Cover of Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy
Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:

Displaying: 1-20 of 35 documents

articles in english

1. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
L.M. Demchenko

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This article covers issues illustrating determining significance of philosophy as a theoretical reflection over the utmost bases of culture as well as processes, conditioned by phenomena of alienation and self-alienation of culture, resulting in its integrity, uniqueness and originality demolition. This, in its turn, definitely leads to various kinds of deformation of philosophic reflection. The most important tendency in subduing the crisis of culture and philosophy is to project a new type of philosophizing, represented in the critical philosophy of “Frankfurt’s School”, and other trends, which emphasize ideas of correlation between philosophy, science, art and morality, and transforming its former states into the new stream of philosophizing and questioning. Variety of philosophic trends, originality of its approaches, variety of its ”images” is determined, to a considerable extent, not only by contradiction of philosophic process, but also by the status of culture, its deformations, its former values devastation as well as forming new ones, decaying of its integrity, embodied in the form of alienation and self-alienation of culture.Self-alienation of culture only reveals alienated character of society itself, both its creators and its consumers, dividing and studying cultural values. Transformations of philosophic ideas appear not only in the form of reconsidering for historic and philosophical process achievements, but also in the form of new forms of society and culture reconsidering, appealing to the future in the outline of its humanitarian development.
2. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Edward Demenchonok

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
At The paper analyzes the problems of cultural diversity and universality as elaborated in the concepts of “intercultural philosophy” (Ra 1 Fornet-Betancourt), “transculture” (Mikhail Epstein), and “discourse ethics” (Jürgen Habermas, Karl-Otto Apel, and Seyla Benhabib). In the postmodern theories of culture, there is an internal tension between multiculturalism and deconstruction. Multiculturalism implies an essentialist connection between cultural production and ethnic or physical origin. In contrast, the paper argues for a concept of cultural diversity free from determinism and representation. The paper articulates a criticalphilosophical-methodological approach at the heart of which is Mikhail Bakhtin’s dialogical philosophy and the idea of “vnenakhodimost” (“outsidedness”). According to Mikhail Epstein’s concept of “transculture,” each culture is incomplete, thus needs to transcend its borders in dialogue with other cultures. Transculture is a path of liberation of the individual from the symbolic dependencies of culture itself and self-imposed identities. It is a state of virtual belonging of one individual to many cultures. Critical universality means diversity as a property of a single individual or a single culture insofar as they can include the diversity of others. It is viewed as an internal diversity of individuals, their dialogical openness to others and self-identification primarily as members of humanity. The paper focuses on Jürgen Habermas’s analysis of the problem of cultural identity and diversity in terms of the liberal conception of equality and cultural rights. Multiculturalism itself is not immune from knowledge/power relations. Its paradox is that individual basic liberties are restricted in the name of the securing collective rights of culture groups. Habermas argues that these problems can be solved only from the perspective of “the difference-sensitive egalitarian universalism of equal rights.” Mutual recognition requires a transformation of interpersonal relations through discourse and public debates over identity politics. Attention is paid to David Rasmussen’s analyses of conflict and toleration within the confines of a post-secular society.
3. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Serghey Gherdjikov

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper continues my “Virtual and real Relativity” (section Ontology). Both present the monograph: Philosophy of Relativity (Gherdjikov 2008). We pass each other. In the same degree we do not know ourselves as an ego, as community, as civilization. This is an unconsciousness relativity effect, which comes into being in the process of communication between cultures and between individuals. Relating is virtual defining – projection of the real connection between moments of alife process. ‘This’ without ‘that’ is not this. ‘I’ without ‘you’ is not I. ‘West’ without ‘East’ is not west. ‘Man’ without other living beings is not man. Global relativity awareness. The live awareness of relativity makes our mental forms conditional and we do not expect them to be the same as other people. We explore other people’s attitudes and categories like religion without a God and a fate, freedom without individual independence, nature without the division in ‘human’ and ‘animal’ and world beyond the division ‘nature–culture’. We realize the relativity and conditionality of the I, the Absolute, Necessity, Causality, Freedom. Thisbrings us nearer to planetary wisdom: we all are human and living beings and have to uphold our unconditional life against the destructive forces. This theoretical scheme is developed into a study, giving new solutions to a series of problems concerning information and meaning, the world and language, identity and difference.
4. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Vladimir Glagolev

