With the early success of the deep ecology movement in attracting adherents and with the increasing threat of a global ecological catastrophe, one would have expected this movement to have triumphed. We should be in the process of radically transforming society to create a harmonious relationship between humans and the rest of nature. Instead, deep ecology has been marginalized. What has triumphed instead is an alliance of managerialism, transnational corporations and neo-liberalism committed to replacing communities with markets and transforming every (...) facet of nature and society into means for increasing the profitability of corporations and expanding GDP. This outcome is here explained by the failure of deep ecologists to understand the ideological, political and economic forces driving ecological destruction, and thereby what is required to overcome these. To regain the initiative, it is argued, it will be necessary to recover the whole project of the Radical Enlightenment upholding the Renaissance quest for liberty that was subverted by the scientific materialism and possessive individualism of the Moderate Enlightenment. Not only will it be necessary to transform science to develop a comprehensive alternative conception of nature and humanity and its destiny, it will be necessary to revive and develop the institutions of the Radical Enlightenment to subordinate markets to democratically organized communities at multiple levels, as communities of communities committed to augmenting the life of these communities, including the life of ecological communities. Doing so will involve reformulating the grand narrative of emancipation as a dialogic, polyphonic grand narrative to orient individuals, organizations and nations to create a global ecological civilization. -/- . (shrink)

In the history of philosophy, Jean-Jacques Rousseau is mainly considered as an atypical philosopher of the Enlightenment, as a pioneer of the revolutionary idea of a free civilian state and natural law; in literary history, he is considered the forerunner of Romanticism, the writer who perfected the form of an epistolary novel, as well as a sentimentalist. However, this paper focuses on the biographical approach, which was mostly excluded in observation of those works revealing Rousseau as the originator of the (...) autobiographical novelistic genre. The subject of this paper is the issue of credibility of self-portraits, and through this problem it highlights the facts from the author?s life. This paper relies on a biographical approach, not in the positivistic sense but in the phenomenological key. This paper is mainly inspired by the works of the Geneva School theorists - Starobinski, Poulet and Rousset. Zan-Zak Ruso uglavnom je u istoriji filozofije promatran kao netipican filozof epohe prosvetiteljstva, kao zacetnik revolucionarnih ideja o slobodnoj gradjanskoj drzavi i prirodnom pravu; u istoriji knjizevnosti kao preteca romantizma, pisac koji je usavrsio epistolarnu formu romana i sentimentalista. Medjutim, u ovom radu fokus je na prenebregavanom biografskom pristupu onim delima u kojima se Ruso otkriva kao zacetnik autobiografskog romanesknog zanra. Preispitan je problem verodostojnosti autoportreta i kroz taj problem osvetljene su cinjenice iz autorovog zivota. Pristup u ovom tekstu oslonjen je na biografski, ali ne u pozitivistickom vec u fenomenoloskom kljucu. Osnovna inspiracija za tekst bili su radovi teoreticara zenevske skole - Starobinskog, Pulea i Rusea. (shrink)

Karl Popper (1902-1994) est mort avant d’avoir terminé cette collection d’articles. Quelques uns (comme « Back to the Presocratics » (1958), publié dans Conjectures et Réfutations, ou la note de The Open Society (1945) – huit pages – consacrée aux corps premiers du Timée) sont relativement connus. Certains, tel celui consacré à « la lumière que la Lune peut jeter sur les deux voies de Parménide » (1992) le sont moins. D’autres enfin sont inédits, comme la « réhabilitation » de (...) Xénophane (ch.... (shrink)

It is acceptable to state that Foucault has always held a strong stand and a radical distance in front of Kant’s thoughts. Similarly, it is possible thinking that through the changes of Foucault’s thoughts, the sceptical outlook suffered changes in relation with Kantian philosophical critique. Consequently, as said by Jon Simmons in his Foucault and the Political “it is ironic that a writer with a reputation for anarchist, nihilistic, even apocalyptic opposition to rationality, humanism and the Enlightment turned to (...) Kant as a model for critique”. Despite the fact of trying to find a labelling reference for Foucault’s thought, that’s to say, where to put it?: modernity, post-modernity, anarchism, radical sceptical; the labelling duty would be very problematic; although the philosopher himself states that “if there is a need to label Foucault within the philosophical tradition, it is in Kant’s critical philosophical tradition and his stake (Foucault’s) would be named “a critique history of Western thought”. In fact, Foucault himself also writes that, “Every contemporary thought is, in certain way, neo-Kantian. In the same way, inquiries himself, “wasn’t Kant the one who said: one doesn’t learn philosophy, one learns how to philosophize?”. (shrink)

The synthesis of the Critical Theory’s called essentials shapes shows the remaining and relevance of the Enlightment Dialectic’s notion. With this we can notice the relation between productive rationalization and social relations’ instrumental deformation, as constitutive character of modern culture. At time, the dialectic nature of Enlightment’s categories propitiates a melting of critical theorizations engaged with reformulated Enlightments’s ideals. This dialectic establishes some epistemologic conditions for the restoration of Critical Theory’s posibilities conditions. Around these, we feel necessary a (...) sistematic connection among materialist and hermenutic attitude on the analysis of knowledge’s historic determination. Historic interest’s concept allows the elaboration of that alternative, opening ways of reflection to Critical Theory’s revolutionary restating. This objective requires the recovering of historic experience’s extreme notion, formulated by original project of that’s most significative authors. (shrink)

The synthesis of the Critical Theory’s called essentials shapes shows the remaining and relevance of the Enlightment Dialectic’s notion. With this we can notice the relation between productive rationalization and social relations’ instrumental deformation, as constitutive character of modern culture. At time, the dialectic nature of Enlightment’s categories propitiates a melting of critical theorizations engaged with reformulated Enlightments’s ideals. This dialectic establishes some epistemologic conditions for the restoration of Critical Theory’s posibilities conditions. Around these, we feel necessary a (...) sistematic connection among materialist and hermenutic attitude on the analysis of knowledge’s historic determination. Historic interest’s concept allows the elaboration of that alternative, opening ways of reflection to Critical Theory’s revolutionary restating. This objective requires the recovering of historic experience’s extreme notion, formulated by original project of that’s most significative authors. (shrink)

English translation of Kant's Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung? (Königsberg in Prussia, 30 September 1784).

