy Gizel, Theophan Prokopvych and Georgiy Konyskyi.The article shows that Sakovych, Gizel and Prokopovych supported a typical scholastic di-vision of intellectual powers into the active and passive intellect, although Prokopovych expressed doubts about the necessity of this division. Unlike them, Konysky in (...) 1749-51 totally denied the division of the intellect. The article argues that Prokopovych’s and Konyskyi’s change in the interpretation of intellectual powers was influenced by modern philosophy, mainly by Cartesianism. In general, the views of Mohylian authors on the problem of intellectual cognition are marked by some eclecticism, combining elements of different scho-lastic schools. They followed Francisco Suarez and Scotists defining creative power of the possible intellect and the formal difference between two kinds of intellectual powers. However, they, especially Inokenitiy Gizel, went by Thomistic interpretation of verbum mentis. At the same time, the professors of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, like other scholastic philosophers, recog-nised the necessary connection between cognitive powers of different levels. In their view, cognitive powers belong to the human being as a complex substantial system. The article proves that Kyiv-Mohyla concepts of intellectual cognition express a range of clearly modern ideas; nevertheless, they are also oriented to the ideas that modern philosophy denied. (shrink)

The article supplements the publication of the introduction to Theophan Prokopovych’s philosophical course (taught at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in 1707-09). It analyses characteristics of Prokopovych’s manuscript in comparison with the manuscript of Georgiy Konyskyi’s philosophical course (taught in 1747-1749). The latter turns out to be a copy of the former, as it does not contain significant differences. The article describes the editorial principles of Prokopovych’s Prooemium and the significance of the text as well as gives short exposition of the content (...) with the analysis of references by Prokopovych. It explains some codicological and textological characteristics of both manuscripts. The analysis of textual relation between the two manuscripts shows that Konyskyi’s manuscript contains much more mistakes than Prokopovych’s manuscript. Most of more than a hundred variations between the manuscripts are mistakes in Konyskyi’s manuscript. The author supposes that the student, the scribe of Konyskyi’s manuscript, not completely understood rather complicated style of Prokopovych. Prokopovych’s position about the style of exposition shows balancing between humanistic and scholastic ideas. It states that Prokopovych refers usually to ancient authors. The references in the text are quite detailed, but not enough accurate. Half of them (6 out of 12) happen to be incorrect. It is probable that Prokopovych made references from memory. (shrink)

Any author should be happy when commentators on a long book discuss it thoroughly, raise important issues, and show their sensitivity to its main themes. So I want to begin with thanks to Isaac Levi, Peter Machamer, Richard Miller and Dudley Shapere. This is not, of course, to register agreement with all their criticisms. Indeed, that would be impossible, for their perspectives are so varied as to resist integration into a consistent synthesis. Nevertheless, each of them poses problems that my (...) approach to the growth of scientific knowledge must address, and I believe that the combination of their essays greatly advances the discussion. (shrink)

The article attempts to define a worldview paradigm in the philosophy of H. Skovoroda. In historical and philosophical studies, there is a certain difference of opinion regarding the evaluation of the main provisions of the Ukrainian’s enlightener philosophy. Scientists emphasize the manifestations of pantheism, dualism, pluralism and mysticism in the work of H. Skovoroda. This is a palette of mutually exclusive definitions of the main philosophies of the thinker.The conducted critical analysis of the Skovoroda’s philosophical heritage allows us to reveal (...) the deistic direction of his worldview positions. However, compared to the conceptual presentation of deism by the founder of the French Enlightenment of the 18th century, F. Walter, the philosophical deistic positions of H. Skovoroda have their own characteristics. The deistic tendencies of Walter’s worldview are based on the principles of rationalism. They permeate the foundations of his theoretical and practical philosophy. The Ukrainian enlightener’s principle of deism is based on manifestations of the highest divine wisdom. They include rational forms of existence and knowledge, spiritual and practical, moral foundations of human existence. (shrink)

This thesis is neither e page to page commentary nor en assessment of Hume's place in the history of Philosophy. It mainly consists in an attempt at justifying a certain approach to the Interpretation of his theory of value with special reference to morals.

On religious and spiritual life as depicted in Bhāgavatapurāṇa, Hindu mythological text.

Moral theories may differ not only in the substantive moral principles they assert, but also in their concept of a person or moral agent. Thus, for example, Utilitarianism stresses the ability of a human being to calculate rationally the profit and loss which attend particular actions; and Aristotle bases his Nichomachean Ethics on a moral psychology tied to the notion of harmonious self-development.

I. Pryor on McKinsey: " A. Pryor’s Version of McKinsey-style Reasoning 1. Given authoritative self-knowledge, I can usually tell the contents of my own thoughts just by introspection. So I can know the following claim on the basis of reflection alone: " McK-1: I am thinking a thought with the content _water puts out fires_.