Lenin's work "On the Significance of Militant Materialism," written in the spring of 1922, is justly regarded as the philosophical testament of our leader. In it, the tasks of the day were merged with the tasks of the entire epoch on the basis of a profound analysis of reality.

An interrogation of the term 'theory' from the perspective of linguistic discourse Zima offers a new definition of theory from a cultural and sociological perspective, with a view to encountering heterogenerous points of view in critical dialogue.

The gives the detailed analysis of the ratio of freedom and imagination in an unpublished manuscript written by F.V.Y. Schelling, which contains the materials for the lecture course read at Erlangen University in 1820-1821. The author focuses on the question of imagination as a condition for the possibility to unfold the modal differences that provide the hierarchy of predicative definitions. The article shows that both the draft philosophy of mythology and the philosophy of revelation are a direct continuation of the (...) transcendentalist program given by Kant.Those projects bases on the thesis that the consciousness of freedom and consciousness of the law, justified in the “Critique of Practical Reason”, are related one another. Schelling following Kant’s theory, points to the law and to the unconditional imperative of freedom as the main principle which is not only theoretical or practical, but determines the separation of ontological and deontological modalities. At the same time, the formal structure of an imperative as a command has the specific character of “hiden opening”: what is themed in an imperative is not opened as a meaningful opportunity, it is only opened as theopportunity in its difference from necessity. I show in this article that interpreting the Schelling possibility relies on the teachings of I. Kant in his transcendental idealconception, connected with Kant's interpretation of the imagination’s productive ability. In the middle of Schelling’s theological interpretation of Kant's consciousness of lawdoctrine as the “fact of mind” lies the analogy between peacemaking and the ancestral sin of the first people. This concept is the main source of the theory of potency as ontological modalities, developed by Schelling in the 1830s - 1840s in lectures on the philosophy of mythology and the philosophy of revelation. (shrink)

J. T. Hooker argues that at Il. 24.649 ⋯πικερτομ⋯ων must mean ‘taunting’ and, since ‘taunting’ makes no sense, that ⋯πικερτομ⋯ων must have entered ourIliadat this point from a version of theIliadslightly different from ours in which it did make sense. I wish to argue that ⋯πικερτομ⋯ων has a meaning different from ‘taunting’, which makes good sense of this, and every other, context.

This article focuses on analysis of a handwritten fragment by F. W. J. Schelling “Psychological scheme”, which is a study of main principles of philosophical anthropology. The article reconstructs the circumstances of creating the mentioned text, which are connected with the trusting relationship between Schelling and Bavarian Crown Prince Maximilian; it also highlights the parallels between the text and the earlier Schelling's works exploring philosophical-anthropological problematic: “Philosophical Investigations into the Essence of Human Freedom” and “Stuttgart Seminars”. In the course of (...) terminological analysis of the fragment author displays that the the main source of influence was the work by I. Kant “Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone”. Major problem, considered by Schelling's anthropology, is defining the correlation between intelligible and empirical human character, the main resolving instrument being Schelling’s doctrine of potencies as ontological modalities developed in 1820-1830. (shrink)

Presents an original theoretical system to explain and contrast modernism and postmodernism.

A considerable increase in interest in Soviet philosophy has been observable of late in the capitalist countries. There are various reasons for this. Some seek to understand its meaning so as to define their attitudes toward it, while others find it of interest for entirely different reasons — a target of criticism.