Designated bishop of Silves, diocese of Faro, Algarve, in 1334, D. Alvaro Pelayo entered in conflict with Alfonso IV (1325-57), the King of Portugal, sending him two letters in that one can notice that there he also had to defend the jurisdictional autonomy of the spiritual power, in order to the centralizing politics that the king, following his father’s steps, D. Dinis (1279-1325), gave continuity, with the purpose of restricting the political space of the high Lusitanian clergy. Past some few (...) years, (1347) for the same reason, the conflict of the relationships of power among the two authorities increased. Our purpose here is double: to analyze the historical facts related with the two mentioned conflicts, well as the aspects doctrinal contents in the two referred letters, with view to show the thought coherence and attitude of D. Alvaro Pelayo. (shrink)

En el sexagésimo aniversario de la liberación del campo de exterminio de Auschwitz, el tema de la dialéctica de la Ilustración (que se situó en el núcleo del pensamiento crítico de posguerra), sigue siendo una cuestión abierta y candente. ¿Qué proceso de transformación atraviesa la visión del mundo occidental para que los valores de la Ilustración resulten de improviso completamente inoperantes para detener la expansión de la barbarie más antihumana? Este interrogante aún desafía la construcción de una cultura universalista a (...) partir de la tradición de la modernidad, moviéndonos a un replanteamiento crítico de su trayectoria. La lúcida obra de.. (shrink)

Departing from Pierre Bayle's discussion of Spinoza in the entry 'Japan' in his Dictionaire, this article discusses how debates about the Far East functioned as a foil for the polemics generated by the Radical Enlightement. The central point of investigation is a debate between Gerard Vossius and Georg Hornius, integrating three main issues where ideas about the East challenged accepted European authority: sacred history, republicanism, and natural philosophy. The article demonstrates that the onset of radicalism involved a plethora of old, (...) new and exotic ideas, from logic to linguistics and Hermeticism, before crystallizing into the scientific and political notions now associated with modernity. (shrink)

In the past decade the work of Jurgen Habermas has sparked off a series of lively debates over modernity and post-modernity, the nature of language, the interplay of law and politics and the dilemmas of morality. Significantly, these debates unfold in the context of his particular reading of the modern philosophical tradition from the German enlightment to the present period. In this original interpretation, David Rasmussen provides both guide and critique to the later Habermas encountered in the context of (...) the best of the critical literature that has emerged in recent years. Reading Habermas argues that Habermas' concept of modernity provides the context for the theory of language as well as his approaches to law and ethics. This book, as its title implies, offers a reading. It explores philosophical options chosen in the light of other, rejected readings. It is a distinctive, readable contribution to the current controversy surrounding the most recent developments in critical theory. (shrink)

In recent years, a new type of Neo-Augustinian theology has received extensive attention: Radical Orthodoxy. Leading figures behind Radical Orthodoxy such as John Milbank, Catherine Pickstock, and Graham Ward assert that they reclaim Augustine's theology over and against almost every major types of modern theology. Their leading claim is that an Augustinian participationist theological ontology overcomes Enlightment sourced secularism. In this essay, the Augustinian character of Radical Orthodox theology is put to the test in terms of a comparison and (...) confrontation between Radical Orthodoxy and Augustine's Christology. It is shown that Radical Orthodoxy's sole concern with regard to Christology is in the manifestation or expression of the ontological relationship or unity of God and the world. Thus, Radical Orthodoxy has its roots in a post-Hegelian rethinking of unity in difference rather than being a rediscovery of Augustine's theology. Subsequently, it is shown that Radical Orthodoy's reading of Augustine denies his understanding of the manifestation of the being of God in Christ; furthermore, it does not account for Augustine's doctrine of atonement: where we recover our original justice and happiness through the substituting life and death of Christ, an atonement which prepares us for the vision of God in the Eschaton. (shrink)

Our reply to Fabian Freyenhagen’s article “Was ist orthodoxe Kritische Theorie?” (DZPhil 65.3 [2017], 456-469) raises the question whether his proposal that Critical Theory only “be adequately and appropriately critical” without a program of justification spares the search for any general criteria. Answering negatively we conversely want to recall, particularly with regard to Horkheimers’s and Adornos’s Dialectic of Enlightment as well as Habermas‘s concept of an emancipatory interest, that such a criterion as a normative foundation of critique is crucial (...) not only for systematical purposes, but also recognised as necessary in this respect by Adorno, who Freyenhagen wants to play off against programs of justification. Critical Theory needs to be clear in this respect. Against this background we are questioning Freyenhagen‘s recourse to an “interest in abolishing social injustice” as the “only criterion for Critical Theory.” Because Freyenhagen ignores the fact that Critical Theory has been understood by its representatives in a twofold manner – as a theoretical program of justification for one and secondly as a cultural diagnosis – his plea for an orthodox Critical Theory is endangered by decisionism. (shrink)

Ellis and Murphy show how contemporary sciences actually support a religiously based ethic of nonviolence, not by appealing to the Enlightment's mechanismic ...

