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.

The ideological evolution of the intellectual and political movement existed in postrevolutionary Russian emigration in the third and fourth decades of the XX century is analyzed in this dissertation. The ideological transformation of the Eurasians movement (which was defined as "degeneration of Russian idea to the Kremlin mafia universal ideal of hegemony") was determined by the rivalry between different conceptions which were represented by N.Trubetzkoy, P.Savicky, G.Florovsky and L.Karsavin. L.Karsavin role (lived in Kaunas since 1928) in this dramatic movement's evolution which culmination was the split of the movement in 1929 is analyzed in this dissertation.

The ideological evolution of the intellectual and political movement existed in postrevolutionary Russian emigration in the third and fourth decades of the XX century is analyzed in this dissertation. The ideological transformation of the Eurasians movement (which was defined as "degeneration of Russian idea to the Kremlin mafia universal ideal of hegemony") was determined by the rivalry between different conceptions which were represented by N.Trubetzkoy, P.Savicky, G.Florovsky and L.Karsavin. L.Karsavin role (lived in Kaunas since 1928) in this dramatic movement's evolution which culmination was the split of the movement in 1929 is analyzed in this dissertation.

The ideological evolution of the intellectual and political movement existed in postrevolutionary Russian emigration in the third and fourth decades of the XX century is analyzed in this dissertation. The ideological transformation of the Eurasians movement (which was defined as "degeneration of Russian idea to the Kremlin mafia universal ideal of hegemony") was determined by the rivalry between different conceptions which were represented by N.Trubetzkoy, P.Savicky, G.Florovsky and L.Karsavin. L.Karsavin role (lived in Kaunas since 1928) in this dramatic movement's evolution which culmination was the split of the movement in 1929 is analyzed in this dissertation.

The agonistic model of democracy says that the dimension of antagonism is inherent in human relations. The ineradicability of antagonism, it is argued, is constitutive of the political. The main task of this model is to establish us/them discrimination in a way that is compatible with pluralist democracy. On the one hand, agonistic democracy criticizes neutral and procedural aspects of liberal democracy, on the other hand, both agonistic and liberal models accepts the priority of pluralism and individual rights. In summary, the processes of liberalization and democratization are conceptually contradictory. The ethos of liberalism, especially the ideal of negative liberty, reduces the substantial concept of equality to indifferent equal liberty. The principle of moral equality is gradually transformed to the principle of moral individualism. The deontological liberalism ignores the main democratic question – how to establish the democratic community with both the autonomy of persons and the shared understanding of the good? In this way political liberalism negates the ideal of democracy – the identity between governing and governed.

The agonistic model of democracy says that the dimension of antagonism is inherent in human relations. The ineradicability of antagonism, it is argued, is constitutive of the political. The main task of this model is to establish us/them discrimination in a way that is compatible with pluralist democracy. On the one hand, agonistic democracy criticizes neutral and procedural aspects of liberal democracy, on the other hand, both agonistic and liberal models accepts the priority of pluralism and individual rights. In summary, the processes of liberalization and democratization are conceptually contradictory. The ethos of liberalism, especially the ideal of negative liberty, reduces the substantial concept of equality to indifferent equal liberty. The principle of moral equality is gradually transformed to the principle of moral individualism. The deontological liberalism ignores the main democratic question – how to establish the democratic community with both the autonomy of persons and the shared understanding of the good? In this way political liberalism negates the ideal of democracy – the identity between governing and governed.

The agonistic model of democracy says that the dimension of antagonism is inherent in human relations. The ineradicability of antagonism, it is argued, is constitutive of the political. The main task of this model is to establish us/them discrimination in a way that is compatible with pluralist democracy. On the one hand, agonistic democracy criticizes neutral and procedural aspects of liberal democracy, on the other hand, both agonistic and liberal models accepts the priority of pluralism and individual rights. In summary, the processes of liberalization and democratization are conceptually contradictory. The ethos of liberalism, especially the ideal of negative liberty, reduces the substantial concept of equality to indifferent equal liberty. The principle of moral equality is gradually transformed to the principle of moral individualism. The deontological liberalism ignores the main democratic question – how to establish the democratic community with both the autonomy of persons and the shared understanding of the good? In this way political liberalism negates the ideal of democracy – the identity between governing and governed.

The agonistic model of democracy says that the dimension of antagonism is inherent in human relations. The ineradicability of antagonism, it is argued, is constitutive of the political. The main task of this model is to establish us/them discrimination in a way that is compatible with pluralist democracy. On the one hand, agonistic democracy criticizes neutral and procedural aspects of liberal democracy, on the other hand, both agonistic and liberal models accepts the priority of pluralism and individual rights. In summary, the processes of liberalization and democratization are conceptually contradictory. The ethos of liberalism, especially the ideal of negative liberty, reduces the substantial concept of equality to indifferent equal liberty. The principle of moral equality is gradually transformed to the principle of moral individualism. The deontological liberalism ignores the main democratic question – how to establish the democratic community with both the autonomy of persons and the shared understanding of the good? In this way political liberalism negates the ideal of democracy – the identity between governing and governed.

From time to time in the fields of philosophy and sociology of science the political vocabulary is employed. Certain processes, which take place in science, are described using military notions such as "conflict", "war", "revolution" etc. This article concentrates on question, whether the vocabulary and instruments of political theories could enable more adequate understanding of the scientific processes that are socially influenced? In order to answer the latter question, Carl Schmitt's political theory (concept of the political, friend-enemy distinction, notions of war and exception) is employed. The main objective of this article is to figure out possible benefits of the Schmitt's ideas for current discussions in the field of philosophy of social sciences and humanities.

From time to time in the fields of philosophy and sociology of science the political vocabulary is employed. Certain processes, which take place in science, are described using military notions such as "conflict", "war", "revolution" etc. This article concentrates on question, whether the vocabulary and instruments of political theories could enable more adequate understanding of the scientific processes that are socially influenced? In order to answer the latter question, Carl Schmitt's political theory (concept of the political, friend-enemy distinction, notions of war and exception) is employed. The main objective of this article is to figure out possible benefits of the Schmitt's ideas for current discussions in the field of philosophy of social sciences and humanities.

The term "liberal democracy" hides the conflict of two different philosophies. Liberal metaphysics is based on the idea of thing, while democracy is based on the idea of action & process. Democratic process does not have any core of ideas, which is typical of liberalism. The goal of liberal political philosophy is to circumscribe political power. The aim of democracy is the creation of self-government of the citizens. Liberals do not see many things that are important to democrats: common good, community, nation, history & cultural identity. It is possible to speak about fundamental conflict between liberal individualism & general will of democracy. In discussions about democracy there is always at least some confusion about the role of liberalism & democracy. Contemporary theoreticians of democracy do not want to admit that the drawbacks of liberal political philosophy necessarily become the weaknesses of democracy. This is the price we have to pay for the fusion of liberalism & democracy. The drawing of demarcation lines between the spheres of influence of democracy & liberalism today is the main goal of the theory of democracy. Adapted from the source document.

The controversial No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act was signed into law in the United States on January 8, 2002. It was co-authored by Democratic Representative George Miller from California and Democratic U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy from Massachusetts. NCLB enacted the philosophy of outcome-based education which promotes setting higher expectations and establishing measurable goals that lead to significant enhancement of student educational achievement. The Act bases primary and secondary education in the U.S. on four pillars.