immigration, Cet article porte sur l'efficacité politique d'une série photographique qui problématise des questions socioculturelles contemporaines telles l'immigration, l'exploitation et l'éthique du travail. L'image photographique devient une ressource dans les mains des acteurs sociaux et fait fonction de diagnostic des tensions du contemporain. La photographie permet de « reconnaître à travers » (c'est-à-dire « diagnostiquer ») et de formuler des jugements. Le potentiel sémantique du diagnostic engendré par cette série et la force illocutoire des jugements qui y sont inscrits fonctionnent comme une sorte d'« argumentation par images ». L'analyse de cette série photographique, réalisée par le photographe et théoricien Allan Sekula, nous a amené à nous interroger sur la relation entre image, corpus, genres d'afférence et statuts (documentaire et artistique).
The purpose of this work is to reveal the natural principle of the precedence of the philosophy of music in music science, which removed musical aesthetics with its basis of the traditional philosophical and rationalist system of Cartesianism. 'Culturologisation' of modern musicology testifies to the absorption of non-logical properties of associative knowledge, which, according to Yu. Krysteva, is no longer rejected by science, being called the 'hermeneutic-interpretive' meaning of the object of the study. The methodological basis of the research is the intonation approach of the B. Asafiev school in Ukraine, as it was in the works of O. Zosim, O. Markova, O. Muravska, O. Kozarenko, Liu Bingjian, O. Roschenko with an emphasis on hermeneutic and stylistic-comparative analytical search engine. The scientific novelty of the work is due to the theoretical primacy in the musicology of Ukraine of the statement of the philosophy of music as a substitute for the sphere of musical aesthetics, which has prevailed since the 18th century, as a "speculative theory of music" relative to the traditional core of musicology, the theory and history of music. Conclusions. The movement of musical aesthetics into the bosom of the philosophy of music was carried out by the displacement, following practice, in musical science of the theatrical-secularised expression of general aesthetic antitheses in favor of the all-encompassing lyric as a specifically musical embodiment of beauty, and the dramatic and the comic appear in the degrees of incompleteness of the lyric presentation, which delimits the "aesthetic-sensual" in the musical sense. The focus of musical expressiveness on the aestheticism of the beautiful and lyrical in this approach generalises, despite its direct ecclesiasticism, the experience of spiritual music, for which the beauty of the lyrical, in the syncresis of the suprapersonal and personal, expression (compare with the "spiritual beauty" of music in Mikhail Psellus, 11th century) displaces meaningful antitheses, which theoretically coincides with the symbolism of Pythagoreanism-Neoplatonism in the philosophical-mental understanding of music as a touch to the Eternal.
Key words: musical aesthetics, philosophy of music, traditional musicology, modern culture-oriented musicology, genesis of music science.
"Map overestimation," or "the contemporaneity problem," derives from the assumption that settlements identified during surface surveys were occupied throughout individual periods. Inductive and simulation analysis have been used to ascertain the degree of contemporaneity in surface survey data sets, as variation in settlement location is critical for understanding population density and demography, which inform social, economic and political interpretations. This paper revisits the inductive approach to interrogating survey data developed by W. M. Sumner and the simulation model approach developed by R. E. Dewar to explore the survey data from two regions within South Asia's Indus civilization. This analysis demonstrates the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches. It also highlights the variability in settlement systems in different areas within the Indus civilization and shows that consideration of stability and instability within settlement systems is an important factor when considering dynamics of resilience and sustainability.
The paper analyzes two main dominant political projects of transformation of the political system and state-legal organization in the post-Soviet territory - conservative one and modernizational one which differ in internal ambiguous and contradictory. The authors argue that the process of political transformation should be examined as a wider category than the concept of "modernization", which is a type of transformation processes which are interpret as evolutionary, revolutionary or pendulum forms of political institutions, the system of authoritative relations. It is proved that modern conservative projects of transformation of political life of the community, aimed at the formation of adequate and organic to socio-cultural environment public institutions of government, forms of organizations that meet the interests and values of society. At the same time, it is shown that in the twenty-first century in the post-Soviet territory, and in particular in the development of Russia's political organization a stable conservative strategy is restored. The paper the general characteristics are identified and the fundamental differences between conservative and modernist political programs are pointed out. Depending on the style of conservative thinking and fundamental civilizational standards of political organization such conservative platforms operating in Russian politics as traditsionalistic, neo-eurasistic, modernistic, postmodernistic and others are selected and analyzed in the article. DOI:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s2p373
Researching the history of the establishment and development of the European integration process, as well as the legal nature of the European Union, we have seen that in the scientific literature there is very little information not only on the use of imperial experience in the integration process, but also on the concept of imperial federalism, which used to be rather popular at the end of ХIX and in the early twentieth century in the European empires. If in the English-language literature one can find a lot of literature on the theory and practice of imperial federalism in Great Britain, similar studies concerning the German and Austro-Hungarian empires practically had not been not carried out. Much more often it is possible to find out books about the German or Austrian federalism, but they generally deal with selected current issues or with the functioning of German or Austria federalism overall. In consideration of the importance of Germany in the European Union's development and functioning, it seems clear that the study of the German experience of integration within the framework of the German Empire under the Constitution of 1871 is long overdue. The purpose of the paper is to provide an overview and to close another gap in the literature on the role of the imperial concept of federalism in the development of modern integration process in Europe.