This book combines the insights of enlightenment thinking and feminist theory to explore the significance of love in modern philosophy. The author argues for the importance of emotion in general, and love in particular, to moral and political philosophy, pointing out that some of the central philosophers of the enlightment were committed to a moralized conception of love. However, she believes that feminism's insights arise not from its attribution of special and distinctive qualities to women, but from its recognition (...) of human vulernability. (shrink)

Contrary to the belief of most Kantians and Kant scholars, Kant is in fact an anarchist. In this paper, I distinguish sharply between two concepts of enlightenment, enlightenment lite and heavy duty or radical enlightement ; show how there is an unbridgeable gap between Kant’s official political theory in The Doctrine of Right and his ethics; show how Kant’s real political theory is worked out in Religion Within the Boundaries of Mere Reason, and is in fact a heavy-duty, radically enlightened (...) version of anarchism; refute and debunk widely-believed Hobbesian assumptions about human nature, which are in fact nothing but cognitive illusions; and propose a de-biasing strategy in political aesthetics for ridding ourselves of these Hobbesian cognitive illusions. (shrink)

Guilhen Antier | Résumé : Lacan décèle en Luther un artisan de la modernité sans laquelle l’invention freudienne n’aurait pas eu lieu. Une articulation des thématiques luthériennes de la déréliction, de la prédestination et de la mort de Dieu avec la relecture lacanienne du mythe freudien du meurtre du Père au moyen des concepts de loi, désir et jouissance, permet d’explorer et de redéployer différentes facettes d’un héritage théologique dont la psychanalyse est tributaire et qu’elle revisite pour en mettre à (...) jour des aspects insoupçonnés. En retour, expliciter la référence de Lacan à Luther en remontant à la source luthérienne en tant que telle ouvre la voie à un dialogue entre les perspectives théologique et psychanalytique en vue de proposer une compréhension renouvelée de la foi, au nouage de la croyance et de la confiance. |: Lacan finds in Luther an architect of modernity without which the Freudian invention would not have taken place. An articulation of Lutheran themes such as dereliction, predestination and the death of God, with topics such as law, desire and jouissance in Lacan’s rereading of the Freudian myth of the murder of the Father, leads to explain and redeploy various facets of a theological heritage which psychoanalysis revisits in order to enlight some of its unsuspected aspects. In return, explicating Lacan’s reference to Luther by going back to the Lutheran source as such opens the way to a dialogue between the theological and the psychoanalytic perspectives in order to propose a renewed understanding of faith, between belief and trust. (shrink)

2000 Years and Beyond brings together some of the most eminent thinkers of our time - specialists in philosophy, theology, anthropology and cultural theory. In a horizon-scanning work, they look backwards and forwards to explore what links us to the matrix of the Judaeo-Christian tradition from which Western cultural identity has evolved. Their plural reflections raise searching questions about how we move from past to future - and about who 'we' are. What do the catastrophes of the twentieth century signify (...) for hopes of progress? Can post - Enlightment humanism and its notion of human nature survive without faith? If the 'numinous magic global capitalism' is our own giant shadow cast abroad, does that shadow offer hope enough of a communal future? Has the modern, secularized West now outgrown its originating faith matrix? Often controversial and sometimes visionary, these seven new essays ask: how do we tell - and rewrite - the story of the Common Era? Introduced by Paul Gifford, and discussed in a lively dialogic conclusion, they add their distinctive voices to a debate of profound and urgent topicality. (shrink)

In the critically inherited Marxism, the Annales school and on the basis of the theory of dissipative structures, construction of a world system Wallerstein school's overall theory. Wallerstein's overall theory includes two aspects: First, the integrity of space and time. In space, the center of the modern world system is, semi-periphery and the edge of the composition of the three economic regions of the world economy or the nation-state form of the international system; in time, the modern world-system dynamic performance (...) of long-term trend and cycle rhythm . Another is the integrity of knowledge. An integrated multidisciplinary approach to construct an alternative history of interdisciplinary social sciences, natural sciences and humanities to eliminate the tension between and within different social science disciplines and between the spatial and temporal dimensions of the differences between the rules of the special theory and the binary opposition. Wallerstein's theory of deconstruction of the traditional whole social science disciplines in the national myth and myth, which we understand the history and reconstruction of historical system has important implications. By crtically inheriting Marxism, the Annales School and the Dissipative Structure Theory, Wallerstein constructs holism of world-system school, which is inclusive of two aspects: one is the entirety of TimeSpace; the other is the entirety of knowledge. In respect of space, modem world-system is constitutive of world economy or international system ; whereas in respect of time, the dynamic characteristics of modem world-system displays secular trends and the cyclical rhythms. As to the entirety of knowledge, Wallerstrin employs unidisicplinary approach in place of interdiscipline to construct historical social science whereby he intends to remove the tension between natural sciences and humanities, eliminates the TimeSpace dimension differences between various disciplines within social scieces, and dispels the dilemma between idiographic and nomothetic. Wallerstein's holism deconstructs the myth of nations and the myth of disciplines in traditional social science, which is of significant enlightment to the understanding of history and the reconstruction of historical system. (shrink)

"Traditional interpretations of Kantian idea of autonomy – based on the classical texts such as Kritik der praktischen Vernunft and Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten – stress basically one point: action is autonomous only when an agent obeys the law. In this paper, the author tries to introduce an interpretation of Kant’s practical philosophy, which covers a wider perspective, resulting in the idea of “radical autonomy”. Re-reading classical texts of Kant in connection with Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft (...) and Tugendlehre I try to show, that Kant’s conception of autonomy also allows for acting, that is not determined by the law (i.e. categorical imperative). Roughly, to be radically autonomous you do not have to be necessarily moral (there are other conditions that make your autonomy valid). This paper adopts reasons of „historicistic enlightment” (Schnädelbach), which is rather contrary to the general anti-historicistic context of Kant’s philosophy. Although this approach seems to be against the Kantian „metaphysical hipotheque” (e.g.: pure Faktum der Vernunft, absolute justification/Grundlegung of morality), it provides a (re)interpretation that allows to defend the broadened idea of autonomy. And this ‘radical autonomy’ shows some explanatory attractiveness of Kant’s ethical theory in the contemporary critical horizon of historicism. ". (shrink)

