Suchergebnisse

The paper presents an overview of analytical philosophy in Lithuania. It is observed that analytical philosophy had not been studied or developed in Lithuania before the 1970s, when Evaldas Nekrasas and Rolandas Pavilionis began their work in philosophy of science and philosophy of language, rooted in analytical tradition. The article discusses the works of Nekrasas and Pavilionis, as well as those of others (e.g., Degutis and Plesnys). It notes that analytical philosophy was the first non-Marxist trend of philosophy to be developed in post-war Lithuania, and thus it was of considerable influence at the time when the Marxist methodology had to be overthrown. Although the influence of analytical philosophy in Lithuania has diminished during later years in favour of postmodern trends, it is still evident in some recent works on philosophy of mind, philosophy of causation, and methodology of the humanities and social sciences. It has also made a strong impact upon the development of political philosophy and research in the history of positivism.

The paper presents an overview of analytical philosophy in Lithuania. It is observed that analytical philosophy had not been studied or developed in Lithuania before the 1970s, when Evaldas Nekrasas and Rolandas Pavilionis began their work in philosophy of science and philosophy of language, rooted in analytical tradition. The article discusses the works of Nekrasas and Pavilionis, as well as those of others (e.g., Degutis and Plesnys). It notes that analytical philosophy was the first non-Marxist trend of philosophy to be developed in post-war Lithuania, and thus it was of considerable influence at the time when the Marxist methodology had to be overthrown. Although the influence of analytical philosophy in Lithuania has diminished during later years in favour of postmodern trends, it is still evident in some recent works on philosophy of mind, philosophy of causation, and methodology of the humanities and social sciences. It has also made a strong impact upon the development of political philosophy and research in the history of positivism.

The paper presents an overview of analytical philosophy in Lithuania. It is observed that analytical philosophy had not been studied or developed in Lithuania before the 1970s, when Evaldas Nekrasas and Rolandas Pavilionis began their work in philosophy of science and philosophy of language, rooted in analytical tradition. The article discusses the works of Nekrasas and Pavilionis, as well as those of others (e.g., Degutis and Plesnys). It notes that analytical philosophy was the first non-Marxist trend of philosophy to be developed in post-war Lithuania, and thus it was of considerable influence at the time when the Marxist methodology had to be overthrown. Although the influence of analytical philosophy in Lithuania has diminished during later years in favour of postmodern trends, it is still evident in some recent works on philosophy of mind, philosophy of causation, and methodology of the humanities and social sciences. It has also made a strong impact upon the development of political philosophy and research in the history of positivism.

The paper presents an overview of analytical philosophy in Lithuania. It is observed that analytical philosophy had not been studied or developed in Lithuania before the 1970s, when Evaldas Nekrasas and Rolandas Pavilionis began their work in philosophy of science and philosophy of language, rooted in analytical tradition. The article discusses the works of Nekrasas and Pavilionis, as well as those of others (e.g., Degutis and Plesnys). It notes that analytical philosophy was the first non-Marxist trend of philosophy to be developed in post-war Lithuania, and thus it was of considerable influence at the time when the Marxist methodology had to be overthrown. Although the influence of analytical philosophy in Lithuania has diminished during later years in favour of postmodern trends, it is still evident in some recent works on philosophy of mind, philosophy of causation, and methodology of the humanities and social sciences. It has also made a strong impact upon the development of political philosophy and research in the history of positivism.

Over the last few decades, political philosophers have been formulating the identity of their discipline not merely in terms of their inner objective. An aggressive attack of political scientists contributed significantly towards the perception of the identity of political philosophy. The definition of the purpose of political philosophy became dependent on the existence of a strong external opponent. This was hardly the case with the political philosophers representing the former generations. They contributed towards development of political philosophy without thinking about guard against representatives of other sciences. During the last few decades, political philosophers have come up with the definition of the purpose of their discipline. But they do not adhere to it in their real philosophical investigations. This non-adherence is caused not by the lack of professional ethics, will power or by dissimulation. Political philosophy as a discipline is too broad and controversial to be enclosed in the framework of a single definition of purpose. The definition of the purpose formulated during several decades of debates with political scientists, is oriented towards the external rather than internal use.

Over the last few decades, political philosophers have been formulating the identity of their discipline not merely in terms of their inner objective. An aggressive attack of political scientists contributed significantly towards the perception of the identity of political philosophy. The definition of the purpose of political philosophy became dependent on the existence of a strong external opponent. This was hardly the case with the political philosophers representing the former generations. They contributed towards development of political philosophy without thinking about guard against representatives of other sciences. During the last few decades, political philosophers have come up with the definition of the purpose of their discipline. But they do not adhere to it in their real philosophical investigations. This non-adherence is caused not by the lack of professional ethics, will power or by dissimulation. Political philosophy as a discipline is too broad and controversial to be enclosed in the framework of a single definition of purpose. The definition of the purpose formulated during several decades of debates with political scientists, is oriented towards the external rather than internal use.

