In this paper I present two philosophers, namely Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Jean-Paul Sartre, but from the perspective of social philosophy. I emphasize that social philosophy proves to be a rarity today, and this explains the necessity of articulation of the achievements of these philosophers. In particular, I analyze the relationship between the articulation of intersubjectivity and social philosophy and on the basis of these relations I present the differences and conflicts between the aforementioned philosophers. Merleau-Ponty?s philosophy is explained from the (...) perspective of unbroken intersubjectivity; the philosophy of Sartre is presented on the basis of the relation between 56 transcendental subjectivity and intersubjectivity. The article follows the genealogical approach, that is, it highlights the dynamics of the thinking of these thinkers in order to show the displacements. Finally, I develop the thesis that the late Sartre, who remained within the frames of Marx?s approach, actually reinterprets the early indications to be found in Merleau-Ponty concerning social philosophy. Consequently, late Sartre is still an important reference point in terms of the critical philosophy of society. nema. (shrink)

Šiuo straipsniu naujai persvarstoma viena svarbiausių romantinės meilės teorijų šiuolaikinėje filosofijoje – meilės kaip vienio teorija. Remiantis iš transpersonalinio tyrimo kylančiais pastebėjimais, straipsnyje klausiama, ar nebūtų verta pripažinti, kad meilė neatsiejama nuo stipraus vienio jausmo. Taigi autorius laikosi nuostatos, kurios šiuolaikinėje filosofijoje nesilaiko niekas. Šiame kontekste straipsnyje taip pat glaustai apžvelgiamas vienas iš svarbiausių meilės kaip vienio variantų – vienio su Dievu. Straipsnis baigiamas pasiūlymu, kad, kalbant apie išsipildžiusią meilę, būtų prasmingiau kalbėti apie ryšius, o ne apie santykius.

There are productive material connections beyond mere internal or external relations. The concept of connection enables a creative reinterpretation of certain historical questions and, accordingly, the essay stresses the importance of the concepts of connection, nexus, and fusion in many philosophies, from Aristotle to Deleuze.

"The best-known version of the ontological argument was formulated by Saint Anselm of Canterbury. With his argument Anselm tried to prove the existence of God. In my paper I restate all the propositions of Anselm’s argument, and also present Gaunilo’s counter-arguments. Finally, I raise some problems that further analysis of the argument could benefit from. Keywords: Saint Anselm, Gaunilo, existence, God, ontological argument".

Ovaj clanak se bavi znacenjem zivota, i mogucnostima ukljucivanja zivota u okvire politicke filozofije. Postoje dva odgovora na ovo pitanje. Prvi odgovor se vezuje za H. Arent, a drugi za M. Fukoa koji je skicirao genezu biopolitike, to jest, razlicitih mehanizama optimalizacije kapaciteta zivota pocev od "klasicne epohe". Autor clanka posredstvom kriticke interpretacije H. Arent i Fukoa tvrdi da postoji opravdanost istovremenog tretiranja biomoci i suvereniteta. Time on namerava da zadobije perspektivu u odnosu na suverenitet koji tretira kao neizostavan u (...) artikulaciji politickih odnosa sto znaci drugacije u odnosu na pristupe H. Arent i M. Fukoa. Istovremeno autor clanka kritikuje koncept biopolitike smatrajuci da on dovodi do depolitizacije tela i zivota, cime se, delimicno, prihvataju odredjena upozorenja H. Arent. Politickoj filozofiji zapravo se pripisuje zadatak da tretira biomoc i suverenitet kao ireducibilne, ali i komplementarne okvire kao i da tretira njihov dinamicki medjuodnos. Tek ukoliko istovremeno tematizujemo suverenitet i biomoc dobijamo sliku o dinamici modernih politickih odnosa u Evropi. (shrink)