Faut-il penser l'unite de - la - philosophie des Lumieres comme s'il s'agissait d'un phenomene europeen homogene? Lumieres, Aufklarung, Enlightment, Illuminismo: ces termes ne sont pas la traduction l'un de l'autre. Unifier ces pensees en leur attribuant un commun recours a l'universel a un caractere profondement problematique et peut avoir un sens ideologique et politique. Le present ouvrage, en marquant la persistance de l'argumentaire sceptique, propose, selon la formule de La Mothe Le Vayer, un Decalogue sceptique qui ne se (...) reduit pas au doute generalise: il prescrit et programme une systematicite dans l'etude de la variation des normes. Au temps des Lumieres, en effet, l'universel de toutes les normes, theoriques ou pratiques, fait reellement debat et met en question une philosophie de la lumiere naturelle et une metaphysique du moi suppose etre un point fixe. Cette critique de l'universel s'exprime dans une philosophie du sensible: Diderot etudie la figure paradoxale de l'Aveugle, Condillac erige sa statue, l'abbe de l'Epee restitue les sourds muets a la dimension de la discursivite, La Mettrie invente - Monsieur Machine - tout en invoquant une metaphysique de la tendresse, Rousseau justifie un epicurisme de la raison et un art de jouir, Hume naturalise la religion en l'articulant a des passions fondamentales, Montesquieu, attentif a la logique des histoires singulieres, demonte et compare les machines juridiques. Le pluriel des Lumieres a ete meconnu: il permet pourtant de comprendre le caractere equivoque de leur heritage aujourd'hui, entre la reprise morale d'un universalisme des normes et sa contestation dans un travail juridique et anthropologique.". (shrink)

A través de un largo excurso por la historia de España, el autor se propone descubrir la particularidad de la Ilustración en el país ibérico para desmontar la tesis según la cual, aquende los Pirineos, no hubo propiamente un Siglo de las Luces, y por lo tanto, tampoco una auténtica filosofía moderna. Presenta en un segundo momento la figura intelectual del padre Benito Feijoo como ejemplo paradigmático de lo que fue la Ilustración española y su diferencia con el Enlightement inglés, (...) las Lumières francesas y la Aufklärung alemana. Se desarrolla la idea según la cual el siglo XVIII sentó las bases de una revolución cultural de carácter supranacional que se materializó en la Constitución de Cádiz de 1812, luego abortada por la Restauración absolutista de Fernando VII. (shrink)

