Abstract:

Abstract:

Abstract: The article considers the influence of T.S. Eliot’s creative work on Canadian media theorist H.M. McLuhan. Eliot’s poetry and prose formed the aesthetic taste of the Canadian researcher and became material for his concepts. McLuhan was sure that creative innovations used by Eliot reflect the processes that were going in media in 1920-1940 s. The analysis of Eliot’s influence on McLuhan is the key to understanding the legacy of the Canadian scholar.

Keywords: cultural sciences, G. M. McLuhan, mass media, literature of modernism, communication, Canada, English-American poetry, interaction of literature and media.

Abstract: The article considers the issues of development of the post-industrial society and a new stage of it, - transformation to information society. Most of the focus is on defi ning and differentiating between terms of ‘knowledge’ and ‘information’. The author makes an attempt to thoroughly defi ne and analyze the term ‘information’ taking into account the growth of importance of information processes in social and political life.

Keywords: philosophy, society, knowledge, information, post-industrial, interpretation, communication, rationality, technologies, ideology

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2020.1.32018

Abstract: This article discusses the image of philosophy in modern world in the context of synthesis of the various intellectual and cultural traditions. The author explores the correlation between philosophy and politics, knowledge and power as a certain discursive practice that in an organic part of Western European culture; demonstrates the limits on establishing dialogue between philosophical traditions, schools and strands of thought. Leaning on the ideas of Kant and Foucault in viewing the phenomenon of Enlightenment, the author analyzes the role and place of a philosopher in the political and intellectual environment. The procedure of double sample realized by the philosopher holds the risk of losing its position on the pedestal taken by intellectualism and serve ideology instead, since orientation towards socially-pragmatic actions inevitably requires involvement into a political game. It demands conscious demarcation of the two types of decisions made: on the one hand, it is an existential choice pertinent to the held by philosopher intellectual position; while on the other – a socially-pragmatic, associated with interval choices, not affecting the ultimate grounds of existence. Due to the fact that preservation of the autonomy of philosophical territory in the era of globalization is an acute problem, there is a need for extremely cautious attitude to any attempts of shifting traditions and cultures, which usually assign primary role to the “philosophical reason”.

Keywords: existentialism, dialogue of cultures, theory and practice, philosophy and politics, intercultural philosophy, autonomy of philosophy, Enlightenment, tradition, East-West, globalism

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2015.6.15091

Abstract: The subject under research of the present article is the problem of free will. The author of the article presents a critical review of one of the most important modern arguments against compatibilism in the free will debate, Derk Pereboom's 'Manipulation Argument'. The Manipulation Argument is built upon the analogy between external manipulation of the agent's actions and causal determination. Based on that analogy, Pereboom concludes that agents who act in a situation of causal determination do not feel moral responsibility. The author of the present article suggests that we should extend the borders of Pereboom's mental experiment. In the course of his research the author comes to the conclusion that the Manipulation Argument does not prove the incompatibility of determinism and moral responsibility. In the author's opinion, Pereboom's argument only proves that moral responsiblity requires an integrated personality and sequential personal history. The method of the present research is the conceptual analysis mostly used in analytical philosophy. The author also conducts mental experiments to illustrate and prove his point of view. The main conclusion of the present research is the author's proof of the failure of Peterboom's manipulation argument. The author of the article shows that the manipulation argument does not prove the statement that determinism and moral responsibility are incompatible. According to the author, Pereboom's argument only proves that moral responsiblity requires an integrated personality and sequential personal history. 

Keywords: free will, freedom of the will, moral responsibility, Derk Pereboom, compatibilism, Manipulation Argument, four-case argument, determinism, philosophy of freedom, incompatibilism, Michael McKenna

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2015.6.66624

Abstract: The subject under research of the present article is the problem of free will. The author of the article presents a critical review of one of the most important modern arguments against compatibilism in the free will debate, Derk Pereboom's 'Manipulation Argument'. The Manipulation Argument is built upon the analogy between external manipulation of the agent's actions and causal determination. Based on that analogy, Pereboom concludes that agents who act in a situation of causal determination do not feel moral responsibility. The author of the present article suggests that we should extend the borders of Pereboom's mental experiment. In the course of his research the author comes to the conclusion that the Manipulation Argument does not prove the incompatibility of determinism and moral responsibility. In the author's opinion, Pereboom's argument only proves that moral responsiblity requires an integrated personality and sequential personal history. The method of the present research is the conceptual analysis mostly used in analytical philosophy. The author also conducts mental experiments to illustrate and prove his point of view. The main conclusion of the present research is the author's proof of the failure of Peterboom's manipulation argument. The author of the article shows that the manipulation argument does not prove the statement that determinism and moral responsibility are incompatible. According to the author, Pereboom's argument only proves that moral responsiblity requires an integrated personality and sequential personal history. 

Keywords: free will, freedom of the will, moral responsibility, Derk Pereboom, compatibilism, Manipulation Argument, four-case argument, determinism, philosophy of freedom, incompatibilism, Michael McKenna