Ovaj clanak se bavi znacenjem zivota, i mogucnostima ukljucivanja zivota u okvire politicke filozofije. Postoje dva odgovora na ovo pitanje. Prvi odgovor se vezuje za H. Arent, a drugi za M. Fukoa koji je skicirao genezu biopolitike, to jest, razlicitih mehanizama optimalizacije kapaciteta zivota pocev od "klasicne epohe". Autor clanka posredstvom kriticke interpretacije H. Arent i Fukoa tvrdi da postoji opravdanost istovremenog tretiranja biomoci i suvereniteta. Time on namerava da zadobije perspektivu u odnosu na suverenitet koji tretira kao neizostavan u (...) artikulaciji politickih odnosa sto znaci drugacije u odnosu na pristupe H. Arent i M. Fukoa. Istovremeno autor clanka kritikuje koncept biopolitike smatrajuci da on dovodi do depolitizacije tela i zivota, cime se, delimicno, prihvataju odredjena upozorenja H. Arent. Politickoj filozofiji zapravo se pripisuje zadatak da tretira biomoc i suverenitet kao ireducibilne, ali i komplementarne okvire kao i da tretira njihov dinamicki medjuodnos. Tek ukoliko istovremeno tematizujemo suverenitet i biomoc dobijamo sliku o dinamici modernih politickih odnosa u Evropi. (shrink)

Ruso i Marks predstavljaju dve paradigmaticne varijante radikalnog suprotstavljanja svetu. Bez sumnje, postoje znacajni momenti konvergencije izmedju ovih mislilaca, primera radi u pogledu podele rada, ili u pogledu samoprinude. Medjutim, nasa je tvrdnja da su uprkos odredjenim tendencijama u strucnoj literaturi divergencije jace nego konvergencije, odnosno, tvrdimo da ovi mislioci predstavljaju dve razlicite varijante radikalnog misljenja. Osnove ovih razlike nailazimo u citanju Rusoa koga opisujemo iz perspektive kolektivne autenticnosti, pravednosti, samoprezentnosti naroda i protesta protiv zavisti. A Marks se ne moze (...) citati iz perspektive krize zbog intenzivirane neuatenticnosti, njegova kritika politicka ekonomije stvara refleksivno polje koje je duboko divergentno u odnosu na Rusoa. (shrink)

Ruso i Marks predstavljaju dve paradigmaticne varijante radikalnog suprotstavljanja svetu. Bez sumnje, postoje znacajni momenti konvergencije izmedju ovih mislilaca, primera radi u pogledu podele rada, ili u pogledu samoprinude. Medjutim, nasa je tvrdnja da su uprkos odredjenim tendencijama u strucnoj literaturi divergencije jace nego konvergencije, odnosno, tvrdimo da ovi mislioci predstavljaju dve razlicite varijante radikalnog misljenja. Osnove ovih razlike nailazimo u citanju Rusoa koga opisujemo iz perspektive kolektivne autenticnosti, pravednosti, samoprezentnosti naroda i protesta protiv zavisti. A Marks se ne moze (...) citati iz perspektive krize zbog intenzivirane neuatenticnosti, njegova kritika politicka ekonomije stvara refleksivno polje koje je duboko divergentno u odnosu na Rusoa. (shrink)

There are productive material connections beyond mere internal or external relations. The concept of connection enables a creative reinterpretation of certain historical questions and, accordingly, the essay stresses the importance of the concepts of connection, nexus, and fusion in many philosophies, from Aristotle to Deleuze.

This article not only mentions spiritual anarchism nominally, as do so many previous articles, but tries to define it as precisely as possible. The definition assumes that the self itself can be a source of unjustifiable authority and a limitation to freedom, and that spiritual anarchism is nothing more than being open to that which transegoically transcends our narrow perspective. The article critically revisits previous overviews of spiritual anarchism, and itself proposes to take into account traditions that have been neglected. (...) Finally, the article reverses the approach; that is, it considers how some of our spiritual practices can be made more anarchistic, including meditation, the psychedelic experience and the mystical experience. (shrink)

The paper comparatively deals with the concept of attention in Bergson’s and Husserl’s philosophy. Special attention is devoted to their confrontation with psychological interpretations, as well as to methodological aspects of their theories. Analysed are the vitality, intentionality and temporality of attention by keeping in mind the complex terminological background in both Bergson and Husserl. The author holds that what connects them is that they both define attention as an inherent dynamic modification, with the different dimensions of presence, past and (...) future. Similarities and differences are both taken into consideration concerning the most important dilemmas. (shrink)