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In the world of globalization religious-artistic works remain a phenomenon study of which allows to observe the main tendencies of socio-cultural dynamics taking into account complicated and multi-plan contexts of its realization. Methodological peculiarities of the suggested approach base on philosophic comparative study and interdisciplinary method, which allow neutralizing negative consequences of scientist approach based on physiological–ideological projectivity. In this case correlation of sacral and aesthetic works as crossing of “vertical” and “horizontal” dimensions which opens “the second derivative” of thecreative process – its Stereological orientation. At the threshold of the second decade of the 21 century it is expedient to activate comparative analysis of the problem of creation through the prism of cultures of various types at the specific material. This will allow us to understand more fully opportunities of global strategy of unity of the humanity on the basis of great achievements of culture having determined its boundaries and perspectives.
5. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
V.S. Glagolev

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The report brought to the section members’ notice issues consideration of the major tendencies of religious and aesthetic medium transformation laying the emphasis on the major factors of this transformation together with its socio-cultural basis. Based on the comparison of the processes taking place within Catholicism, Protestantism and Orthodoxy the report marks the concurrency of religious and aesthetic processes present within the named confessions which challenges the idea of absolute uniqueness of religious and aesthetic experience of the orthodox in Russia nowadays. The syncretism in the first place and dialectical unity of fundamentalism and modernism in the second, can be considered as the leading tendencies of transformation of religious and aesthetic medium of modern Christianity.
6. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Emilia Guliciuc

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
We could ask: how national could be a culture or another? The modernist or postmodernist perspectives seems to be unilateral here. Could be transmodernism the right sollution? The distictions between modernism, postmodernism and transmodernism are actually a pretext to set into discussion again the old dispute between Culture, regarded as a humanity universal feature and national cultures, perceived as a human community tradition symbol (community that claims a territory, a language, a religious belief and a certain government form).
7. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Viorel Guliciuc

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
We are living in the transmodern era. Now we could detect beyond the similarities and the differences between the modernism and the postmodernism the common search for the human integrality. Only this time we are not beginning with the proclaimed human unity, but with the human diversity. The Human Being has a non generic universality. The unity is purpose before being ground.
8. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Zilya Habibullina

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The present paper deals with the Russian cosmism in the conditions of modern society and views. The cosmism is conveyed in both philosophical and naturalistic aspects. The idea of the so-called cosmicity of the human and cosmic outlook is one of the most attractive features of the Russian cosmism for our contemporaries. Among the fundamental issues elaborated by the Russian cosmists is an idea of dynamic evolution. It is the lack of integral system of social actions that indefinitely postpones the implementation of the projects, elaborated by the Russian cosmists. Many ideas of the Russian cosmism are topical, in a view of new discoveries in the field of science, technology and cosmos development they have become even more convincing.
9. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Vadim Kortunov

view |  rights & permissions | cited by
10. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
S. Yu. Lepekhov

view |  rights & permissions | cited by
11. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Xiong Liwen

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The article mainly tries to discuss the dialogue between China and Western countries from the aspect of logic. There were three sources of logic, including formal logic in ancient Greek, logic in Early Qin of China as well as logic in ancient India. While, among all the schools in ancient China, Mohist and Virtuoso valued logic most. But as the rulers of Han Dynasty only paid their homage to Confucianism, the two schools gradually sank, logic in Early Qin of China discontinued, without entering the main headstream of logic development worldwide. Later, logic in China had little influence on Chinese society although Indian logic was introduced in Tang Dynasty, a scholar-bureaucrat named Zhizao Li in Ming Dynasty, translated logic textbook Discussion of Name and Science, and German philosopher G.W. Leibniz explained Chinese changing theory with binary system. In the early 1900s, during the process of introducing western science, logic, regarded as the basis of science and a tool of scientific research, was highly valued by Chinese scholars, in fact, western logic entered China through two channels. After Chinese scholars learnt from western logic, they made their contribution to the development of logic.
12. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Hai Luong Dinh

