In Lithuania at the end of the XX century the doctrine of juridical positivism was substituted to the sociological concept of law. The object of the science of law history was substantially extended. Law history was substituted to the history of legal system. The concept of the law history of the West and the formalion of the Western legal tradition, proposed by H. J. Berman, became the basis of the science of law history in Lithuania. Was created the pluralistic and nonconflict model of the legal system of the Great Duchy of Lithuania as the prototype of the legal system of the European Union. Because the existing paradigm of law gradually grows antiquated, has already been created the new paradigm, in which are combined the elements of the social sciences and humanities, physics, biochemistry and the technological sciences. In this year the Institute of the law history of the Law faculty of Vilnius university proposed the new theme of the postgraduate studies – "Law and scientific progress". This theme completely corresponds to the policy of Vilnius university and will be coordinated with the reforms, which now are achieved at the university.
In Lithuania at the end of the XX century the doctrine of juridical positivism was substituted to the sociological concept of law. The object of the science of law history was substantially extended. Law history was substituted to the history of legal system. The concept of the law history of the West and the formalion of the Western legal tradition, proposed by H. J. Berman, became the basis of the science of law history in Lithuania. Was created the pluralistic and nonconflict model of the legal system of the Great Duchy of Lithuania as the prototype of the legal system of the European Union. Because the existing paradigm of law gradually grows antiquated, has already been created the new paradigm, in which are combined the elements of the social sciences and humanities, physics, biochemistry and the technological sciences. In this year the Institute of the law history of the Law faculty of Vilnius university proposed the new theme of the postgraduate studies – "Law and scientific progress". This theme completely corresponds to the policy of Vilnius university and will be coordinated with the reforms, which now are achieved at the university.
In Lithuania at the end of the XX century the doctrine of juridical positivism was substituted to the sociological concept of law. The object of the science of law history was substantially extended. Law history was substituted to the history of legal system. The concept of the law history of the West and the formalion of the Western legal tradition, proposed by H. J. Berman, became the basis of the science of law history in Lithuania. Was created the pluralistic and nonconflict model of the legal system of the Great Duchy of Lithuania as the prototype of the legal system of the European Union. Because the existing paradigm of law gradually grows antiquated, has already been created the new paradigm, in which are combined the elements of the social sciences and humanities, physics, biochemistry and the technological sciences. In this year the Institute of the law history of the Law faculty of Vilnius university proposed the new theme of the postgraduate studies – "Law and scientific progress". This theme completely corresponds to the policy of Vilnius university and will be coordinated with the reforms, which now are achieved at the university.
In Lithuania at the end of the XX century the doctrine of juridical positivism was substituted to the sociological concept of law. The object of the science of law history was substantially extended. Law history was substituted to the history of legal system. The concept of the law history of the West and the formalion of the Western legal tradition, proposed by H. J. Berman, became the basis of the science of law history in Lithuania. Was created the pluralistic and nonconflict model of the legal system of the Great Duchy of Lithuania as the prototype of the legal system of the European Union. Because the existing paradigm of law gradually grows antiquated, has already been created the new paradigm, in which are combined the elements of the social sciences and humanities, physics, biochemistry and the technological sciences. In this year the Institute of the law history of the Law faculty of Vilnius university proposed the new theme of the postgraduate studies – "Law and scientific progress". This theme completely corresponds to the policy of Vilnius university and will be coordinated with the reforms, which now are achieved at the university.
The Master's thesis \"The problem of Subject in Modern and Post-modern Philosophy of Education,\" is an attempt to highlight the problem of the subject in the context of modern philosophy of education. The present work describes and analyzes the distinction between modern and classical education philosophies as well. The historical, theoretical, and scientific development of the principles and standards of education are also dealt with focusing on philosophical principles that influenced the emergence and development of certain educational principles. The paper pays attention to the problem of child objectivisation in the system of classical education and the problem of subjectivisation in modern education. The modern education system highlights the importance of experience and reflection, intentionality of consciousness, which show the relevance of phenomenology. This work discusses the interplay of the ideas of phenomenology, pragmatism, and existentialism in education. Mostly the works of the representative of existentialism P.Freire are analyzed. P.Freire stresses the problem of human freedom and humanistic education in his educational philosophy. The paper also analyzes the importance of individual experience, its reflection and practical application in the educational system of the representative of pragmatism J.Dewey. Mostly the principles of democracy and humanism as the basic educational principles are emphasized. This paper presents the classical education system as the system that is dehumanising the individual and highlights its weaknesses, whereas the modern education system, on the contrary, is viewed as humanizing and liberating the individual.
