DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.1.10746

Abstract: The modern Protestant Bible hermeneutics has two main paradigms: the conservative paradigm and the liberal paradigm. The liberal hermeneutic paradigm was formed in XVIII -XIX centuries under the influence of the ideas of Enlightenment and Positivism. Later existentialism also had a significant influence on it.  The conservative paradigm as we know it was formed in the XIX century as a reaction to the spread of the liberal paradigm. The conservative hermeneutic paradigm is related to the conservative theological and metaphysical position in Protestantism.  These paradigms are the object of studies in this article. The article uses social philosophical analysis, comparative analysis, psychological analysis, and general scientific methods. Social and philosophical analysis allowed to uncover the influence of social and political elements on the later interpretation of sacral texts. With its help the author defines specific historical prerequisites for the development of hermeneutic strategies. The conservative movement has the most influence among the clergy, and interpretation based on conservative approach is often used in the preaching practice: for preaching, counseling talks and missionary work. Liberal approach has more influence in the academic circles. The two movements have mutual distrust towards each other. From the standpoint of conservative Protestants, the representatives of the liberal movement are doubtful Christians.  And from the standpoint of the liberal Protestant the conservative approach towards the Bible interpretation is hardly scientific.  The conservative approach is irrational (while not being mystical). At the same time, it should be noted that in the late XX century fundamentalism merged with the postmodernism, since these two approaches similarly distrust critical mindset.

DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.1.10709

Abstract: This article presents critical analysis of the article by J. Habermas "Religious tolerance  - the pacemaker for cultural rights". On one hand the author analyzes the strategy of cultural tolerance, which according to J. Habermas starts with the religious toleration mindset and it is finally reflected in the logic of the modern constitutional democratic society. On the other hand, the author continues his discussion with J. Habermas by speaking of the theory of interculture as a social and cultural strategy for the formation of the new European world.  Finally, the discussion concerns the logic of formation of the new European social and cultural area in the perspective of a widely perceived tolerance program, which in turn is widened to the extent of the logic of formation of interculturalism.  The author regards the position of J. Habermas as continuation of Kant's criticism of the rational mind, and considers it possible to add to his range of ethical terms the system of terms and connections, which allows for uniting the widely interpreted tolerance strategy with the elements of the European culture, which are expressed by the terms "naturalism" and "rationalism".  With such a widened understanding of the tolerance program the new European naturalism and rationalism are connected by the inner logic with the strategy of peaceful co-existence of variety of cultural worlds. They turn out to be the consequence of the direction towards the tolerant formation of the common world to live in.  In this sense, regarding the new European world as an embodiment of the "criticism of cultural mind" the author regards the position of J. Habermas as part of this criticism.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2014.1.10670

Abstract: The authors interpret noosphere development as a consciously managed nature oriented co-development of Human Being, Nature and Society, when the satisfaction of needs takes place with no harm for the Universe and later generations. The role of education today is like it has never been before. It may become a leader for the noosphere transition, and the link, by moving which one may resolve other problems of human society. Noosphere education does not deny previously existing systems, rather it takes the best of what humanity has developed  and suports the education with the knowledge of patterns of development of the noosphere system.  The authors formulate and substantiate the concept of semiotic representation of noosphere universum according to the teachings of hte V.I. Vernadskiy on transition from the biosphere to the noosphere.  The problems of noosphere universum are analyzed within the context of correlation of categoreis of "semiotics", "semiology", "fundamental noosphere law", "universal semiotic law", "language conscience", "semioconscience", "semiosphere", "infosphere", "biogeochemical energy", "noogenous biochemical energy", etc.  The philosophical and methodological analysis of the semiotic representation of the noosphere (noosphere reality) allows to suppose that the modern semiotic knowledge facilitates the formation of the new syntetic semiotic discipline - universum (noosphere) semiotics or semiosophy by developing within the lines mentioned by V.V. Ivanov and Y.S. Stepanov. Currently it is fair to speak of environmentalization of the world view, which is the form of humanization of knowledge.  Environmentalization serves the goal of spiritual and practical development of nature in order to form the system of "nature society", functioning "under control" (first of all technical and technological) of the people.  The process of transition from the biosphere to the noosphere viewed through the prism of semiotics and knowledge of the signs of the Universe turns out to be adequate to the cluster of principles of the modern natural sicence, allowing for understanding and explaining of the ways of development of the human civilization within the framework of the modern civilization processes. Semioconscience and semiotic thinking of Vernadksiy allow one to go outside the limits of scientific and religious understanding of noosphere to find symbolic and sign-oriented understanding of noosphere, guaranteeing the in-depth forms of noosphere discourse. The semioconscience may provide assistance for the deeper understanding of the processes of noosphere formation and the noosphere itself as an incomprehensible matter within the contexts of both the XX and the new XXI centuries.

DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.1.12096

Abstract: The article analyzes Kripke’s skeptical paradox, that is the interpretation of the Kripke-Wittgenstein problem of following the rule applied to the addition operation. The paradox states that it is impossible to naturalize the sense and the problem of following a rule in the networks of a classical (non-normative) naturalism. It is suggested to view the problem from the point of view of Wittgenstein’s normative naturalism. The notion of a normative disposition is introduced. The article criticizes the solution of the paradox recently suggested by Ginzborg, particularly her naturalistic “middle way” between the dispositionalism and mentalism. Kripke’s paradox and Ginzborg’s approach are analyzed within the networks of the interpretation of Wittgenstein’s second philosophy which is understood as a normative naturalism of language games that are natural and spontaneous at the same time. It is also found that the paradox appears as a result of neglecting of pragmatics and normative measurements of the operations. Ginzborg’s approach is close to Wittgenstein’s normative naturalism but the notion of primitive normalization which she introduces is not satisfying. It is more correct to speak not about the naturalism with the minimum of normalization added (as Ginzborg does) but about the normative naturalism.

DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.1.10630

Abstract: The article presents the results of the study of economic science at the level of philosophical fundamentals in comparable empiric and theoretical study level. The author reveals the phenomenon of economism, introducing the relevant term, discussing its influence on economics, being an important part of social life, which includes other spheres bearing negative influence of economism.  The object of studies includes interrelations between society, economics and the phenomenon of economism, which is an attempt of the society to submerge everything into economics, which is perceived as an all-inclusive reality in comparison towards the social reality. The methodological basis for the studies includes dialectics, and it is specialized with the methodological principles of objectivity, development, raising from abstract to specific, unity of historic and logical elements.  The methodological principles are complemented by the opposition of positive (classical) dialectics and negative  (new historical form of opposition of dialectics and metaphysics) dialectics.  It is shown that they have identical approach towards the philosophical worldview, which they attempt to substitute with themselves, while showing inadequacy to being and its development.  The mechanicism is related to an attempt to substitute general philosophical categories with the categories of natural sciences (in the attitude of positivism), while economicsm follows the post-modernism standards and attempts to substitute philosophical provisions with the terms of humanities, attempting to substitute the social reality and its dynamics.  It is no less important for uncovering the nature and overcoming economism (and mechanicism) to show its inadequacy towards objective contents and dynamics of science, the process of its ascent from classical rationality to non-classical rationality and then to post-non-classical rationality. This is the process within which the understanding of ontology of an object, part and whole, their correlation were revised, and it contradicts both mechanicism and economism. The conclusions are of importance for both general and social philosophy.

DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.1.10676

Abstract: This article is written in the form of a dialogue. To be specific, this is the continuation of the interview by Aleksey Nilogov with the author of the book 'Time Mortido' Vladimir Kutyrev. Their conversation started with the question 'Is it possible to manage the progress?' (See Philosophical Researches Journal Issue 8 published by Note Bene in 2013). The interview progressed into a conversation which represented a hidden but quite sharp dispute between the 'progressor' and 'conservative'. The interlocutors make different, often quite oppositive evaluations of the humankind prospects. They talk about being and nothingness, post-modernism transformation of human into the 'other', destruction of life grounds as the result of disappearing line between genders and creation of weak (thinking) and strong (programmed) zombies. As the author of the books 'Time Mortido',  Vladimir Kutyrev speaks against the infinite expansion of innovative (i.e. post-human) technologies, in particular, the idea of 'im-provement' of people. It is his opinion that the main goal of a modern human should be the preservation of civilization in its anthropomorphous dimensions. The freedom declaring rights of an individual (the part) should not dominate over the rights of the society (the whole). 

DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.1.10624

Abstract: The article includes analysis and critical evaluation of the worldview situation, which is cultivated in Russia by its government structures. The disheartening worldview phenomenae include lessening of the role of philosophy as responsible free thinking in favor of dogmatism of religion, declarative objectivism of science and utilitarian commercial thinking, introduction of the elements of prophane eschatology into the collective conscience, the government favoring the principle of efficiency in the issues of organization of public life.  In comparison with the authentic philosophical world view, which was established by the Heraclitus of Efes, the author formulates and substantiates a number of specific сchallenges towards religious and clerical Christian views and practices, and the alliance between the church and secular government.  The text has a number of references for the potential readers towards the ideas of Niccolo Machiavelli and Albert Camus with their non-subservient realistic interpretation of human fate.  The author substantiates the need and necessity of metaphysically correct discussion between philosophers and theologians.  It is stated that the vulgar pragmatic approach towards science and education is inacceptable and harmful, and the norms of efficiency are not adequate when characterizing the contents of social and cultural processes and statuses. In order to have correct evaluation of human activities, one has to use principle of independency as guidance.