This article reads Jean-Luc Godard's film essay Histoire(s) du cinéma (1988–1998) as a contemporary artistic endeavour to resist the synchronising, standardising time of global capital, the pervasive uniformity of the global super-present, brought about by today's televisual and digital communications, which threatens to trivialise the different processes of memory and history, as well as art and culture in general. Taking its point of departure in Bernard Stiegler's observation that the final stage of capitalism is the control and synchronisation of "available brain time," the article argues that Godard's work opposes this control and synchronisation of our minds through an aesthetics of contemporaneity. The argument is based on the development of a theoretical framework that combines recent theories of contemporaneity with reflections on the politics of images. Focusing on the ways in which the Holocaust is remembered in Histoire(s) du cinéma, the article deals with Godard's image-political creation of temporal contemporaneity through a montage of clips of old films and newsreels, photographs, stills, images of paintings, new footage, advertisements, music, sound and voice recordings, textual citation, narration and commentary.
Although a 'product' of the contemporary period, environmental history brings other disciplines, such as the natural sciences, to bear upon our understanding of contemporary history. It also expands our view of the contemporary era as one essentially linked to earlier epochs, linking twentieth-century ideas like the 'environment' to earlier special and cultural concepts. Environmental history complicates our view of contemporary history, challenging assumptions of modernization with narratives of decline and destruction. Environmental history, then, broadens our understanding of contemporary history, adding cultural, social, and scientific dimensions to deeply political issues.
The paper attempts a subaltern reading of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar's Annihilation of Caste and tries to highlight the importance of the speech as a subaltern script in the contemporary world. It foregrounds how subaltern voices are supressed in India with the influence of religious and caste politics. The representation of the subaltern mass is problematized by this nexus which further leads to a total control over their lives. A resurrection of silenced voices is the need of the hour.
The article deals with the semantic and historico-philosophical peculiarities of the formation of the contemporaneity phenomenon, as a set of ideological and worldview attitudes relevant to our age. It is indicated that the term «contemporaneity» itself was used so as to define the temporal and semantic distinction between the old (former) and the actual (present). At the same time, what was emphasized, was the indispensable historical change of the «old» to the «new» and the undeniable value superiority of «modern» (anti-ancient) over the «past» (premature). Simultaneously, the western tradition preserved a generally favorable attitude to the «classical» as to the authoritative supertemporal «topicality», the best sample of which for a long time considered to be the spiritual heritage of antiquity. Each and every time working out a different, «new» attitude towards it, the subsequent generations thus were substantiating «their own» contemporaneity. The significance of the philosophical and semiotic approach in the study of the determinant characteristics of the Western civilization during the last centuries is emphasized herein, namely: acceleration, emancipation, and democratization. In particular, the identification of the nature of the relations between «modernity», «modernization» and «Modern» remains among the insufficiently studied aspects of the issue in question. It has been substantiated that the very history of the contemporaneity can be considered in the synchronic and diachronic planes, where the first one takes into account, first and foremost, the actual «turning points» and the actions of their immediate creators, participants or witnesses, while the second one builds a logically related time sequence between what has already been done, what is now in the process of implementation and what has not yet been implemented. With the help of the «temporal layers» concept introduced by R. Koselleck, it has been established that the novelty of our era was formed under the influence of both temporal and substantive– and value-based parameters. It has been specified herein that: a) its components could differ even within one ideologically homogeneous period; b) each «contemporaneity», but for the uniqueness of its formation, also involves the inheritance of a greater or lesser number of «layers» of the already by-past shared history; c) the reoccurrence and even predictability of changes that determine the actual «spirit» of the epoch, does not deny either the radicalization of their potential meanings, nor the particular specificity of their implementation. On the example of the «modernity» of the classical paradigm in the Modern era, it has been proved that its components could differ even within a single chronological period. The basics that shared the common mathesis universalis principle were functioning in one plane, while the second plane demonstrated a high level of critical guidance to the Cartesian principles. Consequently, the Cartesian-modern interpretation of «contemporaneity» faced a semantic dispute with another interpretation. Their confrontation successfully played the role of auxiliary «causative agents» in the formation of the modern age, which convincingly linked its progress with Cartesianism. This can be illustrated by several examples: the famous intellectual «Quarrel of the Ancients and the Moderns» (fr. «Querelle des Anciens et des Modernes»); philosophical essay by J.