Sophists’ apologia. -/- Sophists were the first paid teachers ever. These ancient Greek enlighteners taught wisdom. Protagoras, Antiphon, Prodicus, Hippias, Lykophron are most famous ones. Sophists views and concerns made a unified encyclopedic system aimed at teaching common wisdom, virtue, management and public speaking. Of the contemporary “enlighters”, Deil Carnegy’s educational work seems to be the most similar to sophism. Sophists were the first intellectuals – their trade was to sell knowledge. They introduced a new type of teacher-student relationship – (...) the mutually beneficial communication on equal terms. They taught pupils how to think independently and how to persuade others, which was inseparably connected with the rise of democracy in the most advanced Greek polices. Sophists were the first to proclaim that all people are naturally equal. They put forward the idea of natural rights and social contract, working out the fundamentals of the present-day law. In addition, they developed the basics of philology, psychology, logic, and gave a scientific explanation to the origins of religions. They embodied definite positive ideals of their epoch. Sophistry flourished in the second half of the Vth through he first third of the IVth centuries B. C. The period coincides with the heyday of the entire Greek history – the so called Greek Miracle epoch. Sophists expressed some present-day concepts of Ancient Greek ideology and mentality, characteristic of its Golden Age times. The Ancient Athens of the times of Periclus were similar to the Florence of Renaissance as to the type of social structure. That is why (?) the art of eloquence (public speaking) was highly respected in Florence. The two cities had a lot of features of the present-day capitalist society, which was due to their role as the main centres of industry of their “worlds-economies”. During the subsequent Hellenic period, the Old Order was restored, based on the feudal rent recipients’ rule. The degradation of society resulted in the decline of sophistry. Sophistry represents the highest point in the evolution of Greek philosophy. It is also the most prominent school as to the novelty of its ideas. That was owing to the common propensity for innovation typical of Periclus’ Golden Age, which in its turn resulted from the establishment of the individualistic and rationalistic thinking similar to present-day mentality. Among other aspects, close attention was paid to ethnic issues; some humanistic ideas such as Master and Servant ethics and Enlightment as the primary condition of man’s freedom, received scientific grounding. The genre of philosophical dialogue was developed, as well as the rationalistic scientific gnoceology, aimed at consistently opposing any religion. Dialectics, the most outstanding achievement of the Antiquity, was also worked out by the sophists. Zeno of Helleas was one of the sophists. Democrites’ ideas were, too, quite close to dialectics. Socrates’ contemporaries regarded him ironically, as shown, for example, in the Aristophanes’ comedy “Clouds”. Nevertheless, this scholar can still be referred to as a sophist, although of somewhat weird personality. Socrates’ popularity, which came later, should be attributed to the fact that he was the first philosopher ever to have been sentenced and executed by law, rather than to any valuable scientific contributions. Sophistry as such, rather than Socrates, marks the line between pre-Socratic and post- Socratic schools. Plato, with the exception of his latest works, is considered to belong to the same philosophical school. Specifically, there are valid reasons to believe that he was paid fees by his disciples. In Plato’s Dialogues, all points of view will be proven and then disproved, so that an integral philosophical system is hard to observe. Plato’s “Idealism” is but one of the many possible theories. His ideal philosophy is a high-minded argument of wise men. As late as towards the end of his life, Plato betrayed the ideals of sophistry, turning into the world’s first proponent of totalitarianism. Sophistry is Greek classical literature. Later on, philosophy, as well as the entire Greek civilization, started to fall into decline. Over 500 subsequent years, Hellenistic-Roman scholars never came up with anything novel. The entire process of antique philosophical evolution can be subdivided into the following six stages: Phoenician (IX–VIIth centuries B. C.), archaic (VIth – the first half of IVth century B. C., classic (the epoch of sophistry: the second half of the Vth through the first decades of the IIIrd centuries B. C.), late antique (middle of the IIIrd – first decades of the VI th centuries B.C.) The fact that early in the VIth century B. C. sophistry was rejected in Athens, has a lot to do with the consequences of their defeat in Peloponnesian war, a social catastrophe. Ever since, the prevalent part of the criticism of sophistry is a criticism of sophists’ immoral ways of life and personalities, rather than the essentials of their philosophy. For instance, Aristotle’s criticism primarily concerns their pragmatism and tendency to make a profit out of teaching. However, Aristotle himself taught his disciples along similar lines, showing them how to “be able to prove both opposites”. It was Aristotle who summed up sophists’ century-long elaborations. The traditional modern interpretation of sophists as shown in Plato’s dialogues appears to be groundless. The truth of the matter is that Plato regards sophists as more serious philosophers than Socrates was. It becomes especially clear in the dialogue titled “Protagoras”, which shows the latter as gaining an undoubted victory over Socrates. Generally speaking, Plato’s works never regard sophists as weak or worthless opponents. A common opinion as to the essence of sophists’, in particular, Protagoras’s philosophy, has hitherto not been worked out. Many researchers renounce the very existence of any specific philosophical position in sophistry. The term “relativism” itself now has a bad name. However, it should be borne in mind that Protagoras doctrine emerged as a result of an attempt to get out of the ontological dead-end to which the entire Greek natural philosophy had come. To this purpose, he employed Anaxagoras’s idea about everything comprising everything, whereupon he built his physical-ontological theory, and Zeno of Helleas’s concept that all objects are such and different at the same time in the same respect. According to Protagoras’s philosophy, every object does not only seem, but is different from every other object, including human beings. Therefore, every person is his or her own measure of all other entities. The objective reality is the Ego’s relations with the outer world. Every object’s essence is defined through its interaction with ourselves. Nothing remains stagnant – every existence already contains non-existence, and vice-versa. However, the relativity of being is not to be regarded as absolute. That means, that relatively stable and therefore relatively cognizable entities do exist, among them the words we say. Doubt is not considered absolute by relativists either, which differentiates them from skeptics and agnostics. They dare to believe. Uncertainty is Godly – here, Protagoras becomes very close to the concept of apathetic theology. Gorgius shared Protagoras’s views and tried to prove them applying the same method as Zeno applied when upholding Parmenidis’s philosophy. He argued that if one accepts the opposite point of view and agrees that nothing can exist and not exist at the same time, one is bound to come to an the absurd conclusion that nothing is cognizable and nothing exists. To prove that there is a universal contradiction within the Existence itself, Protagoras and his followers in their turn put forward a number of special logical arguments, called rules of contraries, or sophisms. The most well-known of them is the Euathle’s sophism, which proves that an object can be such and different at the same time in the same respect. Generally speaking, all relationships of any entity are extraneous. The idea that all entities, including concepts, exist and do not exist at the same time, was also accepted by Plato. It should be stressed, that Plato’s philosophy as a whole is relativists’ greatest achievement. In his dispute against relativism, Aristotle put forward the main concepts of his ontology: the existence falls into the existence in possibility and the existence in reality, or substance and accidence – the ever changing “sublunary” world and the stable world of divine heavenly bodies. This division made his system self-contradictory to the point of absurd. Aristotle quite realized, that the direct disproof of relativism is hardly possible, which fact makes his criticism a mere tautology. It is very indicative in this respect that materialists, idealists and even skeptical agnostics applied the same arguments do disprove relativism. That demonstrates that the inner contradiction between any forms of “absolutism” and relativism is the most fundamental philosophical problem. Relativist ideas were repeatedly renewed throughout history, provided the social conditions were favourable. In variations, the concepts were advanced by Tzuan Tsi and ancient Chinese sophists, apostle Paul, Nicolas of Cusa, Galileo, Rene Descartes, G. Berkley, D. Hume, Ch. S. Pierce, E. Mach, A. Bogdanov, F. de Saussure, N. Bore, P. Feuerabend, U. Quain and others. However, no consistent relativist ontological system was developed after Protagoras. Meanwhile, a valid relativist theory could provide a clue to a fuller and more adequate general physical concept of the world, and to a deeper understanding of quantum mechanics. -/- Relativism as an ontological system of beliefs. -/- The relativist principle of relativity of all that exists is fundamental for the entire system of philosophy. Absolutely everything exists, but, at the same time, no existence is absolute. Anything is possible, but those entities only exist for us with which we interact this way or another, i. e., reality is interaction, “I interact – hence, I exist”. However, an overly close relationship between entities leads to non-existence – in other words, there is a certain existential optimum. For all of us, information, or perceptible heterogeneities, is real. Each of us is the center of a definite system of interactions with the world. If God is an endless Possibility, then the World is but the man’s dialogue with God. However, the ties that bind us with the world are of some definite kind, which predetermines our reality. The principle of relativity constrains itself, as any relativity is relative. On the one hand, that calls forth the Evil – caused by our own weakness. On the other hand, it makes our world relatively stable and cognizable. Generally speaking, the world is what we are. Everybody has an own Universe, but since people are fairly similar, our universes can be regarded as one Universe with common laws and regulations. It is possible for us to change the degree of objects’ existence in relation to ourselves and one another. It is equally important, though, to remain ourselves (keep following our “warrior’s path”). Since everything exists and no existence is absolute, the process of cognition should involve a criticism of everything but never a complete rebuttal of anything. The criterion of verity for any theory then is in its capacity to build itself upon a bigger number of diverse statements than in any other theory. Theoretically, all philosophies should ideally be complementary. The question of what in fact happened is meaningless unless we specify the “we”, the “where” and the “when”. The past can only exist as part of the present. When we change, our past undergoes corresponding qualitative objective changes, all of which are irreversible. The contemporary physics regards all objects of the Universe as existing for one another, which results in absurd conclusions. In fact, only what we interact with, exists. The so called “speed of light in vacuum” c is the maximum speed of direct interaction and direct exchange of signals. Specifically, at the oncoming speed c with a significant blue parallax the gamma-quantum is unable to interact with the matter. When this speed is reached, the gravitational mass of objects in relation to one another becomes equal to zero (imaginary), whereas their inertial mass equals infinity. Further acceleration will bring us into an entirely different Universe. That means that the Universe is an open system, which fact destroys all present-day cosmological models. Anything is possible in this world. Our reality is magic. Every bit of space contains a potentially limitless number of bits of other, however virtual, universes, as well as an infinite number of particles, which are still virtual for us (as postulated by quantum mechanics). In other words, there exists an infinity of different realities. With all the above in mind, the different levels of entities’ existence, in particular, of Life and Reason, should be taken into consideration. For example, to which extent a live system exists in relation to the inanimate forms of being is very indefinite, as what life is has to be determined by living creatures. An even greater compass of levels of existence can be brought about through interaction – that is the core idea of Godel’s theorem. As a result, the range of forms of existence tends towards infinity – the evolution of matter through super-intelligence will bring us up to God’s heights. A more generalized mathematical model of the physical world, including a universal operator of the co-existence of objects, can be developed based on the above considerations. The bonds between objects become weaker owing to 1) a high speed, 2) acceleration, 3) rotation, 4) strong gravity, 5) strong fields of other kinds, 6) the difference of levels of existence , 7) phase shifts. Yet, there always is an existential optimum. Such mathematical model is to operate certain non-transitive algebras. Relativist ontology assumes that the notion of “temperature” is relative, thus making it possible to ignore the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In its turn, that will allow for phase shifts. A perpetual motion machine of the second type will become a reality. Rotation could presumably be used to increase inertial and decrease gravitational mass, slowing down the time. An experimental research could shed light on the mentioned effects. (shrink)

