Vox. Philosophical journal最新文献

{"title":"Emptiness of Ultimate Knowledge or How to survive in the realm of shadows","authors":"A. Sukhno, V. Gulin","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-37-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-37-9","url":null,"abstract":"The article proposes to consider Hegel's “Science of Logic” as a project, where the most important thing is not to describe the “laws of thinking”, but rather to propose a more precise definition of the theoretical level at which thinking itself becomes the subject of its own description. Thus, on the one hand, Hegel reveals the paradox that lies at the basis of the logic as a philosophical discipline, and on the other, seeks to show the possibility of the existence of the logic in the extreme conditions of this paradox. Within the framework of this approach, logic is inseparable from the theory of knowledge — it is assumed that the configuration or “form” of thinking cannot be “neutral” with respect to its content. Therefore, according to Hegel, in reality there is not the logic of isolated operations occurring in the mind, but the logic of “the object itself”, which shows and directly embodies itself in these operations. At this level, there is no gap between the thinking consciousness and objects of the external world separated from it. We are talking about a special — “pre-ontological” — dimension, where the subject's sensory experience is not yet launched and distinguished, and a subject of the thinking process and thinking itself form a single whole. Such a dimension is developed in the historical experience of philosophical thought, starting from Antiquity, and is captured by Hegel under the name of “Ultimate knowledge”. The article raises the question of why this dimension repeatedly eludes us, acquiring a “semi-mystical” status in the minds of Hegel's interpreters, and yet how it is still possible to infiltrate into it.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121384873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Violence and political bureaucracy:\u0000a summary of concerns","authors":"V. Makarenko","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-37-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-37-3","url":null,"abstract":"The article presents a fragment of the concept developed by the author in recent years [Makarenko V. P., 2018]. It discusses the problems of liberation of mind and conscience from the legacy of the Soviet era, the resuscitation of obscurantism in Russia against the background of the contrast between culture and the state along with the main characteristics of the twentieth century and constants of Russian history. The author also reviews the Old Testament concept of holy war, transformation of war in Christianity, Russian and Soviet state mind, the civilizing dictatorship of the empire in the past and present, the evolution of government philosophy to a system of total lies, modern forms of its embodiment, including collaborationism, and the influence of these factors on the functioning of power in the country.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"133 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125237881","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Conversation and the logic of history","authors":"P. Tishchenko","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-37-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-37-4","url":null,"abstract":"The problem of the logic of understanding history is discussed. We propose a model of understanding history as a conversation, which the person thinking about history has with interlocutors (sources) of previous epochs. The epoch is interpreted as a special way of problematizing human's understanding of him (her) self and the world around. At the same time, three gifts — attention, recognition and name — underlie the connection of the historian in conversation with interlocutors (sources) from other eras. They are not given in advance but are results of a struggle for the recognition. In choosing his (her) interlocutor (source), the historian chooses him (her) self. By giving this interlocutor (the source) the opportunity to be heard, the historian, at the same time, receives a gift from the source — the opportunity to express what would otherwise remain unspoken in the historian's own mind. The logic of conversation, designated as transduction, is not the connection through the identification of the beginning and the end of the discourse, which is appropriate and necessary within the speech of each of the conversationalists, but the connection of the beginnings of these discordant discourses among themselves.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129252068","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Understanding of personality: Averintsev, Bybler, Gefter, Bibikhin","authors":"S. Neretina","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-4","url":null,"abstract":"The problem of personality in philosophy has been significant since the emergence of Christianity. In Soviet Russia, this problem has been actualized since the 2nd half of the twentieth century, since the Thaw, when the books of Russian religious philosophers became known. We were the original heirs of Christian ontology and ethics, which assumed that a personal appeal to God on You (Tu) testified to a change of places in the interior of being itself, which becomes intimate, close, because the infinite God, being in a person, makes him the same infinite person.