The Master's thesis \"The problem of Subject in Modern and Post-modern Philosophy of Education,\" is an attempt to highlight the problem of the subject in the context of modern philosophy of education. The present work describes and analyzes the distinction between modern and classical education philosophies as well. The historical, theoretical, and scientific development of the principles and standards of education are also dealt with focusing on philosophical principles that influenced the emergence and development of certain educational principles. The paper pays attention to the problem of child objectivisation in the system of classical education and the problem of subjectivisation in modern education. The modern education system highlights the importance of experience and reflection, intentionality of consciousness, which show the relevance of phenomenology. This work discusses the interplay of the ideas of phenomenology, pragmatism, and existentialism in education. Mostly the works of the representative of existentialism P.Freire are analyzed. P.Freire stresses the problem of human freedom and humanistic education in his educational philosophy. The paper also analyzes the importance of individual experience, its reflection and practical application in the educational system of the representative of pragmatism J.Dewey. Mostly the principles of democracy and humanism as the basic educational principles are emphasized. This paper presents the classical education system as the system that is dehumanising the individual and highlights its weaknesses, whereas the modern education system, on the contrary, is viewed as humanizing and liberating the individual.
Heritage of Modern Architecture in Lithuania At any history stage the process of public activity leaves some material symbols, among which immovable items take an especially important place. The dominant part of them in the cities is formed from architecture. Conception of historical architecture is undergoing constant changes by encompassing still new decades and styles. One of the "youngest" styles, which is gradually coming to be perceived as part of historical heritage, is modernism. The majority of the European countries have already refrained from questioning the historicity of this style. This stimulates us focusing also on the heritage of Lithuania's modern architecture and analysing what was achieved and what could be preserved as part of the former era. The research subject-matter deals with modern architecture as part of the heritage of Lithuania's architecture in the 20th century. Given the conditions of independent Lithuania, interwar and post-war modern architecture and separate objects of it receive ambiguous evaluations, a number of highly relevant and severe problems of heritage conservation and heritage documentation nature occur, which require urgent and reasoned answers. Fundamental problem lies in the attitude of conceptual character, namely whether this heritage is by and large recognized as the object of Lithuanian cultural heritage. Further destiny of modern architecture heritage depends on the latter attitude. It should be emphasised that the greatest part of architecturological research focused on the classical history periods of Lithuanian architecture and failed to go beyond the boundary of the 20th century. Alongside with this, the relevant problem of determining the criteria of differential value of modern architecture occurs. This issue is of really complex character because it must follow objectivity requirements, while our period of time relates to various interests, such as economic, political, etc. On the basis of the possible values it would be possible to determine and classify the valuables of modern architecture and resolve yet another major problem, i.e. integrate such valuables into the system of heritage documentation. The present research aims at finding out certain most important protection problems arising with regard to the Lithuanian modern architecture and determining the possibilities for its preservation. This research overviews the particularities of the development of 20th century architecture; deals with the complex and ambiguous attitude towards the heritage of Lithuanian modern architecture and the reasons of particular situation; singles out the examples of Lithuanian modern architecture and presents the most characteristic values of such buildings. After the research was carried out certain conclusions were drawn. Firstly, it should be stated that European movements and directions of modern architecture illustrate the social and economic situation of that time and demonstrate the creative architectural potential of those times; therefore, searching for one's own place in the overall architectural context, we must perceive and value the heritage of every historical stratum. Architecture of the 20th century shall not be an exception. Secondly, it should be stressed that a marked part of heritage of Lithuanian architecture of the 20th century is loosing its attractiveness due to various economic, cultural and political reasons and, should the legal acts fail to protect it, it is likely to disappear rapidly. The given situation may be altered by an active position of contemporary society. Third, it shall be asserted that 20th century architecture is not an ordinary heritage object; attitude towards such heritage must be more flexible in order to adjust it to the needs of a modern city. The given situation may be altered by an active position of contemporary society.
Heritage of Modern Architecture in Lithuania At any history stage the process of public activity leaves some material symbols, among which immovable items take an especially important place. The dominant part of them in the cities is formed from architecture. Conception of historical architecture is undergoing constant changes by encompassing still new decades and styles. One of the "youngest" styles, which is gradually coming to be perceived as part of historical heritage, is modernism. The majority of the European countries have already refrained from questioning the historicity of this style. This stimulates us focusing also on the heritage of Lithuania's modern architecture and analysing what was achieved and what could be preserved as part of the former era. The research subject-matter deals with modern architecture as part of the heritage of Lithuania's architecture in the 20th century. Given the conditions of independent Lithuania, interwar and post-war modern architecture and separate objects of it receive ambiguous evaluations, a number of highly relevant and severe problems of heritage conservation and heritage documentation nature occur, which require urgent and reasoned answers. Fundamental problem lies in the attitude of conceptual character, namely whether this heritage is by and large recognized as the object of Lithuanian cultural heritage. Further destiny of modern architecture heritage depends on the latter attitude. It should be emphasised that the greatest part of architecturological research focused on the classical history periods of Lithuanian architecture and failed to go beyond the boundary of the 20th century. Alongside with this, the relevant problem of determining the criteria of differential value of modern architecture occurs. This issue is of really complex character because it must follow objectivity requirements, while our period of time relates to various interests, such as economic, political, etc. On the basis of the possible values it would be possible to determine and classify the valuables of modern architecture and resolve yet another major problem, i.e. integrate such valuables into the system of heritage documentation. The present research aims at finding out certain most important protection problems arising with regard to the Lithuanian modern architecture and determining the possibilities for its preservation. This research overviews the particularities of the development of 20th century architecture; deals with the complex and ambiguous attitude towards the heritage of Lithuanian modern architecture and the reasons of particular situation; singles out the examples of Lithuanian modern architecture and presents the most characteristic values of such buildings. After the research was carried out certain conclusions were drawn. Firstly, it should be stated that European movements and directions of modern architecture illustrate the social and economic situation of that time and demonstrate the creative architectural potential of those times; therefore, searching for one's own place in the overall architectural context, we must perceive and value the heritage of every historical stratum. Architecture of the 20th century shall not be an exception. Secondly, it should be stressed that a marked part of heritage of Lithuanian architecture of the 20th century is loosing its attractiveness due to various economic, cultural and political reasons and, should the legal acts fail to protect it, it is likely to disappear rapidly. The given situation may be altered by an active position of contemporary society. Third, it shall be asserted that 20th century architecture is not an ordinary heritage object; attitude towards such heritage must be more flexible in order to adjust it to the needs of a modern city. The given situation may be altered by an active position of contemporary society.