How is it possible that beginning from the negation of rational thoughts one comes to produce knowledge? This problem, besides its intrinsic interest, acquires a great relevance when the representation of a knowledge is settled, for example, on data and automatic reasoning. Many treatment ways have been tried, as in the case of the non-monotonic logics; logics that intend to formalize an idea of reasoning by default, etc. These attempts are incomplete and are subject to failure. A possible solution would (...) be to formulate a logic of the irrational, which offers a model for reasoning permitting to support contradictions as well as to produce knowledge from such situations. An intuition underlying the foundation of such a logic consists of the da Costa's paraconsistent logics presenting however, a different deduction theory and a whole distinct semantics, called here "the semantics of possible translations". The present proposing, following our argumentation, intends to enlight all this question, by a whole satisfactory logical point of view, being practically applicable and philosophically acceptable.Como é possível que a partir da negação do racional se possa obter conhecimento adicional? Esse problema, além de seu interesse intrínseco, adquire uma relevância adicional quando o encontramos na representação do conhecimento em bases de dados e raciocínio automático, por exemplo. Nesse caso, diversas tentativas de tratamento têm sido propostas, como as lógicas não-monotônicas, as lógicas que tentam formalizar a ideia do raciocínio por falha . Tais tentativas de solução, porém, são falhas e incompletas; proponho que uma solução possível seria formular uma lógica do irracional, que oferecesse um modelo para o raciocínio permitindo não só suportar contradições, como conseguir obter conhecimento, a partir de tais situações. A intuição subjacente à formulação de tal lógica são as lógicas paraconsistentes de da Costa, mas com uma teoria da dedução diferente e uma semântica completamente distinta . Tal proposta, como pretendo argumentar, fornece um enfoque para a questão que é ao mesmo tempo completamente satisfatório, aplicável do ponto de vista prático e aceitável do ponto de vista filosófico. (shrink)

How is it possible that beginning from the negation of rational thoughts one comes to produce knowledge? This problem, besides its intrinsic interest, acquires a great relevance when the representation of a knowledge is settled, for example, on data and automatic reasoning. Many treatment ways have been tried, as in the case of the non-monotonic logics; logics that intend to formalize an idea of reasoning by default, etc. These attempts are incomplete and are subject to failure. A possible solution would (...) be to formulate a logic of the irrational, which offers a model for reasoning permitting to support contradictions as well as to produce knowledge from such situations. An intuition underlying the foundation of such a logic consists of the da Costa's paraconsistent logics presenting however, a different deduction theory and a whole distinct semantics, called here "the semantics of possible translations". The present proposing, following our argumentation, intends to enlight all this question, by a whole satisfactory logical point of view, being practically applicable and philosophically acceptable.Como é possível que a partir da negação do racional se possa obter conhecimento adicional? Esse problema, além de seu interesse intrínseco, adquire uma relevância adicional quando o encontramos na representação do conhecimento em bases de dados e raciocínio automático, por exemplo. Nesse caso, diversas tentativas de tratamento têm sido propostas, como as lógicas não-monotônicas, as lógicas que tentam formalizar a ideia do raciocínio por falha. Tais tentativas de solução, porém, são falhas e incompletas; proponho que uma solução possível seria formular uma lógica do irracional, que oferecesse um modelo para o raciocínio permitindo não só suportar contradições, como conseguir obter conhecimento, a partir de tais situações. A intuição subjacente à formulação de tal lógica são as lógicas paraconsistentes de da Costa, mas com uma teoria da dedução diferente e uma semântica completamente distinta. Tal proposta, como pretendo argumentar, fornece um enfoque para a questão que é ao mesmo tempo completamente satisfatório, aplicável do ponto de vista prático e aceitável do ponto de vista filosófico. (shrink)