\u0000The Latin term \"persona\" is translated as \"mask\" (personality). V.V. Vinogradov in the \"History of Words\" says that the word \"personality\", associated with Latin and Greek meanings (persona, prosopon), was not used massively in the Old Russian language until the XVII century, and in the XVII and XVIII centuries it began to denote only the official position of a person. It is impossible to associate this meaning of the face with what was in antiquity and the Middle Ages. This is a homonym.\u0000Reflecting on Greek literature, S. S. Averintsev wrote that the term \"creativity\" is poorly applicable to the Greek philosophers: \"poyesis\" is a matter understood as an invention. The Greeks invented an objectified type of communication-through-literature, i.e. dialogue, consciously separated from life communication. Dialogue as an invention revealed the fundamental undialogical nature of Greek literature, and Socrates is the ideal of a radically undialogical person who cannot be internally hurt by the word of the interlocutor. Therefore, for Averintsev, a personality is a mind free from a \"dialogical situation\", it is a mask, an individual understood as an eidos. It is the mask — \"immobile-clear, fully revealed and appeared\" — that is the semantic limit of a continuously emerging face. By opening the \"mask\", the Greeks emphasized the importance of individuality.\u0000V. S. Bybler, criticizing Averintsev, argues that dialogue is not a construction, it is an internal dispute of the philosopher taking place in his own soul. He is in the thought itself, pushing its definitions to the limit and reaching the border of other possible definitions, concepts, understandings. According to Bybler, the thought itself is dialogical, communicating with itself within itself and forming a gap between itself and the other \"I\". At the same time, Bibler defines his philosophy as the philosophy of an eternally borderline culture. Dialogue is a tense collaboration between an author who worked in a past culture and a reader who lives in a modern culture. Personality for the Bibler is the ultimate embodiment of the individual — the reverse course of Averintsev.\u0000M. Ya. Gefter and V. V. Bibikhin worked out this problem 20 years later. Gefter, based on the unmotivated appearance of homo sapiens and the unexplained appearance of speech, emphasized that speech destroyed the limit of understanding between people. This is also connected wi","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"121 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122753070","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Where have you been for 8 years?","authors":"Yulia V. Gorbatova","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-9","url":null,"abstract":"It's not my place to talk about politics, I'm not a political scientist or even a sociologist. My business is logic, theory of argumentation and communication. So I can only speak confidently about how we reason and how we try to convince someone with the help of our reasoning. Let's look at several arguments, which are offered to us, if not by the state itself, then by those who agree with the \"special operation\" in Ukraine.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131298408","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Polemic and polemos","authors":"S. Neretina","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-3","url":null,"abstract":"The article, with reference to a selection of materials devoted to the theme of \"war\" and published in issue 18 in the journal \"Vox\" for 2015, re-emphasizes the need, no matter how tragic for thought and being, to end the very state of war as \"father of all\" (Heraclitus). The author emphasizes that human speech is permeated with struggle, which still connects the new and the old states of the world. The point is not in its content, not in the dialogues, oppositions and contradictions expressed in the text. The very organization of speech, its phonetics shows how, in poetry and prose, sounds push apart, merge, even interfere with each other, weakening each other, allowing the pronunciation of the superfluous or not giving the opportunity to pronounce what seems superfluous. However, the mind, memory and reason inherent in man act in different directions, suggest different solutions, expressed primarily and most sharply through feelings. Now, one of them is important for the preservation of the genus sapiens: the emphasis on the anti-militarist concept, since the war has become total, and the consciousness is militaristic. The world has become a war, and concepts have acquired the character of shape-shifting. War has now become an existential problem, the ultimate expression of the existentials of care, fear, abandonment, displacing civilizational and cultural attitudes, putting a person not even before questioning himself, but about the possibility of belonging to the genus sapiens. The point of reconfiguring thinking is to ban war as a state of peace, which will make the 21st century meaningful. For today, any local conflict in fact means an invasion of the world order.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"204 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120838886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The figure of the monarch in the political philosophy of Dante Alighieri","authors":"V. Zhulev","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-10","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this article is to analyze the figure of the monarch presented in Dante's “De Monarchia”. The study of Dante's political project will provide us with an opportunity to see the shifts in intellectual environment of the late Middle Ages through the evolution or perhaps return from the theocratic model to the earlier pre-Christial concept of the ruler. The study of Dante's political lexicon will demonstrate the revival of the original meanings starting to challenge and shift the consensus of the political philisophy at the time.