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Culture is the source of fostering the systems of philosophy, the philosophical ideologies/thoughts, and is the condition and material, the origin and condition for development of philosophy. A nation may have no its own system of philosophy, but cannot have no its own culture. Without its own culture, such nation cannot exist. Culture is the necessary conditions, requisites for existence of each nation in both aspects of the material and spiritual life. According to that meaning, culture is also the requisites for the existence and development of the systems of philosophy. Different from the systems of scholarly philosophy in which the thinkers, scientists completely define and create the philosophies, the universals are commonly nameless, appear and exist in the different forms such as: folkverse, folk-speech, in the daily life, in architecture, etc... Cannot determine exactly the time of generating one certain universal, one specific philosophy. But can determine the author and the appearance time of one specific system of philosophy. Such philosophies, abundant and diverse universals have existed for a long time in the life of each national community, however they can exist only side by side, reflect the specific aspects, processes of the social life, but they cannot incorporate into a system of philosophy having an internal structure, a system of reasons/arguments. Their generalization level cannot be high and closely systematical like the systems of scholarly philosophy. The life reality of the nations shows the national cultures cannot be short of philosophies, universals because they are the orientations for their activities, communication and communication. The more and more a culture develops, the bigger and bigger quantity and depth of philosophies get. The farther and farther go towards the modernity, the bigger and bigger quantity, depth and polyhedral diversity of the entire philosophies become. The more and more go backward the ancient past, the smaller and smaller quantity, depth and polyhedral diversity of the entire philosophies become. The most important is that when the system of philosophies increases in both quantity and depth, the other factors in the national culture also develop in both width and depth according to the development orientation of system of philosophies, since how far philosophies develop and expand,they will pave the way, create the direction, form the patterns for actions, communication and activities in order to create new cultural value, new cultural environment, new cultural products. Another aspect in the relationship between culture and philosophy that relates to the philosophies in the national culture is the role of the philosophies for the systems of scholarly philosophy. Only a few nations have the systems of scholarly philosophy. The systems of philosophy are normally at the high argumentative level in comparison with the philosophies in the national culture. The systems of philosophy are also an important component of the national culture. Can say, the doctrines of the scholarly philosophy is the high-leveled crystallization at the high argumentative level presenting the world outlook and the outlook on life of the nation in that era which were refracted through the concrete philosophists’ prism. The philosophies in the national culture are the direct materials for forming the structure for all factors of the systems of scholarly philosophy. On another side, the philosophies can take part more or less by their contents of knowledge, way of thinking, and deduction... into the systems of philosophy in the form of archetype. On the other hand, many philosophies indirectly take part in the doctrines of the scholarly philosophy through influencing the philosophist’s thought, consciousness during the study process, throughthe life experience, through adopting the experiences of the other people, in order to take part into the system of the scholarly philosophy since such system appeared, formed, developed and was expressed to become the systematical argumentation. The national culture is the living environment of the systems of scholarly philosophy, is the place supplying food, drinking water, oxygen and sunlight to those systems of scholarly philosophy. Like fruit trees in the garden being planted in the national culture gardens, the fatter, the richer with appropriate temperature, humidity, light they are, the more they develop with the more fruit. The systems of scholarly philosophy are the products firstly of the national culture that were piled up, distilled and sublimed through talent of the awareness, meditation, skill and spirit combined with the other virtues of the philosophists who have created the systems of scholarly philosophy that were also sprouted, fostered in the national culture. Can say there is no national culture that developed to a certain degree, cannot have the systems of scholarly philosophy. Culture is the spiritual foundation of society, at the same times is the spiritual foundation of philosophy. Culture in the broad sense of the word is the foundation of the existence of the humankind, at the same time is the decisive foundation for the birth, existence, development and perdition of the systems of philosophy.Culture despite the broad sense of the word or the narrow meaning is regularly the motive force of the social development in general in which there is the development of philosophy. A nation without a developed culture cannot have the abundant, diverse philosophies, even cannot have the systems of philosophy. A nation may be enslaved for thousands years, but it has not lost, eliminated its own culture, then that nation can exist as an independent nation. The nations can borrow the systems of philosophy, but cannot borrow the philosophies, moreover cannot borrow the culture in general. That is the relative independence of philosophy with culture and the role of culture for philosophy.
13. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Charalampos Magoulas

