Dostoevskiĭ i ego khristianskoe miroponimanie -- T︠S︡ennostʹ i bytie -- Bog i mirovoe zlo.

Tipy mirovozzreniĭ -- Chuvstvennai︠a︡, intellektualʹnai︠a︡ i misticheskai︠a︡ intuit︠s︡ii︠a︡ -- Ideal-realizm.

Materii︠a︡ v sisteme organicheskogo mirovozzrenii︠a︡.--Sovremennyĭ vitalizm. Dokazatelʹstva nesostoi︠a︡telʹnosti biomekhanizma. Svoĭstva i sposoby deĭstvii︠a︡ faktora zhizni.

Uslovii︠a︡ absoli︠u︡tnogo dobra -- Kharakter russkogo naroda.

В прил.: Н. О. Лосский и священник П. Флоренский / С. М. Половинкин. Письма Н. О. Лосского к священнику П. Флоренскому. Биографические данные о Б. Н. Лосском. Письма Н. О. Лосского к Б. Н. Лосскому и его семье.

The paper deals with the problem of human freedom and the freedom of person, as seen by Russian personalist philosophers of the 20th century in their Parisian exile - N. Berdyaev and N. Lossky, both of them influenced by F. M. Dostoyevsky. Their philosophical conceptions derive from existentialism, which is the existential-experiential source of the modern personalism in general. The Russian personalists saw human freedom as one of the absolute values and included its problematic together with the paradoxes of the (...) particularity of individual being into their sear_ching for the true essence of humans. In justifying freedom as the basic human right both thinkers combine their anthropocentric approach with the Christian doctrine. The free philosophy is religious and intuitive at the same time. (shrink)

The history of Russian philosophy, beginning in the eighteenth century. Also includes brief biographies of famous Russian philosophers.

Исследование посвящено философскому осознанию природы духовности человека. Автор рассматривает духовность внутреннего мира человека как единство высших чувств души и нравственного сознания. Для специалистов в области философии, методологии науки.

We argue that the appraisal of models in social epistemology requires conceiving of them as argumentative devices, taking into account the argumentative context and adopting a family-of-models perspective. We draw up such an account and show how it makes it easier to see the value and limits of the use of models in social epistemology. To illustrate our points, we document and explicate the argumentative role of epistemic landscape models in social epistemology and highlight their limitations. We also claim that (...) our account could be fruitfully used in appraising other models in philosophy and science. (shrink)

Exclusionary defeat is Joseph Raz’s proposal for understanding the more complex, layered structure of practical reasoning. Exclusionary reasons are widely appealed to in legal theory and consistently arise in many other areas of philosophy. They have also been subject to a variety of challenges. I propose a new account of exclusionary reasons based on their justificatory role, rejecting Raz’s motivational account and especially contrasting exclusion with undercutting defeat. I explain the appeal and coherence of exclusionary reasons by appeal to commonsense (...) value pluralism and the intermediate space of public policies, social roles, and organizations. We often want our choices to have a certain character or instantiate a certain value and in order to do so, that choice can only be based on a restricted set of reasons. Exclusion explains how pro tanto practical reasons can be disqualified from counting towards a choice of a particular kind without being outweighed or undercut. (shrink)