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114843757","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Why Kephalos? A Significant Name in Plato’s Republic","authors":"D. Konstan","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-8","url":null,"abstract":"As is well known, the conversation that is recorded in Plato’s Republic takes place in the home of Kephalos, the father of Polemarchus, who contributes to the discussion, and the orator Lysias. Kephalos was a wealthy metic, who owned an arms factory manned by numerous slaves (metics were not permitted to own land in Athens). In the charming preface to the dialogue, Socrates recounts how he was waylaid by Polemarchus and some others as he was heading back to town from Piraeus, and compelled to accompany him to his place. It is a well-wrought preface, and Plato is said to have revised the opening sentence several times before he was satisfied with it. The first word, κατέβην (“I went down”), while standard usage for heading in the direction of Piraeus, also suggests a kind of catabasis, a descent as though into the cave, as scholars have noted. But why Kephalos’ house? Why there?","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132491538","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Stay, moment, you are terrible: reinventing the philosophy of tragedy","authors":"","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-5","url":null,"abstract":"In order to be spoken, a tragic monologue which is the quintessence of any great tragedy, always required quite a special moment amidst action, approximately described as ‘stop-time’, ‘falling-out-of-time’ or ‘time-within-time’. This abruption of natural time-durance, formation of some strange lacuna in its usually monolith and constant flow, along with the strengthening of the emotional effect of such dramatic meditation by portraying it against the most depressing, uncomfortable or disastrous convulsions in the world around which seems to literally fall apart and leave the man to his own — was rarely regarded from the outside of dramatic art as a serious philosophical conception, a keystone event to present human self-awareness. Indeed, Plato already compared thinking (as a process) to the inner speech of soul communicating with itself (and thus knowing, noticing itself), and again, the same Plato suggested that to reach the real essence of things (which is the inborn aim of thinking), a human being must find itself on the breaking edge of existence where the material world is cast aside and the other world of godly truths starts to shine through — as it happens to the soldier Er in one of myths quoted in ‘Republic’, who seemingly fell in battle but as he lay neither dead nor alive his soul went to other planes to witness the divine order and then bring the knowledge of it back to people as Er resurrected. But the connection between the matrix of central elements in such enlightening tales (‘catastrophe of usual being’ — ‘transgression to some medium plane’ — ‘learning some all-changing truth there’ — ‘coming back to the world and oneself to speak the learnt to the people’), was never considered akin to that of the core elements of tragic climax. After Plato, Aristotle developed the idea that to think seriously we need a special time free of all else that storms our everyday lives — yet designing the laws of tragedy in ‘Poetics’, he didn’t ever let this intellectual transcendence counter the dramatic strives of actions and passions of its heroes (as well as the forth movement) although it was only one step away to admit their likelihood. The latter Christianity defiled tragedy as the way only to despair, and more to that, a theatrical illusion leading conscience astray. Only modern European thinkers from Pascal to Nietzsche and existentialists (with the significant help from outstanding authors like Shakespeare) brought back the notion of tragic to philosophical bloom again and re-presented the tragedy as one of the highest and most complicated arts devoted to human self-cognizance.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"107 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131087679","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"War and Intelligence","authors":"A. Akhutin","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-1","url":null,"abstract":"I ventured to think during the war. I wrote several blogs on the topic \"War and Intelligence\". Everything seems out of place here. War requires action (participation, protection, assistance), and thought wants concentration in peace. I am not engaged in scientific research, I just think about what I can, what I have, and what I carry with me, without referring to sources and reference books. I'm thinking about this very: how does the event of the war relate to the ability — and maybe even the duty — to think. I wrote two posts. They consider intelligence (intellectus) as a kind of responsibility. All knowledge, awareness, concepts, sciences, discursive practices, etc. — are secondary. They make sense in the primary context of responsibility. All intellectual pursuits have meaning and meaning as aspects of the answer to the question that constitutes a human being as human. This is being-in-question.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121830188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}