This paper looks at Thomas Szanto?s theory of hatred that suggests that hatred has an indeterminate affective focus and that it derives its intensity from the commitment to the attitude itself. Contrary to Szanto?s theses, this paper claims that the hated properties are not necessarily fuzzy. On the contrary, in many cases we can clearly reconstruct the quasi-rational genesis of hatred, by relying on the deep structures behind the social dynamics. Furthermore, the paper states that even though in certain cases (...) hatred is a truly empty of content, these cases are marginal in comparison to other, more important forms of hatred. (shrink)

This article analyzes Quentin Meillassoux’s concept of cessation. First, the article argues that this concept plays a decisive role in Meillassouxian philosophy. Second, by taking into consideration medieval and early modern debates on annihilation, it critically examines the conclusions elaborated in After Finitude. After that, it conceptualizes the relation between absolute time and absolute contingency, keeping in mind the critical reception of Meillassoux’s philosophy. Finally, the article turns to his insights into death and resurrection, and it confronts them with phenomenological (...) theories of mortality. The conclusion is that Meillassoux faces several essential difficulties with regard to the concept of cessation that seem to be unsalvageable. (shrink)

This essay discusses engagement against state secrecy and engagement for secrecy, free from interference. By exploring divisions introduced by state secrecy (through exclusion, subjection and oppression), it identifies the distortions of equal participation in political communities. The author introduces the notion of pata-politics in order to describe the false relation to the secrecy effect. Furthermore, the text examines key issues of today’s intelligence studies (such as democratic intelligence oversight and the balance of powers doctrine), with special emphasis on the possible (...) limits of a liberal approach. Additionally, the author elaborates a metacritique of the framework in which the private sphere is one-sidedly described as a victim of wrong interference by state institutions. (shrink)

Even though Belgrade student protests emerged and ended abruptly after only seven days in June of 1968, they came as a cumulative point of a decade-long accumulated social dissatisfaction and antagonisms, as well as of philosophical investigations of the unorthodox Marxists of the Praxis school. It surprised the Yugoslav authorities as the first massive rebellion after WWII to explicitly criticize rising social inequality, bureaucratization and unemployment and demand free speech and abolishment of privileges. This article focuses on the intellectual destiny (...) and legacy of the eight professors from the Faculty of Philosophy close to the Praxis school, who were identified as the protests’ instigators and subsequently expelled from the University of Belgrade due to their “ethico-political unsuitability”. Under both international and domestic pressure, they were later reemployed in a separate research unit named the Centre for Philosophy and Social Theory, where they kept their critical edge and argued for political pluralism. From the late 1980s onwards, they and their colleagues became politically active and at times occupied the highest positions in Serbia – Dragoljub Mićunović as one of the founders of the modern Democratic Party and the Speaker of the Parliament, former Serbian President and Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica and former Prime Minister late Zoran Đinđić. Still, while some members became strong anti-nationalists and anti-war activists, other embraced Serbian nationalism, therefore pivoting the intellectual split into the so called First and Second Serbia that marked Serbian society during the 1990s and remained influential to this day. (shrink)

Even though Belgrade student protests emerged and ended abruptly after only seven days in June of 1968, they came as a cumulative point of a decade-long accumulated social dissatisfaction and antagonisms, as well as of philosophical investigations of the unorthodox Marxists of the Praxis school. It surprised the Yugoslav authorities as the first massive rebellion after WWII to explicitly criticize rising social inequality, bureaucratization and unemployment and demand free speech and abolishment of privileges. This article focuses on the intellectual destiny (...) and legacy of the eight professors from the Faculty of Philosophy close to the Praxis school, who were identified as the protests? instigators and subsequently expelled from the University of Belgrade due to their?ethico-political unsuitability?. Under both international and domestic pressure, they were later reemployed in a separate research unit named the Centre for Philosophy and Social Theory, where they kept their critical edge and argued for political pluralism. From the late 1980s onwards, they and their colleagues became politically active and at times occupied the highest positions in Serbia - Dragoljub Micunovic as one of the founders of the modern Democratic Party and the Speaker of the Parliament, former Serbian President and Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica and former Prime Minister late Zoran Djindjic. Still, while some members became strong anti-nationalists and anti-war activists, other embraced Serbian nationalism, therefore pivoting the intellectual split into the so called First and Second Serbia that marked Serbian society during the 1990s and remained influential to this day. (shrink)

Darrell P. Arnold, Traditions of Systems Theory. Major Figures and Contemporary Developments, London/New York, Routledge, 2014. Mark Losoncz.