Search narrowed by:




Displaying: 101-120 of 506 documents

Show/Hide alternate language

0.343 sec

101. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 2
Ігор Карівець Ihor Karivets
Деконструкція та реконструкція поняття дг’яна: стратегії та перспективи: Данилов, Д. (2020). Трансформація поняття «дг’яна» у вченні йоґи. Київ: Дух і Літера
Deconstruction and Reconstruction of the Dhyāna Concept: Strategies and Perspectives

102. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 2
Олександр Корнієнко Olexandr Kornienko
У пошуках ідентичності (Історико-філософський аналіз арабської думки): Corm, G. (2020). Arab Political Thought: Past and Present. London: Hurst & Company
In Search of Identity (Historical and Philosophical Analysis of Arab Thought)

103. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 2
Олег Хома Oleg Khoma
"Аристократична метафізика" і стереотипи: Jolibert, B. (2020). Descartes en questions: l'urgence d'un retour aux textes. Paris: L'Harmattan
"Aristocratic Metaphysics" and Stereotypes

104. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 2
Віктор Козловський, Ілля Давіденко, Катерина Круглик, Дар'я Попіль Viktor Kozlovskyi
Геґель і українська філософія 70–80-х років. Частина ІІІ
Hegel and Ukrainian Philosophy of the 70-80th. Part IІI

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Interview of Illia Davidenko, Kateryna Kruhlyk, Daria Popil with Viktor Kozlovskyi.
105. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 2
Анатолій Лой, Ілля Давіденко, Ксенія Мирошник, Дар’я Попіль Anatoly Loy
Розум за «залізною завісою»: українська філософія пізнього СРСР та світова наука
The Mind behind the Iron Curtain: Ukrainian Philosophy of the Late USSR and World Science

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Interview of Illia Davidenko, Kseniia Myroshnyk, Daria Popil with Anatoly Loy.
106. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 2
Марія Кравчик Maria Kravchyk
Перша сесія семінару з історії модерної філософії
First Session of a New Seminar on the History of Modern pPilosophy

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Report on the first session of the seminar “Philosophia perennis” (“Evolution of the concept of consciousness in modern philosophy”), organized by the journal Sententiae in collaboration with the Union of Researchers of Modern Philosophy (Pascal Society) and the Kant Society of Ukraine (August 10 -12, 2021, Odesa).
107. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Олександр Киричок Oleksandr Kyrychok
«Філософ» і «філософія» в києворуських пам’ятках ХІ–ХIV ст.»: необхідність по-новому поставити «старе» питання
“Philosopher” and “Philosophy” in Kyivan Rus’ Written Sources of the 11-14th centuries

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The author justifies the need to return to an analysis of the meaning of such words as “philosophy” and “philosopher” in the Kyivan Rus’ written sources of the 11th–14th centuries. This is explained not only by the inaccuracies the earlier research committed but also by the necessity to take contemporary achievements of Byzantine philosophical historiography into account. The author concludes that the preserved Kyivan Rus’ written sources reflect certain Byzantine interpretations of the words “philosopher” and “philosophy” as understood within particular interpre-tive frameworks: philosophy may refer to a specifically “Christian” or “external” philosophy, presup-pose rational or mystical comprehension of divine wisdom, become verbalized or not. Some sources probably espouse an understanding of philosophy as a practice of true life. The word “philosopher” had different connotations, as well. It referred to advisers or officeholders at the court of the Byzantine emperor, wise princes, church intellectuals, connoisseurs of biblical books, etc. The author invalidates the idea that in Kyivan Rus’, there existed a holistic understanding of philosophy and philosophers. Instead, one should interpret these words as having a limited plurality of meanings.
108. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Сергій Секундант Sergii Secundant
Ляйбніц і Вольф: критичні засади ідеї наукової революції у філософії
Leibniz and Wolf: Critical Foundations of the Idea of Scientific Revolution in Philosophy

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This article reveals the critical content of the idea of scientific revolution in Wolff's philosophy and shows Leibniz's contribution to its formation. Although Wolff's goal was to reform the method of philosophizing on the model of Euclid's geometry, which was based on the Cartesian idea of achieving certainty by clarifying concepts, the clarification that Wolff (in the sense of Leibniz) sees in such an analysis of concepts establishes a connection between them and show the possibility of the object expressed by each concept. Wolff sees the critical meaning of his method in the fact that by analyzing the concepts to link all concepts and statements into a single system, which was based on consistent grounds and would not contain unproven propositions. This would, according to Wolf, remove from philosophy all the con-cepts, the objects of which were not possible, and statements that could not be proved. Leibniz's idea of concept analysis also formed the basis of his notion of philosophy as the science of the possible. The critical meaning of this concept of philosophy in Wolff, as in Leibniz, was to limit the subject of philosophy only to the realm of the possible. Although the main critical ideas underlying Wolff's philosophical system were formulated by Leibniz, Wolf's system was still the fruit of his own genius. Many of his critical ideas were groundbreaking and had a marked influence on the further development of philosophy. These include the requirement to preface the construction of a system of philosophy with research into the cognitive abilities of the human mind. However, his attempts to build a universal system of knowledge led to the leveling of the critical content of some of Leibniz's demands, which led to the accusation against him, and Leibniz, of atheism and fatalism.
109. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Віктор Чорний Victor Chorny
Присутність у широкому теперішньому: умбрехт, Г. У. (2020). Продукування присутності. Що значення не може передати. Харків: IST Publishing
"Presence" in the Broad Present

