Foreword Philip T. Grier The attempt to retrieve a work of scholarship buried under as much historical debris as was IA Il'in's original two-volume commentary on the philosophy of Hegel presented distinct challenges, as well as possible ...

The present study explored motivations for lying self-presentation on Instagram as well as the mental and behavioral outcomes of this presentation. We also examined the differential mediational roles of perceived popularity in accounting for the association between lying self-presentation and depression. Our results showed that individuals with a strong need for approval reported higher levels of lying self-presentation. The results also revealed that lying self-presentation positively influenced depression, perceived popularity and deleting behaviors. Furthermore, we found that even if lying self-presentation (...) increased depression, perceived popularity served as a psychological buffer against depression. (shrink)

This book traces the development of Dialectical Logic within the history of modern western philosophy, culminating in Marx s materialist dialectics. It brings out the essential contours of Logic through a detailed exposition of the ontological and epistem.

보존이란 인간의 활동을 규제해서라도 야생자연이나 생물종을 있는 그대로 지켜야 한다는 사고다. 하지만 패스모어는 인간이 문명의 건설 · 발전을 위해 야생지를 개발하고 생물을 멸종시키는 현 상황이 대체 무슨 문제가 되는가 하는 물음을 제기한다. 야생지 개발과 생물종 파괴가 잘못이라는 판단에 대한 합의는 전혀 이뤄진 적이 없음에도 마치 일정한 합의가 이뤄진 것처럼 보존만이 옳은 것처럼 강조하는 이유가 대체 무엇인가 하는 것이다. 이러한 문제의식 하에 패스모어는 보존에 반대하는 논증을 전개한다. 이 글에서는 패스모어의 보존에 관한 논의 가운데 세 가지 사항을 문제삼아 그 정당성을 검토하고 있다. (...) 그 세 가지란 ①보전과 보존의 개념 문제, ②동식물의 권리 문제, 그리고 ③생물다양성의 원리 문제다. (shrink)

The article by D. I. Dubrovskii, "Brain and Mind" [Mozg i psikhika], published in Voprosy filosofii, No. 8, produced in me not only the desire to debate but also the desire to refrain, in that debate, from employing the tone he used. For that reason it seems necessary to me to list the points on which neither I nor, as I understand it, F. T. Mikhailov desires to take issue with the author of "Brain and Mind," because on these matters (...) we are entirely in agreement with him. To proceed in this fashion is necessary not for the sake of academic courtesy, but precisely in order to denote more clearly the actual points of difference between our positions, and then to let the reader decide which path he prefers. (shrink)

This monograph considers the challenges of science globalization, new trends of development in global studies and globalistics boosted by application of the evolutionary approach. Evolutionary globalistics focuses on the study of development and co-evolution of global processes and systems, and on their synergistic systemic phenomenon - global development. The concept of evolutionary globalistics is defined in the context of the universal (global) evolutionism and in terms of transition to new safer forms of civilization development and of interaction of civilization with (...) the nature of the Earth and Space. Special emphasis is placed on methods and approaches used in globalistics, as well as to spatio-temporal expansion of global studies. The evolution of globalistics itself is analyzed, including the development of such areas as political globalistics, legal globalistics, information globalistics, futuroglobalistics, nooglobalistics, cosmoglobalistics and other. Target audience: experts, lecturers, students, post-graduate students, a wide range of readers interested in the issues of globalistics and global studies. (shrink)