Search results

This volume examines a variety of philosophical approaches that seek to formulate practical guidelines or norms for human actions and behavior in different areas of society, including politics, cultural traditions, the environment, business management, architecture, and medicine. Written by a team of international authors, this volume features thirteen surveys. It begins with an exploration of ethics in politics and cultural traditions. From genocide to the unequal distribution of wealth, it examines many of the harms that currently affect societies throughout the world and considers a way that those in politics can follow to provide better care for all their populations. Next, the book looks at the relation between ethics and cultural traditions. It features a paper that examines the tension that often exists between the past and the present, with a special focus on the history of India. This volume also considers the idea of a universal system of ethics, presents a practical approach to value-based management in private and public organizations, and examines ethics in medicine. In addition, this volume includes coverage of a new type of ethics called Eco-ethica, proposed by the Japanese philosopher Tomonobu Imamichi, which seeks to answer the question of how men and women can live better or live together with each other in a systematized, technological age.--

These days, Africa is seen as an underdeveloped or developing continent. (...) What is meant by this is that Africa as a whole lags behind other areas in terms of measurable economic output and general "quality of life" indices for its inhabitants. An evident paradox in the attempts made to solve the problem of underdevelopment in Africa is that the vast majority of the research into the cause of Africa's present condition emanates from research centres and universities located in the West. And what is evident about the majority of such theories is that they tend to focus narrowly on strictly economic issues geared towards "alleviating poverty" and creating piecemeal conditions for "sustainable development". The collection of essays in this issue approach the problem of development from a broader, more holistic perspective which analyses that explore Africa's present status theoretically, from the standpoint of all the social sciences, not just economics. (Afr Dev/DÜI)

Aileen Kelly, Empiriocriticism: a Bolshevik philosophy?
In the first decade of this century a group of Bolshevik theorists attempted to construct a new philosophical basis for marxism with the aid of the empiriocriticism of Avenarius and Mach. Their attempt is usually treated by historians as merely a brief episode in Bolshevik party history. This article examines its significance within the wider framework of the collective psychology of the Russian radical intelligentsia, in which voluntarism was uneasily reconciled with a predilection for deterministic philosophies of history. The empiriocriticist movement can be seen as a final attempt on the part of the members of the intelligentsia to achieve a synthesis of these elements in their outlook. Their writings and the ensuing polemics are examined with particular regard to the light which they shed on the social psychology of the Russian radical intelligentsia and on the part played by its subjective aspirations in the formulation of its historical goals.

The article attempts to provide a definition for the problem area of the philosophy of politics, political philosophy and political science. Given the lack of a well-established distinction between the subjects of these sciences in the Russian-language discourse, the author turns to the English-language tradition. The analysis of this discourse shows the following: 1) the absence of a distinction between political philosophy and the philosophy of politics, which is replaced by political ontology as part of political philosophy; 2) the existence of a distinction between political theory and political philosophy; 3) the dependence of the paradigm of the relationship between political theory and political philosophy on the consensus developed in the national intellectual tradition. In the English-language discourse, the question of the relationship between political science and political philosophy comes to the fore. The latter is considered as a subordinate, integral part of political science. It is shown that, based on the criterion of "insufficient scientificity", attempts to exclude political philosophy from the political science do not stop. The article substantiates the position according to which, despite their apparent similarity, the subjects of political science and political philosophy do not coincide – the disciplinary ontology of political science can become the subject of political philosophy. When discussing the relationship between the philosophy of politics and political philosophy, the article presents several hypotheses. First, a distinction is made between the philosophy of politics and political philosophy and the author argues that they are distinct. Secondly, the position, according to which the philosophy of politics belongs to the field of philosophy, and political philosophy to political science, is critically examined, and the fact that the two disciplines belong to the philosophical corpus of knowledge is substantiated. Thirdly, it is proposed to demarcate between the philosophy of politics and political philosophy in accordance with the difference between their subjects. The subject of philosophy of politics is the phenomenon of the political, while the subject of political philosophy is political phenomena.