Suchergebnisse

This article explores various interlinks and connections between philosophy and the other sciences, namely, linguistics, cognitive sciences, sociology, economy, political, ideological and human life studies. Those interlinks and connections are analysed within three methodological paradigms. The first paradigm binds cognising, defining and speaking. The second paradigm integrates assembling, self-organising and social engineering. The third one connects working, living and sensing together. According to the aforementioned paradigms, this issue is divided into three chapters. This article, in turn, delivers concise presentations of articles belonging to the above-mentioned chapters. Those presentations interlink various issues of different sciences, such as solving paradoxes of knowability, delivering reliable definitions of transdisciplinary knowledge, identifying means and mechanisms of linguistic subjectivity, proposing effective ways and procedures of self-organization of democracy, discovering relevant methods of social engineering for strengthening democratic welfare state, offering feasible scenarios of Europeanization processes, establishing balance between work, recreation and health, and identifying common sense phenomenon with social life-world.

This article analyses and interprets multiple links and interconnections among philosophy, economics, management as well as cognitive, cultural, social, political and educational sciences. Those links and interconnections are investigated in the frames of four methodological paradigms. The first paradigm connects counting, managing and reflecting. The second paradigm is a certain combination of discovering, thinking and solving. The third paradigm binds acting as overcoming, choosing and alternating. Finally, the fourth one relates acts of criticism, creation and construction. This issue is divided into four sections corresponding to the above-mentioned paradigms. This article, in turn, gives concise reviews and interpretations of articles presented in each of the aforementioned sections. Those reviews and interpretations link and bring together different topics of diverse disciplines, such as econometric counting, participation of youth in family business, transformation of classical concept of causality, solving logical paradoxes, trying to overcome various forms of nihilism, seeking alternatives to consumerism, searching for social equality, safety, security and inclusion.

The grandees of so called second scholasticism – Dominican Francisco de Vitoria (1480 –1546) and Jesuit Francisco Suarez (1548 –1617) – must be reckoned among founders of international law theory. Their works, issued before famous treatise "On the Law of War and Peace" by another father of international law Hugo Grotius, contained solid system of that law. This system, referring to Roman law, the works of Thomas Aquinas, St. Isidore of Seville, St. Raymund of Penafort and John of Legnano, analyzed nature and origin of international law, declared inseparable rights of nations and states, determined sufficient conditions for defending those rights in just war (bellum justum). De Vitoria and Suarez regarded international law as a set of customary rules and principles regulating relations among all or almost all the nations and states of the world. Those rules were considered the certain principles of natural law accommodated to the sphere of international relations. According to de Vitoria and Suarez, by trial and error, nations and states gradually derive from natural law more or less general customs of international conduct. One of the most significant aspects of international law theory in second scholasticism is the list of fundamental and inseparable rights of nations and states,presented by de Vitoria. This list includes the rights to existence, equality and political sovereignty; the right to international migration and trade; the right and duty to lend a military aid to nation, victimized by domestic tyrants or threatened or attacked by external aggressor. These rights must be regarded as a certain equivalent of some principles of modern international law, namely, sovereignty of states; noninterference into internal affairs; interdiction to use force and even to threaten by it; equality and self-determination of nations; freedom of migration; humanitarian intervention etc. ; Šiame straipsnyje nagrinėjama tarptautinės teisės teorija vadinamosios antrosios scholastikos (XVI – XVIII a.) klasikų F. de Vitorijos ir F. Suareso veikaluose. Aptariami esminiai šios teorijos objektai: tarptautinės teisės prigimtis ir kilmė, neatimamos tautų ir valstybių teisės bei jų gynimo teisingame kare sąlygos. Tiriant šiuos dalykus daugiausia taikomas lyginamasis doksografinis metodas. Prieinama prie išvados, kad de Vitorija ir Suaresas laikytini vienais iš tarptautinės teisės teorijos pradininkų ir kad jų pažiūros artimos kito tarptautinės teisės "tevo" – H. Grocijaus – teorijai. Pabrėžiama, kad nemažai antrosios scholastikos tarptautinės teisės principų – paprotys kaip tarptautinės teisės norma, tautų teisės į lygybę, politinę nepriklausomybę, tarptautinę migraciją ir humanitarinę intervenciją, tautų teisių pažeidimas kaip teisingo karo priežastis, ambasadorių ir taikių gyventojų neliečiamybė karo metu, draudimas žudyti karo belaisvius ir įkaitus, reparacijų atitiktis patirtajai žalai, religinių karų neteisėtumas – aktualūs ir mūsų dienomis.