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This review of the Ukrainian translation of H. U. Gumbrecht’s best-known work brings out the strengths and weaknesses of the translation and the peculiar reception of Gumbrecht’s key ideas (“presence” and “the broad present”) in Ukraine. It also critically assesses Gumbrecht’s own original and often contradictory points. I question the relevance of Gumrecht’s meaning / presence distinction for reconstructing the history of the philosophical tradition, as well as for analysing our complex relation to the world. I also demonstrate the weakness of his biased attempts to paint his opponents as relativists. Besides, I contrast Gumbrecht’s meaning / presence dualism with John Dewey’s theory of experience. The latter conceives experience as a dialectical relation between “doing” and “undergoing”. This juxtaposition shows that Gumbrecht’s theory cannot give a satisfactory account of the mechanisms of everyday or aesthetic experience due to its lack of consistent “everyday” epistemology. Moreover, his vague concept of “presence” and its unequivocal appraisal conflict with his own concept of the chronotope of “broad” or “complex” present, as presented in the selected essays of The Time Is Out of Joint. Eventually, I conclude that Gumbrecht’s eclectic terminological apparatus, as well as uncritical and biased reconstruction of the tradition preclude any serious philosophical engagement. However, it does not undermine the significance of his particular insights and theoretical instruments (such as “the broad present”) for cultural analysis.
110. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Юрій Чорноморець Yuriy Chornomorets
Нові спроби відродити український неотомізм через інспірацію перекладами: Роздуми над книгою Кромпєц, М. (2020). Чому зло? Київ: Кайрос.
New Attempts to Revive Ukrainian neo-Thomism through Inspiration-by-translations

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
One of the unsolved problems for the historical and philosophical thought of Ukraine is the lack of reflection on the phenomenon of Ukrainian neo-Thomism. Today, there has not been reconstructed the history of this trend, which had been actively developing in the interwar Western Ukraine since the time of socio-ethical letters by Andrei Sheptytsky in the early XX century, gained new connotations in the diaspora from 1940s to 1990s, and acquired new forms in Roman Catholic thought in Ukraine at the beginning of the XXI century. Moreover, a comprehensive historical and philosophical assessment of the achievements and shortcomings of Ukrainian neo-Thomism at different stages of its development has not been made. Meanwhile, Ukrainian neo-Thomism is experiencing a crisis, which it is trying to overcome by translating controversial works devoted mainly to the history of moral theology. The main feature of the proposed works is the oscillation between the need to recognize the presence of a person’s spiritual-intellectual and moral-volitional intuitions and the reluctance to recognize it openly, because it would be contrary to the very principles of Thomism. Modern Ukrainian neo-Thomism inherits this contradiction, and therefore the choice of classic books for translation reflects the dialectic of the struggle of different tendencies, which objectively cannot contribute to the legitimization of neo-Thomism in the Ukrainian philosophical discourse. Especially significant in this regard was the translation of the book by the classic of Polish neo-Thomism Mieczysław Krąmpiec “Why Evil?”, because this monograph shows the contradiction of neo-Thomistic thought in the key issues about the possibility of person’s moral intuition, moral responsibility and dignity. The refusal of Krąmpiec to recognize the existence of a person’s spiritual-intellectual and moral-volitional intuitions, despite all the prerequisites for such recognition, is a faulre of this monograph and Krąmpiec is not able to answer the question stated in its title. All this justifies that in the time of Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis, moral theology and social doctrine moved to neo-Augustinianism, which recognizes that the person has spiritual-intellectual and moral-volitional intuitions.
111. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Якоб Томазій Jacobus Thomasius
Ядро дослідження про літературний плагіат, передусім теоретичне, уміщене в небагатьох стислих тезах: (1679, original text in Latin and Ukrainian)
Nucleus disputationis de plagio literario maxime theoreticus, thesibus paucis & brevibus comprehensus

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This is the first Ukrainian translation of J. Thomasius’ work “Nucleus disputationis de plagio literario maxime theoreticus, thesibus paucis & brevibus comprehensus” (1679). It is presented with the original Latin on one page, with the translation on the next.
112. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Роман Кисельов Roman Kyselov
Коментар до Томазієвої "Філософської дисертації про літературний плагіат" (1673)
Commentary on Thomasius's "Philosophical Dissertation on Literary Plagiarism" (1673)

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Commentary on the first Ukrainian translation of Thomasius' work entitled "Nucleus disputationis de plagio literario maxime theoreticus, thesibus paucis & brevibus comprehensus" (1679), which is one of the Appendices to the famous "Philosophical Dissertation on Literary Plagiarism" (1673).
113. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Андрій Богачов Andriy Bogachov
Гайдеґер і феноменологія. Westerlund, F. (2020). Heidegger and the Problem of Phenomena. London: Bloomsbury.
Heidegger and Phenomenology. Westerlund, F. (2020). Heidegger and the Problem of Phenomena. London: Bloomsbury.

