Abstract:

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2019.4.29656

Abstract: The object of this research is the eco-friendly and eco-phobic trends in social consciousness. The subject of this research is the concept of religious eco-friendliness. Due to the eco-friendly attitude towards nature, a human tends to minimize the environmental damage. On the other hand, human design within the framework of transhumanism in modern society, combined with technocratism, hedonism and eco-phobia, does not allow improving the quality of life. The theoretical aspect of this work consists in the insufficient study of the philosophy of ecology, eco-friendly and eco-phobic indicators of civilizational and religious development as an ecological worldview; practical aspect is associated with the need for ensuring favorable living environment in Russia. Civilizational importance regards to global sustainability of the development of humanity and the need for positioning nature as the object of special care and reverence. The following conclusions were made: the attitude of religious problematic towards environment and life can be reflected in certain indicators confirming the eco-friendliness of religion; the religions based on eco-friendly views, possess particular characteristics and actualize for solving the ecological issues. The author examines the interaction between eco-friendly and eco-phobic strategies of human and society in the context of religious consciousness. Religion is viewed as a constraining factor in the relationship of human and environment. Transhumanism and technocratism as the strategies of civilizational development are subjected to critical analysis. The creative use of eco-friendly traditions in noosphere dialogue manifests as the resource for accessing the new civilizational paths of development.

Keywords: religion of nature, religious culture, noosphere, quality of life, ecophobicity, ecophile thinking, religious ecology, phytolatry, conservatism, zoolatry

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2015.5.11151

Abstract: The author of the article analyzes Mahatma Gandhi's social and philosophical views from the point of view of the modern definition of 'human dignity'. In this article the author clarifies anthropological views of the Indian philosopher and his views on personal development. Gandhi's struggle for the rights of the people who had the lowest social status in the Indian society is demonstrated to be the practical example of the philosopher's acknowledgement of their dignity. The author of the article also considers Satyagraha as the mutually related moral development of the two actors: Satyagraha (i.e. someone who practices Satyagraha) and his opponent that happen as a result of practical implementation of a number of ideas referring to human dignity. Based on the categorial analysis, the author also specifies the key terms and concepts in Gandhi's philosophy (human dignity, development, freedom, self-rule, endurance of suffering, shame and dialogue) and examines how these terms are related to one another. Analyzing Satyagraha from the point of view of modern views on human dignity developed in the Western philosophy, the author suggests that we should view different components of Gandhi's philosophy as the elements of his idea of personal development. For the first time in the academic literature the author of the article studies the mechanism of transfering the impulse for development from a Satyagraha to his opponent as a result of their interaction during Satyagraha campaign. Acknowledgement and development of one's own dignity combined with a respectful treatment of the Other's dignity as they are practiced by a Satyagraha are viewed as the condition for similar changes in the internal life of the opponent and transfromation of an initially conflict situation into a dialogue. 

Keywords: human dignity, Mahatma Gandhi, Satyagraha, freedom, self-rule, endurance of suffering, sense of shame, development, the Other, dialogue

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2015.5.66522

Abstract: The author of the article analyzes Mahatma Gandhi's social and philosophical views from the point of view of the modern definition of 'human dignity'. In this article the author clarifies anthropological views of the Indian philosopher and his views on personal development. Gandhi's struggle for the rights of the people who had the lowest social status in the Indian society is demonstrated to be the practical example of the philosopher's acknowledgement of their dignity. The author of the article also considers Satyagraha as the mutually related moral development of the two actors: Satyagraha (i.e. someone who practices Satyagraha) and his opponent that happen as a result of practical implementation of a number of ideas referring to human dignity. Based on the categorial analysis, the author also specifies the key terms and concepts in Gandhi's philosophy (human dignity, development, freedom, self-rule, endurance of suffering, shame and dialogue) and examines how these terms are related to one another. Analyzing Satyagraha from the point of view of modern views on human dignity developed in the Western philosophy, the author suggests that we should view different components of Gandhi's philosophy as the elements of his idea of personal development. For the first time in the academic literature the author of the article studies the mechanism of transfering the impulse for development from a Satyagraha to his opponent as a result of their interaction during Satyagraha campaign. Acknowledgement and development of one's own dignity combined with a respectful treatment of the Other's dignity as they are practiced by a Satyagraha are viewed as the condition for similar changes in the internal life of the opponent and transfromation of an initially conflict situation into a dialogue. 

Keywords: human dignity, Mahatma Gandhi, Satyagraha, freedom, self-rule, endurance of suffering, sense of shame, development, the Other, dialogue

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2016.7.16230

Abstract: The author turns attention to one of the most acute problems of mankind – a problem of violence. At the same time, the author notes that the questions of origin, causes, control and prevention of human aggression just recently became a subject for s scientific research. Using a method of comparative analysis, this work examines three most significant theories of emergence of human aggression. Aggression as instinctive behavior is being studied from the positions psychoanalytic approach (S. Freud, etc.) and evolutionary approach. The latter includes ethological approach (K. Lorentz, N. Tinbergen, etc.), a hunting hypothesis (R. Ardri, D. Morris, etc.), and sociobiological approach (E. Wilson, R. Trivers, etc.). These approaches lean towards the fact that aggression has a biological, instinctive basis, in other words, aggression is an inherent instinct. The theory of motivation explains aggression as feeling of frustration (J. Dollard, N. Miller L. Berkowitz, etc.). Theories that state there is a priority of influence of the social upon the natural (theories of social learning (A.Bandura, etc.) and social influence (J. Tedeshchi, etc.)) prove that namely social environment encourages and stimulates aggression. The author criticizes theories of human aggression and comes to a conclusion that the growth of moral responsibility for the consequences of their actions did not provide guarantees that the mankind will not destroy itself. Moral restrictions, regulations of global ethics are far behind the technological progress. A qualitatively new methodology is required.

Keywords: social learning theory, frustration theory, instinctive behavior, social, natural, aggressiveness, aggression, social influence theory, violence, responsibility

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2016.7.68065

Abstract: The author turns attention to one of the most acute problems of mankind – a problem of violence. At the same time, the author notes that the questions of origin, causes, control and prevention of human aggression just recently became a subject for s scientific research. Using a method of comparative analysis, this work examines three most significant theories of emergence of human aggression. Aggression as instinctive behavior is being studied from the positions psychoanalytic approach (S. Freud, etc.) and evolutionary approach. The latter includes ethological approach (K. Lorentz, N. Tinbergen, etc.), a hunting hypothesis (R. Ardri, D. Morris, etc.), and sociobiological approach (E. Wilson, R. Trivers, etc.). These approaches lean towards the fact that aggression has a biological, instinctive basis, in other words, aggression is an inherent instinct. The theory of motivation explains aggression as feeling of frustration (J. Dollard, N. Miller L. Berkowitz, etc.). Theories that state there is a priority of influence of the social upon the natural (theories of social learning (A.Bandura, etc.) and social influence (J. Tedeshchi, etc.)) prove that namely social environment encourages and stimulates aggression. The author criticizes theories of human aggression and comes to a conclusion that the growth of moral responsibility for the consequences of their actions did not provide guarantees that the mankind will not destroy itself. Moral restrictions, regulations of global ethics are far behind the technological progress. A qualitatively new methodology is required.

Keywords: social learning theory, frustration theory, instinctive behavior, social, natural, aggressiveness, aggression, social influence theory, violence, responsibility