Over the last few decades, political philosophers have been formulating the identity of their discipline not merely in terms of their inner objective. An aggressive attack of political scientists contributed significantly towards the perception of the identity of political philosophy. The definition of the purpose of political philosophy became dependent on the existence of a strong external opponent. This was hardly the case with the political philosophers representing the former generations. They contributed towards development of political philosophy without thinking about guard against representatives of other sciences. During the last few decades, political philosophers have come up with the definition of the purpose of their discipline. But they do not adhere to it in their real philosophical investigations. This non-adherence is caused not by the lack of professional ethics, will power or by dissimulation. Political philosophy as a discipline is too broad and controversial to be enclosed in the framework of a single definition of purpose. The definition of the purpose formulated during several decades of debates with political scientists, is oriented towards the external rather than internal use.

Over the last few decades, political philosophers have been formulating the identity of their discipline not merely in terms of their inner objective. An aggressive attack of political scientists contributed significantly towards the perception of the identity of political philosophy. The definition of the purpose of political philosophy became dependent on the existence of a strong external opponent. This was hardly the case with the political philosophers representing the former generations. They contributed towards development of political philosophy without thinking about guard against representatives of other sciences. During the last few decades, political philosophers have come up with the definition of the purpose of their discipline. But they do not adhere to it in their real philosophical investigations. This non-adherence is caused not by the lack of professional ethics, will power or by dissimulation. Political philosophy as a discipline is too broad and controversial to be enclosed in the framework of a single definition of purpose. The definition of the purpose formulated during several decades of debates with political scientists, is oriented towards the external rather than internal use.

The paper explores the paradoxes of the political philosophy of liberalism. Liberal conception of justice is incapable of providing grounds for an identity of liberalism. Liberals do not have a moral conception of their own. This is a source of a paradox. Political identity points to morality and moral identity points to politics. The aim of this paper is to clarify this paradox. Political liberalism is based on certain assumptions of a philosophy of culture. Liberals defend a conception of culture which justifies their inconsistencies. They lack any coherent conception of morality and politics. The article is an attempt to prove this by using the "final position" – an alternative to the Rawlsian "original position".

The paper explores the paradoxes of the political philosophy of liberalism. Liberal conception of justice is incapable of providing grounds for an identity of liberalism. Liberals do not have a moral conception of their own. This is a source of a paradox. Political identity points to morality and moral identity points to politics. The aim of this paper is to clarify this paradox. Political liberalism is based on certain assumptions of a philosophy of culture. Liberals defend a conception of culture which justifies their inconsistencies. They lack any coherent conception of morality and politics. The article is an attempt to prove this by using the "final position" – an alternative to the Rawlsian "original position".

Examining identity in relation to globalization and migration, this book uses narratives and memoirs from contemporary authors who have lived 'in-between' two or more languages. It explores the human desire to find one's 'own place' in new cultural contexts, and looks at the role of language in shaping a sense of belonging in society.

This article is a short introduction to how interdisciplinary theoretical perspectives can be developed for analyzing the phenomenon of national mobilization. The successful mass mobilization in Lithuania demonstrantes that Soviet mental programming was not successful in changing, using Rorty's terminology, the most parochial terms in the final vocabularies of Lithuanians. National identity was preserved during the period of occupation, and provided the grounds for collective action. The success of mobilization (in the "noisy phase") was closely connected with national values that were preserved during the period of Soviet occupation (the "quiet phase"), using various unobtrusive practices of contention in the context of bureaucratic nationalism, when state institutions in Lithuania were employing people who were nationally conscious. This, when a political opportunity emerged, allowed a rapid mass mobilization led by Sąjūdis.

This article is a short introduction to how interdisciplinary theoretical perspectives can be developed for analyzing the phenomenon of national mobilization. The successful mass mobilization in Lithuania demonstrantes that Soviet mental programming was not successful in changing, using Rorty's terminology, the most parochial terms in the final vocabularies of Lithuanians. National identity was preserved during the period of occupation, and provided the grounds for collective action. The success of mobilization (in the "noisy phase") was closely connected with national values that were preserved during the period of Soviet occupation (the "quiet phase"), using various unobtrusive practices of contention in the context of bureaucratic nationalism, when state institutions in Lithuania were employing people who were nationally conscious. This, when a political opportunity emerged, allowed a rapid mass mobilization led by Sąjūdis.

This article is a short introduction to how interdisciplinary theoretical perspectives can be developed for analyzing the phenomenon of national mobilization. The successful mass mobilization in Lithuania demonstrantes that Soviet mental programming was not successful in changing, using Rorty's terminology, the most parochial terms in the final vocabularies of Lithuanians. National identity was preserved during the period of occupation, and provided the grounds for collective action. The success of mobilization (in the "noisy phase") was closely connected with national values that were preserved during the period of Soviet occupation (the "quiet phase"), using various unobtrusive practices of contention in the context of bureaucratic nationalism, when state institutions in Lithuania were employing people who were nationally conscious. This, when a political opportunity emerged, allowed a rapid mass mobilization led by Sąjūdis.