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
One of the main characteristics of the post-modern society is the democratized diffusion of knowledge even on issues of which the average citizen could hardly be aware: social, cultural, ecological and economical risks. However, many philosophers and thinkers (Chomsky, Barber, Zizek, Sartori) argue that we live rather in information societies than in knowledge ones, because the content of information on political actions of major importance are ideologically-oriented and therefore misleading. In the present paper we study two examples of political and scientific rhetoric, trying to interpret not only their political and moral determinants but also their possible impact on international welfare. Aristotle and modern semiotic theories will provide the methodological tools of thisanalysis.
14. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Geeta Manaktala

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This has been possible by the growing awareness of man about his own personal nature, about his larger society and culture and about the whole humanity. The foremost challenge of contemporary man is the discovery and affirmation of man’s spirituality and bringing it into full play in the play of life and for the attainment of some new leap forward in creation and transcendence. The cosmic dimension, therefore comprehends reason and faith, science and poetry. The cosmic dimension brings experience of timelessness in love, worship and beauty The extension of this personal awareness to a larger awareness shared by thesociety enriches the social life and adds an essential element to all progress and development. This balance and harmony is the product of human creativity. Therefore the fullness of life is given to creative persons living harmoniously on all there dimensions of the cosmic, the elemental and the temporal. Some sense of discovery enters into the creative process.
15. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Miguel Matilla

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In Schopenhauer as Educator (1874), Nietzsche wrote: “For there is a kind of misused and exploited culture – just take a look around you! And precisely those powers that today most actively promote culture have ulterior motives, and they do not engage in intercourse with it for pure and unselfish reasons.” (The Complete Works of Friedrich Nietzsche, Vol. 2, (Trans. Richard T. Gray), SUP, California, 1995, p. 218, 16; hereafter CW). And he listed these powers, indicating the reason why they were enemies of a true culture: “I have not yet enumerated all those powers that promote culture without, however, being able to realize its goal, the production of genius. I already named three: the selfishness of the moneymakers, the selfishness of the state, and the selfishness of all those who have reason to disguise and conceal themselves behind form. I cite, fourth, the selfishness of scholarship (Wissenschaft) and the peculiar nature of its servants, the scholars (Gelehrten).” (CW 2, p. 224, 11). This exploitation of culture, pressed into the service of these four powers, resulted in a pseudoculture (Afterkultur). In this paper, I will first deal with the goal of a true culture as Nietzsche formulated it in Schopenhauer as Educator. Then, I will focus on one of these enemies of a true culture: the selfishness of scholarship, or rather, science. Nietzsche’s critique is still pertinent nowadays, even more so in my view. Finally, I will briefly discuss,starting from a Nietzsche’s text on the philosopher of the future, one of the tasks of the philosopher in our increasing technological world.
16. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
L. A. Mirskaya

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In the structure of a modern literature erotic text we see two main tendencies: metaphoric (or metonymic) imagination, (for example Bataille) and combined imagination (de Sad). A bright example of the first tendency is A story of an eye by Bataille (1928). In it we see an antithetic metaphor, striking two sexes together. De Sad, using combined imagination, proceeds from the fact, that there is a limited amount of erotism places. But from them he leads all figures, which act in these places. He transfers them and combines erotica and aggression, forming endless combinations. Кarel by Jahn Jene (1947) is an example of the second tendency. Endlessness of erotic desire in the novel appears as darkness. This darkness – is a sign of bottomless depths of desire–has a stream of light as reverse side, as its antithetic metaphor. The metaphor, created by a non-synthetic combination aims at causing shock, conveying obscenity, unquotability of desire. It has a double nature: to come into touch with Eros one must taste death. Unquotable discourse speaks of a unified pulsation of Eros-Thanatos.
17. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Myeong-jin Nam

view |  rights & permissions | cited by
18. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
K.S. Radhakrishnan

