Search results

Obgleich die Europäische Union zum Gravitationszentrum der politischen Entwicklung im gesamten Europa geworden ist, befindet sich die europäische Politik im Krisenzustand. Das ehemalige Gefühl der Dringlichkeit, "das Europa" zu konstituieren, wich einer Lethargie. Die EU wird heutzutage einem wesentlich stärkeren Druck auf die Rechtfertigung ihrer Existenz ausgesetzt, als es dem zu Zeiten des kalten Krieges war. Nach wie vor bleibt das Haupziel der europäischen Integration die Verhütung jedweder Hegemonie eines nationalistischen Privatinteresses, das den europäischen Frieden zerstören könnte. Nun ist es jedoch vonnöten, in Fragen der europäischen Integration eine überzeugende positive politische Philosophie, eine neue Vision zu entwickeln. Im einzelnen werden in dem Aufsatz u.a. folgende Defizite bzw. offene Probleme der EU ausgeführt: die Verstärkung der demokratischen Legitimität, die Schaffung einer EU-Identität, das Bedürfnis einer institutionellen Reform, das Ungleichgewicht zwischen der politischen und der Währungsunion, das Problem der "unterschiedlichen Geschwindigkeiten" bzw. der "differenzierten Integrierung", die Folgen der EU-Erweiterung für finanzielle und Strukturpläne der EU und die weitgehende Reorganisierung der EU-Finanzen. Diese schwierige Probleme und die teils grundlegenden Differenzen unter den Mitgliedsstaaten hinsichtlich der künftigen Gestalt der EU erlaubten keinen anderen Schluß, als daß die europäische Integration einer unvorsehbaren Zukunft entgegengeht. (BIOst-Hrs)

This essay addresses the issue of how to transcend the long-lasting stalemate between positivism and various forms of post-positivism. The main assumption rests in the belief that one of the possible solutions to this stalemate can be offered by replacing the positivism versus postpositivism debate by a discussion between scientific realism and pragmatism. The article thus starts with a brief characterization of logical positivism, which is followed by a more thorough deliberation on the issue of pragmatism and scientific realism. The text raises questions of the mutual incompatibilities of both positions, as well as their respective influence on the discipline of International Relations. It is also argued that by adopting one or another of these philosophies of science, we can bring about specific consequences for actual research practices. Adapted from the source document.

The study deals with pilgrimages to Esquipulas, Guatemala, and patterns of miracle in terms of their perception by the pilgrims reaching this prominent religious hub of Central America. Two key pilgrimage discourses are distinguished: traditional Maya pilgrimage, based on regular, calendar customs, and conventional Catholic pilgrimage, founded on occasional journeys to fulfil a vow. The Western understanding of miracle as a transgression of "natural laws" or "common course of nature" is relativized and contested arguing that the ethnographic evidence of Esquipulas shows not only different, but also opposite conceptions. Then, the study presents a spectrum of miracle ideas drawing from the Maya as well as European - the case of Lourdes is exemplary here - traditions in terms of the degree of their uncommonness. It is concluded that anthropology has to comprehend miracles as marvels in its cultural context; nevertheless, there is a widespread idea among many cultures that miracle is something wonderful, related to the awareness of non-obviousness of certain things and phenomena. Miracles find its content and meaning within particular cosmology, but, anchored in the psychological characteristics of the astonishment and the difference between usual and unusual or ordinary and extraordinary, they refer to features of human mind in a more general way.

This article examines the issue of the genderedness of the philosophical canon. In the theoretical part of the article the author gives evidence of the constructed nature of the philosophical canon, which in the Euro-American space is clearly androcentric. She summarises criticism to date of the philosophical canon by feminist historians of philosophy and describes the results of their research, which is directed at several areas: uncovering forgotten women philosophers of the past; analysing philosophers' views on gender; identifying the genderedness of basic philosophical categories; criticising the dualism that characterises modern philosophical discourse; and finally, making various reinterpretations of the concepts of past philosophers. Each of these approaches has particular potential and limitations, which the author seeks to identify. In the second part of the article the author presents the results of her analysis of philosophy textbooks and books on the history of philosophy published in the Czech Republic after 1990. She conducted her analysis by comparing information on women philosophers contained in the texts of the selected books with the information available in other literature (mainly English). She also employed the typological method, and she identified five 'strategies' of marginalisation of women philosophers, whereby textbooks used at Czech universities contribute to maintaining the existing philosophical canon.

The article deals with the 1938 treatise History of the All- Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), abbreviated AUCP(b) - an official treatise from the Stalin era of the USSR which was published on a mass scale. The author puts his reflections in two contexts: 1. the internal Marxist dispute over "orthodoxy", which Stalin resolved by publishing (and co-authoring) this "canonical book", and 2. the myth-forming context, which shows how totalitarian regimes present themselves with their "canonical books". He considers publications preceding the analyzed book, which after Lenin's death included texts by Grigory Zinoviev, Nikolai Bukharin and Leon Trotsky. Then he considers the actual book, focusing in more detail on the absence of two topics and concepts - the state and culture. He pays particular attention to the chapter on dialectic and historical materialism written by Stalin, which completes the simplistic interpretations in the so-called Stalinist Marxism. Like L. Kolakowski, he concludes that the entire Stalinist concept is naturalistic (meaning the naive naturalism of the late 19th century: Marxism guarantees a "scientific world view") and naively nomothetic (all fundamental claims have the form of unquestionable laws).