Lithuanian authors have challenges to study Russia's politics of history. The analysis is complicated because of a few factors. Diplomatic disputes and informative wars between Lithuania and Russia concerning historical questions have encouraged researches by historians but not by political scientists. In Lithuania, the questions of who and how is forming the history politics of Russia, what is its content and the function it accomplishes, remain unexamined. The analysis is further complicated by disagreement among Russian political scientists, historians, journalists, and politicians over the existence of such politics. The present analysis demonstrates that post-soviet Russia perceives the importance of historical memory, i.e. it understands that historical memory and its forms depend on the states' politics. Russia's political history genesis testifies that trends of such politics depend on the geopolitical orientation of its government. The end of the Cold War did not manage to conceal the fundamental differences between Europe and Russia. The wave of liberalism and democracy, which spread over Central and Eastern Europe as well as Russian Federation, has caused tension in Russia ruled by B. Yeltsin. Yeltsin's Russia was not able to tackle this problem by using measures of history politics in order to lessen the distance between Russia and the West. V. Putin undertook to find the solution to this situation, and he did. By using changes of international politics, he builds the image of Russia as a great power. Politics of history are subordinated to build this image; also, it is used as an instrument in domestic politics. The history politics of Russia has taken the shape of a manipulative form and serves the interests of V. Putins's power.
Lithuanian authors have challenges to study Russia's politics of history. The analysis is complicated because of a few factors. Diplomatic disputes and informative wars between Lithuania and Russia concerning historical questions have encouraged researches by historians but not by political scientists. In Lithuania, the questions of who and how is forming the history politics of Russia, what is its content and the function it accomplishes, remain unexamined. The analysis is further complicated by disagreement among Russian political scientists, historians, journalists, and politicians over the existence of such politics. The present analysis demonstrates that post-soviet Russia perceives the importance of historical memory, i.e. it understands that historical memory and its forms depend on the states' politics. Russia's political history genesis testifies that trends of such politics depend on the geopolitical orientation of its government. The end of the Cold War did not manage to conceal the fundamental differences between Europe and Russia. The wave of liberalism and democracy, which spread over Central and Eastern Europe as well as Russian Federation, has caused tension in Russia ruled by B. Yeltsin. Yeltsin's Russia was not able to tackle this problem by using measures of history politics in order to lessen the distance between Russia and the West. V. Putin undertook to find the solution to this situation, and he did. By using changes of international politics, he builds the image of Russia as a great power. Politics of history are subordinated to build this image; also, it is used as an instrument in domestic politics. The history politics of Russia has taken the shape of a manipulative form and serves the interests of V. Putins's power.
Lithuanian authors have challenges to study Russia's politics of history. The analysis is complicated because of a few factors. Diplomatic disputes and informative wars between Lithuania and Russia concerning historical questions have encouraged researches by historians but not by political scientists. In Lithuania, the questions of who and how is forming the history politics of Russia, what is its content and the function it accomplishes, remain unexamined. The analysis is further complicated by disagreement among Russian political scientists, historians, journalists, and politicians over the existence of such politics. The present analysis demonstrates that post-soviet Russia perceives the importance of historical memory, i.e. it understands that historical memory and its forms depend on the states' politics. Russia's political history genesis testifies that trends of such politics depend on the geopolitical orientation of its government. The end of the Cold War did not manage to conceal the fundamental differences between Europe and Russia. The wave of liberalism and democracy, which spread over Central and Eastern Europe as well as Russian Federation, has caused tension in Russia ruled by B. Yeltsin. Yeltsin's Russia was not able to tackle this problem by using measures of history politics in order to lessen the distance between Russia and the West. V. Putin undertook to find the solution to this situation, and he did. By using changes of international politics, he builds the image of Russia as a great power. Politics of history are subordinated to build this image; also, it is used as an instrument in domestic politics. The history politics of Russia has taken the shape of a manipulative form and serves the interests of V. Putins's power.