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The Socio-Cultural pluralism and its fabrics in our society have been under the threat of religious fundamentalism and ideological extremism, which firmly believe that there can only one way of true expression and all other forms, are either substandard or false. This attitude has torn away the world into different isolated islands of human settlements. This state of affair is the outcome of multidimensional causes and one among them, no doubt, is related to one of the central issues of Philosophy, i.e., the relation between ‘one and many’. The ontological dimension of the problem of ‘one and many’ cannot be solved withouthaving the proper understanding of epistemological solutions. The epistemic tools of the Advaita Vedanta are powerful enough to suggest pragmatic solutions to the good old problem of ‘one and many’ that attains new relevance in the era of Globalization. The logic of identity in difference and the logic of difference are the two types of logical systems, which are instrumental for the formulation of various types of claims to know of the western tradition. The logic of identity in difference has been clearly designed and defined by the classical logic or the Aristotelian logic. The symbolic logic encarves the various nuances of the logic of difference. The Advaita System has envisaged a new logic i.e., the logic of identity, which is implicit in the Upanisdic mahavakyya ‘Ayam Āthmam Brahma’. The paper intents to explore the possibility of application of the logic of identity in socio-cultural issues of the present day world.
19. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
Margarita Silantyeva

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The report is devoted to elaboratation creative philosophical models for optimization multi-cultural dialogue into “post modern” global society. The main idea of the article is to describe the basic philosophical models (rooting in ancient philosophy, as the most seriously and fundamental theoretical positions for solution the problem of many-pole's world), connecting them with the main points of modern philosophers (F. Fucuyama, A. Toffler, S. Hantington, S. Averintsev, A. Panarin, Y. Lotman, S. Filatov, A. Malashenco, E. Volkhova etc). The dialogue of cultures is the “other side” of the process of globalization. The question about possible strategies of intercultural interaction, its opportunities and limits, as well as potential grounds for mutual understanding is ultimately vital todayfor contemporary philosophy of culture. Its solution determines perspective of consolidation of sodium as well as selection of definite position in the dialogue itself – whether it will be an isolationism leading to the “end of history” as to the returning to cyclic model of life of human community; or there will be retained an orientation for mutual displacement of value priorities (war of ideologies) as competitive adaptive programs. In any case the globalizing world in the order of self-organization in the next decades will stop at the selection of any definite strategy.
20. Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy: Volume > 36
V. Stolyarov

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The concept of the culture of peace has been developed under the UNESCO auspices by prominent academicians, scientists and artists. The challenge is to replace the culture of conflict, which is oriented towards violence and conflict resolution by force, by the culture of peace. Its underlying basics are non-acceptance of violence, devotion to democratic principles, promotion of freedom, justice, and solidarity ant tolerance, mutual respect for others’ cultures, ideologies, beliefs and other humanistic values. As far as sport is concerned from this point of view, there are numerous issues, such as: Whether sport is one of the educatingelements of the culture of peace, that is one of those elements of society which provide for development and establishment of such culture To what extent and how effectively sport has actually served this purpose Whether there is a conflict between competition which is inherent in sport and the role of sport in development of the culture of peace Whether competition which can be especially fierce on the international level can impact negatively the objectives which the culture of peace is called to attain etc. Unfortunately the research into the culture of peace has very little mention of sport as one of the phenomena affecting this culture. The bibliography on the culture of peace published in 1999 does not have any reference to sport in this respect. During the last few years the author with a group of his colleagues have started working on analyzing sport as a factor of establishment and development of the culture of peace. The principal results of this analysis are as follows.