![Još o neopozitivizmu kod nas](/api/image/getgrayliteraturecoverimage?id=document_cover-page-image_343228.jpg)
Još o neopozitivizmu kod nas
article from iussue 1/1938 of the journal »ŽIVOT. ČASOPIS ZAPOPULARIZACIJU NAUKE«, there pp. 37 to 51
More...We kindly inform you that, as long as the subject affiliation of our 300.000+ articles is in progress, you might get unsufficient or no results on your third level or second level search. In this case, please broaden your search criteria.
article from iussue 1/1938 of the journal »ŽIVOT. ČASOPIS ZAPOPULARIZACIJU NAUKE«, there pp. 37 to 51
More...
The author re-examines so-called “normativity problem” in the light of some Derrida’s provisional definitions of the concept of deconstruction. Alleged unbreakable connection between the elementary Derridian conception and the concept of normativity here is criticized with help of “open question argument”.
More...
Jeff Stickney: Tell us when and how your productive collaboration began. Who else played a part in ushering in a new, post-foundational reading of Wittgenstein within philosophy of education? Michael Peters: First let me express my gratitude to you both but particularly Jeff for organizing this interview. As far as I remember our collaborations began with contributing to Jim Marshall and Paul Smeyers’ Wittgenstein’s Challenge published in 1995. We were contributors to the same collection.
More...
The publication of Wittgenstein: Philosophy, Postmodernism, Pedagogy (1999) by Michael A. Peters and James D. Marshall was a landmark. I had just started my doctorate (after ten years of teaching secondary school), intent on applying Wittgenstein’s later philosophy to problems in education: as they appeared on the rough ground instead of the crystalline purity of plans drawn up by the Ministry and District School Boards (PI §107). True to form, this book charts the intellectual and cultural legacies on which Wittgenstein drew: Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, and (with Nicholas Burbules in Chapter 9), currents in 20th c. Viennese society that provided background to his style and aesthetic sensibilities. It also mapped the way forward by drawing connections between Wittgenstein’s manner of “writing the self” with Foucault’s neo-Nietzschean concept of arts and techniques of self-stylization. The effect was to transform my project, exploring joint applications of the philosophies of Wittgenstein and Foucault to teacher inspection and professional development: a trajectory that led me to work with James Tully at University of Toronto, who had long been employing these thinkers in political philosophy (Tully, 1989). Ten years later I appreciated what this turn meant for my own development as a writer and activist in education. At a post-lecture dinner Michael confided that in taking up Lyotard and Foucault, the more political philosophers, he “saved himself from becoming a pithy Wittgensteinian” (Toronto 2010). Anyone fatigued by “over rehearsed” expositions of the compelling rule-following argument will know what this means: even those seeing its wider applications in education. Moving into The Government of the Self and Others, Michael and his collaborators essayed/assayed practice-based approaches to philosophical and policy questions in education: whether initiate training into normative rules (Wittgenstein); or, normalizing, disciplinary and dividing practices (Foucault). His work on Nietzsche, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, Lyotard, Rorty, Derrida and Foucault makes Michael (along with other contributors to this volume) not only our resident genealogist but, ironically, one of the founders of post-foundational philosophy of education.
More...
This festschrift is a “liber amicorum” (“book of friends”) and as a philosopher of sorts I am interested in the genre and in its cultural invention as a means of understanding how I might proceed. I am greatly honored that my friends and colleagues should take the time to respond to the themes in my work and I am particularly grateful that such a group of international and able scholars have contributed. So let me express my deep appreciation and respond in the only manner I know how. After years of university life it is difficult to invent new forms or to experiment when the rituals and habits of critical thought anchor me in a series of set plays.
More...
Po malodušnom protivIjenju zločinima koje su SAD i njeni saveznici počinili u Vijetnamu, može se zaključiti da javnost ima gotovo isto tako malo naklonosti prema moralnim ograničenjima vođenja rata, kao što je imaju oni koji su preuzeli na sebe oblikovanje ratne politike SAD. Čak i kada se ograničenja u pogledu vođenja oružanog sukoba brane, to se čini samo na osnovu njihove zakonske podloge; njihova moralna utemeljenost se često malo shvata. Želim da pokažem da izvesna ograničenja nisu ni proizvoljna, niti samo stvar dogovora i da njihova valjanost ne zavisi jednostavno od njihove korisnosti. Drugim rečima, postoji moralna osnova pravila rata, iako sadašnji dogovori, službeno na snazi, nisu ni blizu njen savršen izraz.
More...
The monograph attempts to provide an empirically grounded answer to a number of discussional scientific issues related to individual decision-making differences by building a comprehensive conceptual model and constructing a specifically selected toolbox as a prerequisite for creating an empirically validated methodology in the field of research of individual differences in decision-making. Original empirical results have been obtained confirming that the style of decision-making is not identical to cognitive style (nor is it a subset, but contains a cognitive component that does not exhaust any of the styles) and is related to mental self-regulation due to individual differences, generated by the ways of satisfying the hedonistic motif (regulatory focus and fashion), the need to control excitement (stress control), and the need for connectivity and increased self-esteem. These results are a prerequisite for the further development of individual decision-making research as well as the decision-making theory itself, because it allows for a fuller consideration of individual differences and their interaction with the characteristics of the situation and the problem that is being solved.The methodological basis of the study is the cognitive survival theory of Seymour Epstein. The results and theoretical summaries obtained empirically confirm the validity of the global personality theory that has the potential to explain new scientific problems, incorporating private theories such as E. Tory Higgins' motivational theory and Mark R. Leary's sociometric mechanism.
More...
The aim of the article is to present Nikolay Milkov's academic path after 1990, when he moved to Germany, as well as some of his contributions to Bulgarian and contemporary Western philosophy. The analyses are focused specially on his book "Kaleidoscopic Mind. An Essay in Post-Wittgensteinian Philosophy", which presents one of his most emblematic inputs.
More...
𝑆𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑠 𝐶𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎 is a multilingual collection of papers presented at the international scientific conference that has been organized by the Department of Classical and Eastern Languages and Cultures of St. Cyril and St. Methodius University of Veliko Tarnovo (Bulgaria) since 2002. Until 2015, the conference was held annually. Since 2018, it is held once every two years. St Cyril and St Methodius University Press issues the collection within the Dr. Nicola Piccolo series. The wide range of topics and the opportunity for authors to submit their academic publications in the original language attracts researchers from all over the world.
More...
An important part of postcolonial critical discourse – which originated in the work of Michel Foucault and which I find rather useful for analyzing the images of China produced by twentieth-century travel writers – is the complex relationship between knowledge and power. Foucault himself declares that one of the main goals of his archaeological endeavors is “to rediscover on what basis knowledge and theory became possible” (Foucault 1973, xxiii) and develops the argument that power and knowledge are invariably and inseparably connected in a way that is by no means innocent. To Foucault, knowledge always bestows to its bearer a certain kind of power over the entity that is being ‘known’ or over the very discourse that produces ‘truths’ about this entity. “[P]ower and knowledge directly imply one another. There is no power relation without the correlative constitution of a field of knowledge, nor any knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the same time power relations” (Foucault 1973: 27). The two notions clearly depend on each other: they seem to be indispensable parts of the same discursive paradigm. Said states that “[k]nowledge gives power, more power requires more knowledge, and so on in an increasingly profitable dialectic of information and control” (Said 1978: 36).
More...