-J. Rousseau «Discourse on the Sciences and Arts» (fr. «Discours sur les sciences et les arts»); the emergence of a new discipline – aesthetics, which diversified the traditional ideas about the canons of beauty; finally, the end to the monopoly of historians on the study of the history of contemporaneity. It has been proved that such understanding of modernization also influenced the new content of the problematic questions as to the past, present and future. The answers to them highlighted the value and emphasized the uniqueness of the contemporaneity, which is happening now and is actually implemented. Non-present was understood as the past or not yet realized «contemporaneity», the driving force of which was progress. In accordance with the vision outlined herein, certain suggestions have been made regarding the interpretation of the key elements of the contemporaneity, namely: «modernity» is understood as the leading thought tradition, as well as spiritual and mental peculiarity of the Western worldview over the last five hundred years. It is implemented practically in the processes of «modernization» of sociocultural human existence and is guided by a solid guideline for its rationocentric emancipation. The mentioned tendencies reached their peak during the historical period called «Modern» (17th – beginning of the 19th c.), and subsequently entered the most actual phase of contemporaneity called the post-Modern (or Postmodern) which finally radicalized the experience of modernization accumulated in the past. Key words: contemporaneity, modernization, modernity, Modern, actuality ; У статті розглянуто семантичні та історико-філософські особливості становлення феномену сучасності як сукупності актуальних нашій добі ідейно-світоглядних настанов. Обґрунтовано, що саму історію сучасності можна розглядати в синхронічній і діахронічній площинах. Підкреслено значущість і перспективність філософсько-семіотичного підходу у вивченні визначальних прикмет західної цивілізації впродовж останніх століть, саме: пришвидшення, емансипації, демократизації. До недостатньо досліджених аспектів порушеної проблематики належить, зокрема, з'ясування природи зв'язку між модерністю, модернізацією і Модерном. За допомогою концепції «часових пластів» Р. Козеллека з'ясовано, що новизна нашої доби сформувалася під впливом і часових, і субстанційно-ціннісних параметрів. На прикладі «модерності» класичної парадигми у період Модерну доведено, що її складники могли відрізнятися навіть у межах одного хронологічного періоду. Проаналізовано, як саме їх протистояння успішно виконували роль допоміжних «збудників» у формуванні новітньої доби, яка донедавна переконливо пов'язувала свій поступ із картезіанством. Відповідно до окресленого бачення, сформульовано деякі пропозиції стосовно тлумачення ключових складників сучасності, а саме: модерність розуміємо як провідну мисленнєву традицію і духово-ментальну своєрідність західного світорозуміння впродовж останніх п'ятсот років. Вона практично реалізується у процесах модернізації соціокультурного буття людини і керується твердою настановою на його раціоцентричну емансипацію. Згадані тенденції свого найвищого розквіту сягнули в історичний період Модерну (XVII – поч. ХІХ ст.), а згодом увійшли у найактуальнішу фазу сучасності, названої пост-Модерною (або Постмодерном), яка остаточно радикалізувала накопичені минулим досвіди осучаснення. Ключові слова: сучасність, модернізація, модерність, Модерн, новітність
On of the border of of XX–XXI of of centuries the phenomenon of terrorism substantially changed: happened him transnationalization, that promoted the measure of danger of threat considerably. The of terrorism explained by social, religious, ideological and political reasons actively co - operates with the different forms of the organized crime, such, as a drug dealing, illegal trade in arms, legalization of the incomes got a criminal way. In of the conditions of transfrontal character of terrorist threat of the special value the factor of adjusting of valuable international cooperation purchased on regional and global levels. However of absence of the internationally – confessed determination of concept «terrorism» creates possibility for the policy of «double standards». ; На рубеже XX–XXI веков феномен терроризма существенно изменился: произошла его транснационализация, что значительно повысило степень опасности угрозы. Терроризм, мотивированный социальными, религиозными, идеологическими и политическими причинами, активно взаимодействует с различными формами организованной преступности, такими, как наркобизнес, незаконная торговля оружием, легализация доходов, полученных преступным путем. В условиях трансграничного характера террористической угрозы особое значение приобрел фактор налаживания полноценного международного сотрудничества на региональном и глобальном уровнях. Однако отсутствие международно-признанного определения понятия «терроризм» создает возможность для политики «двойных стандартов». ; На межі XX – XXI століть феномен тероризму істотно змінився: сталася його транснаціоналізація, що значно підвищило міру небезпеки загрози.Тероризм, мотивований соціальними, релігійними, ідеологічними та політичними причинами, активно взаємодіє з різними формами організованої злочинності, такими, як наркобізнес, незаконна торгівля зброєю, легалізація прибутків, отриманих злочинним шляхом. В умовах трансграничного характеру терористичної загрози особливого значення набув чинник налагодження повноцінної міжнародної співпраці на регіональному та глобальному рівнях. Проте відсутність міжнародновизнаного визначення поняття «тероризм» створює можливість для політики «подвійних стандартів».
