t. 1. Domarksistskai︠a︡ teorii︠a︡ poznanii︠a︡ --t. 2. Sot︠s︡ialʹno-kulturnai︠a︡ priroda poznanii︠a︡.

Издание предназначено для студентов и преподавателей гуманитарных образовательных учреждений, специалистов и практиков в различных областях науки.

Following up on a 1989 paper on the subject, this essay revisits the question of ethical expertise in the court room. Informed by recent developments in the use of ethics experts, the authors argue 1) that the adversarial nature of court proceedings challenges the integrity of the ethicist's pedagogical role; 2) that the use of ethics experts as normative authorities remains dubious; 3) that clarification of the State's interest in “protecting the ethical integrity of the medical profession” is urgently required; (...) and 4) that the expertise of the ethicist may be more appropriately used in advising the legislature than in influencing the court. (shrink)

V.K.: Vladislav Aleksandrovich, you have come a long way in your scientific career: from a student of the class of 1955 in the Philosophy Faculty of Moscow State University to a corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, head of the sector of the theory of knowledge and head of the division of epistemology and logic at the Institute of Philosophy of the RAS, and editor in chief of our country's leading philosophy journal Voprosy filosofii. Your field of research (...) is the theory of knowledge and the philosophy of science or, to be more specific, the cultural-historical analysis of knowledge from the point of view of the activity approach. As far as I know, the psychological aspect of the activity approach to the study of consciousness and knowledge was developed by the psychologists Lev Semenovich Vygotsky, his student Aleksei Nikolaevich Leontiev, Aleksandr Romanovich Luria, and Petr Iakovlevich Galperin. Leontiev, Luria, and Galperin were professors at the Philosophy Faculty of MGU at the time you were studying there. Tell me, did you develop your scientific interests under the influence of the Moscow school of cultural-historical psychology? (shrink)

Whereas feminist theory has revitalized our understanding of the culture of medieval Europe, gay theory has only recently begun to review and rewrite that period of our past. Simon Gaunt, writing in 1992, offered several explanations for this state of affairs—including the homophobia of many educational institutions and a notable lack of visible gay scholars in the field. But the following explanation, I think, goes deepest, and is historically the most intractable. However much medieval women may have differed from modern (...) women, he reminds us, they are “clearly and prominently visible within [medieval] systems of representation.” Though we need to reconstruct their experience with care, since most of the records were produced by men, there is nonetheless no shortage of material. Not so for men whose desire was stirred by other men: “one of the prime difficulties in conducting research on the experience of gay people in the Middle Ages is simply lack of data. With whose experience do we identify?”. (shrink)

Mountains of books have been written about the life of the great sage Socrates, his philosophy, his condemnation by an Athenian court, and his execution. Nonetheless, one of the most erudite experts on ancient culture and philosophy, A.F. Losev, wrote: "Socrates is one of the most difficult problems in all ancient philosophy…. And it is now by no means an easy matter to discern the true Socrates" . This judgment of Losev's is all the more true in view of the (...) fact that Socrates did not write any philosophical works and we have to get all our information about his personality and philosophy from the more or less reliable reminiscences of his pupils and followers, first of all Plato and Xenophon. (shrink)