Glava I. Predposylki vozniknovenii︠a︡ russkogo neoleĭbnit︠s︡ianstva -- Glava II. G. Teĭkhmi︠u︡ller i I︠U︡rʹevskai︠a︡ shkola -- Glava III. A.A. Kozlov i S.A. Alekseev (Askolʹdov) -- Glava IV. Ierarkhicheskiĭ personalizm N.O. Losskogo -- Glava V. N.V. Bugaev i Moskovskai︠a︡ filosofsko-matematicheskai︠a︡ shkola -- Glava VI. Spiritualizm L.M. Lopatina i Moskovskoe psikhologicheskoe obshchestvo -- Glava VII. Kriticheskai︠a︡ monadologii︠a︡ P.E. Astafʹeva -- Glava VIII. Pozdnee russkoe neoleĭbnit︠s︡ianstvo.

Introduction to Sexology [Vvedenie v seksologiiu] by I. S. Kon has finally been published after having made the rounds of publishing houses for many years. This is the first Soviet publication devoted to a description and an analysis of the genesis, development, and state of a new branch of scientific knowledge about man-sexology-which affects every one of us. To be sure, General Sexual Pathology [Obshchaia seksopatologiia], a textbook for physicians edited by G. S. Vasil'chenko, which came out in 1977, has (...) an extensive introductory chapter on sexology, but it is limited to medical problems. Kon's book is an example of an interdisciplinary approach that provides an idea of the most essential components of sexology; it is thus addressed not only to the medical profession, but also to sociologists, philosophers of culture, psychologists, pedagogues, etc. The book takes into account the latest publications in this area of science. (shrink)

It becomes more obvious each year that the appeals of the party and government to strengthen the ties between philosophy and modern science are not being adequately implemented by the chairs of logic in the universities. In a number of institutions, a situation has persisted for a long time in which only a few professors and instructors deal with the subject area of dialectical and mathematical logic at a high professional level. Most of the teaching staff continue to conduct their (...) work essentially within the confines and at the level of the old, arbitrarily designated "traditional" formal logic, primarily in the form in which it took shape in the middle of the last century. It is clear that this does not accord with the demands of the party and of our philosophical and scientific public to raise the theoretical level of all instructional and research work in higher educational institutions. The erroneous orientation toward the old formal logic was, in particular, one of the reasons why the fundamental problems of dialectical logic have to this day not found unambiguous solutions. This is also one of the reasons why the science of logic has suffered some loss of authority among a portion of the country's students. It is not uncommon to see teachers who deal with dialectical logic giving inadequate consideration to the problems of contemporary natural and social science, while those who concern themselves with mathematical logic give inadequate attention to problems in the realm of philosophy. The appearance and persistence of this situation have made possible a sterile and erroneous approach to theoretical problems, the discussion of which is our present aim. (shrink)