The article discusses the concept of political Gnosticism, developed by the philosopher Eric Voegelin. This concept is one of the main elements of Voegelin’s political philosophy, in which he answers the question about the essence of modern politics. Voegelin believes that modernity is the result of the historical victory of the ideology of “Gnosticism”. The historical roots of Gnosticism, says Voegelin, should not be sought in late antiquity, but in the Middle Ages. Based on the ideas of Christian mystics, such (...) as Joachim of Flore, an ideology of Gnosticism was formed, which spread in the Western world and became a powerful political force. This force accomplished the “great Gnostic revolution” and shaped modern society. Examples of modern Gnostic regimes are progressivism, positivism, Marxism, psychoanalysis, communism, fascism, National Socialism. Modern political science is not able to give a critical understanding of Gnosticism, since it itself is a product of Gnostic ideology. Therefore, modern political science needs to restore its fundamental principles, which were established by ancient philosophers, the founders of the philosophy of politics. Voegelin calls this the reteoretisation of political science. The author of the article analyzes the theoretical and historical grounds of Voegelin’s concept and concludes that one of the sources of his theory of political Gnosticism is Hegel’s doctrine of unhappy consciousness. The article also proves that Voegelin’s concept of Gnosticism is not identical with historical Gnosticism. The author also analyzes the reasons why political science of the twentieth century did not accept this concept and did not draw conclusions from criticism of political science in the work “New Science of Politics” by Voegelin. The article concludes that the changes that are taking place in the modern world force us to reconsider and overestimate Voegelin’s concept, which, in our opinion, has great heuristic potential. (shrink)

The article is devoted to Leo Strauss’s critique of Hegel’s political philosophy. The author holds this topic relevant in the context of the crisis of modern political science. To understand the causes and nature of this crisis, it is necessary to pay attention to alternative philosophical and political theories of the XX century. Leo Strauss’s philosophy of politics is just such an alternative theory. Strauss made a radical critique of modern political philosophy, which he saw as an important part of (...) the project of modern civilization. Strauss stresses that Hegel became one of the most prominent philosophers who participated in the creation of modern science and the modern world. The author considers the main critical arguments of Strauss, evaluates their validity and their significance for the Straussian conservative revolution in philosophy. The author pays special attention to the question of Hegel’s role in the break with classical political philosophy. Strauss accused Hegel that he had taken all the major steps that led to this rupture. Hegel, according to Strauss, secularized political thinking, which led to the loss of universal Christian values. The consequence of this secularization was the dominance of positivism in political philosophy. Hegel’s philosophy of history, according to Strauss, is relativism. Hegel’s historicism and progressivism are contradictory and inconsistent. Strauss also accuses Hegel of abandoning the philosophical esoteric art of writing. The article draws attention to the fact that Strauss recognized the importance of Hegel as an outstanding thinker of his time. Strauss viewed Hegel’s philosophy as a kind of intermediate link between classical philosophy and modern positivism. The author concludes that for Strauss the critique of Hegel’s political philosophy became an important element of his project of restoration of classical political philosophy. The article uses little-known materials from Strauss’s lectures in 1958 and 1965. (shrink)

This article provides overview of the swarm intelligence and robotics fields, main characteristics of such systems provided, their advantages and disadvantages as well as differences from other multi-agent systems. Also, main fields of application for swarm systems with examples provided apart from short information on swarm optimizations. The problem of swarms’ control described and possible solutions for it such as algorithm replacement, parameters change, control through environment and leaders. Apart from that fields for possible future research noted.

The present volume is intended as an all-round introduction to constructivism. Here constructivism is to be understood in the wide sense, and covers in particular Brouwer's intuitionism, Bishop's constructivism and A.A. Markov's constructive recursive mathematics. The ending "-ism" has ideological overtones: "constructive mathematics is the (only) right mathematics"; we hasten, however, to declare that we do not subscribe to this ideology, and that we do not intend to present our material on such a basis.

We compare fork arrow logic, an extension of arrow logic, and its natural first-order counterpart (the correspondence language) and show that both have the same expressive power. Arrow logic is a modal logic for reasoning about arrow structures, its expressive power is limited to a bounded fragment of first-order logic. Fork arrow logic is obtained by adding to arrow logic the fork modality (related to parallelism and synchronization). As a result, fork arrow logic attains the expressive power of its first-order (...) correspondence language, so both can express the same input-output behavior of processes. (shrink)

Ṣadr, Muḥammad Bāqir; Islamic philosophy; 20th century.

Purpose. To examine the existential anthropology of G. Marcel and E. Minkowski, in order to demonstrate the necessity of distinguishing the universal-spiritual, as human in human being, apart from the individual-existential in him, and to reveal the hierarchical correlation of biosocial, existential and spiritual spheres in personality. Theoretical basis. Within existential philosophy the author differentiates two separate traditions and proceeds from the insufficiency of the distinction of existential sphere, proposed by phenomenological tradition, showing the necessity of its correlation with the (...) spiritual sphere as a sphere of humanity, proposed by non-phenomenological tradition of G. Marcel and E. Minkowski. Originality. The author presents the anthropological conception of G. Marcel and E. Minkowski, in which human personality is understood as unity of individual-existential and universal-spiritual, which requires a special trans-empirical field of culture, which contains senses, images and symbols of humanity. Also, the author presents the recent developments of existential thinkers in distinguishing existential and spiritual dimensions, both not reducible to the physical and social dimensions. Conclusions. In both existential traditions, the specifically human was founded as a trans-biological and trans-social phenomenon, which appears as indefinable and non-predetermined. But in first tradition, humanity is understood as an existence, as a unique individuality, "project", variant of humanity, equivalent to other variants, and universal is understood as a community of human condition in the world. While in the second tradition, the universal is understood as spiritual. Thus, horizontal level of our private existence, as the process of movement from birth to death, is supplemented by vertical of human, universal ideals and images. Humanity appears as a task, on the way to which human being transcends beyond the limits of his individual "self" to the "super-individual", through inclusion into spiritual community, into universal culture. (shrink)

Humans are fundamentally social and tend to create emergent organizations when interacting with each other; from dyads to families, small groups, large groups, societies and civilizations. The study of the neuronal substrate of human social behavior is currently gaining momentum in the young field of social neuroscience. Hyperscanning is a neuroimaging technique by which we can study two or more brain simultaneously while participants interact with each other. The aim of this article is to discuss several factors that we deem (...) important in designing hyperscanning experiments. We first review hyperscanning studies performed by means of electroencephalography (EEG) that have been relying on a continuous interaction paradigm. Then, we provide arguments for favoring ecological paradigms, for studying the emotional component of social interactions and for performing longitudinal studies, the last two aspects being largely neglected so far in the hyperscanning literature despite their paramount importance in social sciences. Based on these premises we argue that music performance is a suitable experimental setting for hyperscanning and that for such studies EEG is an appropriate choice as neuroimaging modality. (shrink)