Este artigo pretende fundamentar o conceito teo-político na análise do regime colonial estabelecido na conquista da América. Estudando a construção do Padroado na península Ibérica, buscamos identificar como a crença, o poder, a doutrina eclesiástica e o direito civil estão articulados, tanto na Europa quanto no Novo Mundo. Com esse roteiro básico, chegamos ao estudo do Regalismo desenvolvido pelos pensadores ligados ao Estado. Demonstramos ainda que as idéias dos teólogos que pensaram a relação igreja e Estado no século XVIII não (...) eram tão distintas das elaboradas pelo laicato. Essa relação entre o poder e o crer percorre a história humana, mas cremos que conceito de soberania característico da Idade Moderna sobrepõe de modo específico os reinos divino e terrestre. Perceber essas variações dentro da economia teo-política contribui para entender melhor a secularização do Estado no decorrer do século XIX latino-americano e a herança deixada na difícil construção da democracia através do continente. Palavras-chave : Cristandade, Estado, Igreja, Soberania, CrençaThis article explain the concept of teo-political to analysis of the colonial established in conquest of America. Study the construction of Padroado in Iberian Peninsula, seek to identify manners of belief, power, ecclesiastical doctrine and civil law are articulated, in Europe and New World. In this way , we study the Regalismo developed by thinkers linked to the State. Demonstrate that the ideas of theologians who reflecting the relationship between Church and State in the 18th century were not as further than those established by laicato. This relationship between power and believe is presente in human history, but we believe that modern concept of sovereignty characteristic of Enlightment overlaps specific divine and secular kingdoms. Realize these historical variations within the teo-political economy contributes to better understand of Secularization of States in the 19th century Latin American and contribute to identify the inheritances in building democratical sistems in this continent. Keywords : Christianity, State, Church, Sovereignty, Beliefs. (shrink)

In this contribution, the author argues that there are in our European tradition two fundamental conceptions of politics since the French Revolution. We can call them the politics as the art of co-existence, and the politics of dénouement. Both conceptions also have a very different stance towards the traditional religions: for the first one mentioned freedom of religion is constitutive, for the second one religion must serve the state or can even be made redundant. Paradigmatic in this respect was the (...) communist treatment of religion as a relic of the past that will disappear when historic reason makes our society transparant . Here politics transforms in a quasi-eschatological political religion. In the twientieth century neo-marxist philosophers say farewell to this kind of politics and begin to rediscover religious inheritances and theological motives. Today two other positions towards religions are noticeable: the utilitaristic reductionist treatment of religion as a need , and ‘Enlightment fundamentalism’ which continues the rationalist communist conception of religion as a relic of the past. The author criticises both tendencies, and defends a ‘politics without dénouement’ which correspondents to a ‘religion without guarantee’. In closing the author argues that the recent populist politics either dream of a new alliance between religion and/or ‘culture’ and the state, or – in a strange inversion of the multicultural ideals of the nineties – promote a purely polemical identity against an ‘alien’ religion, i.c. Islam. Here the author claims that both tendencies fail to recognize the real nature of the new problems. (shrink)

In this contribution, the author argues that there are in our European tradition two fundamental conceptions of politics since the French Revolution. We can call them the politics as the art of co-existence, and the politics of dénouement. Both conceptions also have a very different stance towards the traditional religions: for the first one mentioned freedom of religion is constitutive, for the second one religion must serve the state or can even be made redundant. Paradigmatic in this respect was the (...) communist treatment of religion as a relic of the past that will disappear when historic reason makes our society transparant. Here politics transforms in a quasi-eschatological political religion. In the twientieth century neo-marxist philosophers say farewell to this kind of politics and begin to rediscover religious inheritances and theological motives. Today two other positions towards religions are noticeable: the utilitaristic reductionist treatment of religion as a need, and ‘Enlightment fundamentalism’ which continues the rationalist communist conception of religion as a relic of the past. The author criticises both tendencies, and defends a ‘politics without dénouement’ which correspondents to a ‘religion without guarantee’. In closing the author argues that the recent populist politics either dream of a new alliance between religion and/or ‘culture’ and the state, or – in a strange inversion of the multicultural ideals of the nineties – promote a purely polemical identity against an ‘alien’ religion, i.c. Islam. Here the author claims that both tendencies fail to recognize the real nature of the new problems. (shrink)

An historical and intellectual review shows that the plan of realisation of the welfare state principle builds less upon philosophical concepts than upon religious, socialist, liberal-concervative, and socialdemocratic ideas. Lorenz von Stein combined socialist ideas of the public good, enlightment philosophy, and the Utopia of St.-Simon, Fourier and German idealism. Gouvermental achievements are limited to the economic capacity of he society, which is why financial science must,,...also establish the measure of the attainable for these tasks.“ With the transformation of (...) the SPD to a left-reform people's party, governmental concepts of social reform replace social revolutionary ideas. As liberal socialism maintains, the constitution results in a balance between neo-liberal thinking and the Keynesianism adopted by the german,,people's parties“. As a result challenge to the social state a society of dependent classes magnifies the,,social power“ of politics and damages the common good in the debit of present contributors and future pensioners of the pension systems. (shrink)