Straipsnyje analizuojama W. Jameso pragmatizmo teorija, apimanti tam tikrą pažinimo metodą ir tiesos sampratą. Pragmatinis metodas bando išspręsti metafizinius ginčus jų keliamas teorines alternatyvas pateikdamas empirinės verifikacijos testui. Pragmatinis metodas traktuoja žmogiškąjį pažinimą kaip nesibaigiantį procesą, kuriame verifikuojamos teorijos tėra laikini instrumentai pasauliui pažinti ir valdyti. Naujos idėjos keičia senąsias, o pastarosios ne išnyksta, bet tampa sudedamaisiais naujų idėjų komponentais. Būtinas ir teorijų praktinis pritaikymas: pažinimo procese teisingomis privalu pripažinti tas teorijas, kurios leidžia žmogui daugiau ar mažiau užvaldyti aplinkinį pasaulį. Pragmatinė tiesos samprata pripažįsta tiesą kaip idėjos ir realybės atitikimo santykį. Vienos teisingos idėjos, koncepcijos, teorijos (gamtamokslinės, sveiko proto ir pan.) atitinka mūsų išorinės patirties, kitos (metafizinės grynojo proto idėjos, melioristinė etika ir pan.) – vidinės patirties pasaulį.

On the basis of Martin Buber's philosophy, the article analyses the links between the dialogue and human existence. In the beginning of the first part, the definition of Buberian dialogue is analysed from the perspective of relation. This perspective shows that primary relations may be of twofold character because there is a constant fight between the two I and It. This shows that human existence is not static and undergoes a gradual development. It is also under constant evolvement and faces a choice. Consumer society and mass media are said to contribute to gradual establishment of the relation I–It, which results in a loss of direct interpersonal communication. In the second part of the article on the basis of the opposition between the dialogue and monologue, different ways of human existence are discussed. The opinion that a dialogic relation is a means for an individual to ascend from the inauthentic to authentic dimension of existence is substantiated. Thus, approaching a dialogue from the perspective of Buber's dialogic communication, it does not have a well-defined structure or any universal models. It is the experience lived through in an intuitive and unique way. In this respect, the dialogue remains the goal and mystery of person's existential life.

This article restores the peculiar ethical-cultural cartography from the philosophical fragments of Ancient Greek Cynicism. Namely, the fragments of Anthistenes, Diogenes of Sinope, Crates, Dio Chrysostom as well as of the ancient historians of philosophy (Diogenes Laertius and Joanes
Stobaeus) are mainly analyzed and interpreted. The methods of comparative analysis as well of rational restoration are applied in this article.The authors of the article concentrate on the main characteristics of the above mentioned cartography, that is, the contradiction between maps
of nature and civilization. The article comes to the conclusion that the basis of this contradiction is the concept of the main value as well as virtue in the above mentioned cynicism, namely, natural radical temperance. According to ancient cynics, this virtue is absolutely incompatible with
pleasure-driven civilization, as the latter annihilates the former. Therefore, cynics interpreted the whole territory of the world known at that time as divided between maps of nature and civilization that never overlap or even intersect. Moreover, according to ancient cynics, the territory
covered by maps of civilization is considerably smaller than that enframed by the maps of nature. Moreover, the areas of nature are continuously being diminished, as civilization resolutely goes ahead. In such a situation that threatens survival of human nature the only possible way out is
a return to the natural value of radical temperance. After cynics, the only effective strategy of achieving that challenging goal is askesis as excercises of temperance dedicated both to body and spirit.The authors of the article also give a certain SWOT analysis of the above mentioned
cartography in the context of contemporary society. According to them, such a cartography possesses both strong and weak points. The main weak point is the contradiction itself between maps of culture and civilization. As a matter of fact, civilization does not annihilate the possibility of
natural temperance, whereas a human being, according to his/her nature, is a creator of culture and civilization. On the other hand, the main positive aspect is an emphasis on virtue of temperance, which is actual, significant and relevant in any epoch, culture and civilization, and which
is pretty much forgotten nowadays.