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Review of Westerlund, F. (2020). Heidegger and the Problem of Phenomena. London: Bloomsbury.
114. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Ілля Давіденко Illia Davidenko
Тенденції сучасного геґелезнавства. Bykova, M., Westphal, K., et al. (2020). The Palgrave Hegel Handbook. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
Trends in Modern Hegelean Studies. Bykova, M., Westphal, K., et al. (2020). The Palgrave Hegel Handbook. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Review of Bykova, M., Westphal, K., et al. (2020). The Palgrave Hegel Handbook. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
115. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Вахтанґ Кебуладзе Vakhtang Kebuladze
Феноменологічні сюжети. Apostolescu, I. (Ed.). (2020). The Subject(s) of Phenomenology: Rereading Husserl. Cham: Springer Nature
Phenomenological Subjects. Apostolescu, I. (Ed.). (2020). The Subject(s) of Phenomenology: Rereading Husserl. Cham: Springer Nature

116. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Михайло Якубович Mykhaylo Yakubovych
«Ліва» ісламська філософія. Bloch, Ernst. (2019). Avicenna and the Aristotelian Left. Translated by Loren Goldman and Peter Thompson. New York: Columbia University Press
"Left" Islamic Philosophy. Bloch, Ernst. (2019). Avicenna and the Aristotelian Left. Translated by Loren Goldman and Peter Thompson. New York: Columbia University Press

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Review of Bloch, Ernst. (2019). Avicenna and the Aristotelian Left. Translated by Loren Goldman and Peter Thompson. New York: Columbia University Press.
117. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Євген Бистрицький, Всеволод Хома, Ксенія Мирошник, Ольга Сімороз Yevhen Bystrytsky
Знати і бути. Частина ІІ
To Know and to Be. Part II

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Interview of Vsevolod Khoma, Kseniia Myroshnyk and Olha Simoroz with Yevhen Bystrytsky.
118. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Наталія Вяткіна, Аміна Кхелуфі, Ксенія Мирошник, Наталія Рева Natalia Viatkina
"Збережене і втрачене". Спроба спогадів on-line
"The Saved and the Lost." Attempt to Recall On-line

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Interview of Amina Khelufi, Kseniia Myroshnyk and Nataliia Reva with Natalia Viatkina.
119. Sententiae: Volume > 40 > Issue: 1
Віктор Козловський, Ілля Давіденко, Катерина Круглик, Дар'я Попіль Viktor Kozlovskyi
Геґель і українська філософія 70–80-х років. Частина ІІ
Hegel and Ukrainian Philosophy of the 70's-80's. Part II

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Interview of Illia Davidenko, Kateryna Kruhlyk, Daria Popil with Viktor Kozlovskyi.
120. Sententiae: Volume > 41 > Issue: 3
Анна Ільїна Anna Ilyina
Традиція і свобода в деконструкційній «філософії філософії»
Tradition and Freedom in the Deconstructive “Philosophy of Philosophy”

abstract | view |  rights & permissions
У статті досліджено особливості відношення між феноменами свободи і традиції в дискурсі деконструкції. При цьому традиція постає насамперед як традиція філософська, критичне запитування щодо якої лежить в основі деридианської думки. Остання великою мірою являє собою філософську рефлексію щодо філософського ж спадку («філософія філософії»). Авторка здійснює аналіз відношення між деконструкцією і філософською традицією у зв’язку з проблемою свободи. При цьому вона застосовує деридианську концепто-метафору перекладу (переходу), спираючись на історико-філософські висновки Марка Крепона. Розглянувши особливості тематизації концептів свободи і традиції в деконструкційному дискурсі, авторка виявила зв’язок між проблемами (а) меж філософії (що є одним з наріжних сюжетів деридианських текстів) і (б) специфічної кореляції між феноменами свободи і традиції. Встановлено, що сполучними ланками, які уможливлюють цей зв’язок, постають ідеї іншого і перекладу (переходу). Для історії філософії другої половини ХХ ст. є важливим правильно розуміти деридиан-ське поняття традиції. У статті доведено, що властиве Дериді тлумачення цього поняття (1) у суттєвий спосіб визначається чинником іншого, (2) ґрунтується на парадоксальній взаємодії традиційності і свободи, (3) зумовлює й уможливлює деконструювання опозиції між сво-бодою і насильством. У підсумку встановлено, що власне деконструкція, яка на позір ке-рується метою звільнення від традиції, зрештою постає як свобода для традиції, якщо остання тлумачиться в