Renaissance utopias belong to a period when Modernity was being built within political thinking, which turns them into a nexus between classical antiquity and the Enlightment, thereby preserving for posterity a series of critical issues, such as democracy, a radical version of natural law or the need for distribution of goods. Christian humanism is also present and, together with Plato’s concept of justice, it enables these utopias to set a different course from that followed by other Renaissance political theory (...) options, founded either on political realism (Machiavelli) or on jus naturale as a justification of an authoritarian state (Bodin). Thus utopia spreads its wings not only announcing Modernity but also the 20th century socialist horizon. (shrink)

In the article of Oleh Shepetyak «Dramatic Theology of K. Barth, H.U. von Balthasar and R. Schwager» the analysis of one of the theological concepts of XX - the beginning of XXI century was performed which was developed by Karl Barth, Gustav Aulén, Gans Urs von Balthasar and got the name «dramatic theology». This way of theological reflection appeared as antithesis to liberal theology developed in the dialogue with the Enlightment philosophy. The contribution of main creators of dramatic theology (...) into the development of this study, its role and meaning in Theological discussions of the Catholic Church after the Second Vatican Council are highlighted in the investigation. (shrink)

Much of postmodern philosophy questions the assumptions of Modernity, that period in the history of the Western world since the Enlightment. These assumptions are that truth is discoverable through human reason; that certain knowledge is possible; and furthermore, that such knowledge will provide a basis for the ineluctable progress of Mankind. The Enlightenment project is underwritten by the conviction that knowledge gained through the scientific method is secure. In so far as biomedicine inherits these assumptions it becomes fair game (...) for postmodern deconstruction. Today, perhaps more than ever, plural values compete, and contradictory approaches to health, for instance, garner support and acquire supremacy through consumer choice and media manipulation rather than evidence-based science. Many doctors feel a tension between meeting the needs of the patient face to face, and working towards the broader health needs of the public at large. But if the very foundations of medical science are questioned, by patients, or by doctors themselves, wherein lies the value of their work? This paper examines the issues that the anti-foundationalist thrust of postmodernism raises, in the light of a case of mild hypertension. The strict application of medical protocol, derived from a nomothetic, statistical perspective, seems unlikely to furnish value in the treatment of an individual. The anything goes, consumerist approach, however, fares no better. The author argues that whilst value cannot depend on any rationally predetermined parameters, it can be rescued, and emerges from the process of the meeting with the patient. (shrink)

The author analyzes the concept of Enlightenment as described in the monograph “Medi-ums of the Enlightenment: obscene deviation” by Oleh Perepelytsia. The author notes that O. Perepelytsia considers Enlightenment as a medial phenomenon and identifies three mediums of the Enlightenment: language, sex and money. The author further notes that the main drawback of O. Perepelitsi’s concept is too broad understanding of the Enlightenment. Also O. Perepelytsia puts universal mediums in the stead of specific mediums of Enlightenment. Sex fulfilled its intermediary (...) functions even in primitive society, and continues to do that today. Sexuality is very important for the European Enlightenment, but in the Chinese Enlight-enment it does not play any special role. However, even when we talk about Europe, it is nec-essary to find out the conditions under which sex becomes a medium of the Enlightenment. Money for Enlightenment is not a medium, but one of the factors that determine the state of human nature before it is subjected to education and training. Language is a full-fledged medi-um only in Chinese Enlightenment. In Europe there is a trend towards the transformation of language into the object of education. To prove this thesis the author compares the views of Locke, Plato and Confucius. (shrink)

The article studies the shift of Enlightment in the interpretation of enjoyment, which led to the construction of a particular ethos/nomos enjoyment and transformation in the model of be-ing/thinking. Thus, constituted the transition from the metaphysics of mind, grounded by Des-cartes, to physic of body, presented by Marquis de Sade. This shift or meta/physical gap is carried out at the intersection of two lines: the reason and enjoyment. Given line of reason, the article specifically actualized line of enjoyment, allowing (...) to explore the transformation of the identity of being and thinking which is fundamental to Western philosophy. It sets the place of enjoyment in Cartesian concept of the identity of being and thinking, and the distinc-tion of soul and body. Hence it formulates the maxim of the subject of cogito: it is in thinking that I enjoy being. Approach of Descartes is opposed by the materialistic definition of enjoy-ment and pleasure worked out by de Sade. This conceptualization of the enjoyment enables the transition to physics of body, which recognizes only bodily/physical being hypertrophi-cated by the imagination. Hence the Sadian subject imago constitutes the maxim: it is only by enjoying being that I think. (shrink)

El presente trabajo muestra cómo, a pesar de que Kant y Hobbes parten del supuesto de una natural belicosodad de los seres humanos y una tendencia hacia la desobediencia, cada uno arriba a soluciones radicalmente diferentes. Kant, en el escrito Acerca del dicho: “Esto puede ser verdad en teoría pero no en la práctica’ contiene un capítulo expresamente contra Hobbes y, fundado en las tesis de la Ilustración, intenta salvar el derecho de los subditos frente al monarca, no obstante que (...) lo reduce a la libertad de expresión.This work shows how Kant and Hobbes, although starting from the assumption of a natural beliosity of human being and a trend to disobediency, arrive to radically different solutions. Kant’s work On the Saying: “This may be true in theory but it does not apply in practice” contains a chaper specially dedicated against Hobbes and, based on the thesis of the Enlightment, intends to protect the right of the subjects against the king, although he reduces this right to freedom of speech. (shrink)