The paper focuses on Hegel’s concept of Bildung and its significance for his account of the concrete subjectivity. It is pointed out that it would be a misinterpretation of Hegel's account of Bildung to reduce it either to a merely individual intellectual event (education, narrowly construed) or to economic production. In Hegel, Bildung is a real historical process that takes place within the life of any individual, any culture and (in principle) even the human race. That is a concrete universal process in which we human beings necessary participate and through which we become aware of ourselves and our natural and social environment. The link Hegel sets between the process of individual enculturation and Bildung of “cosmic” spirit indicates the essential interdependence of individual and universal in social and cultural life. Just as there is noindividuality without the individual’s participation in the universal social and cultural life, there cannot be achieved any universal context without activity of the individuals. In the process of enculturation, the individual (here as a collective historical subject,humanity at large) creates culture and at the same time creates himself through culture.

If we take a bird’s-eye view of the history of philosophical ideas and try to assess the place the problems of modality hold in it, it is likely that we will gain the impression that they are not among the priorities of philosophical thinking of the essence of human being. A closer look at some classical theses, however, can provide us with different answers. In § 76 of Critique of Judgement, which is actually “just” a comment on the basic text, Kant explains that “For human reason it is of absolute necessity to distinguish between the possibility and reality of things”. Kant helps us to include modality in the very metaphysical definition of the human being. That is why we can say: human being is a modal being before being “a rational being”, “a social animal” or “homo faber”. In my opinion that “before” should be understood in a strictly metaphysical sense and it should help us to discover a non-trivial basis and principle of philosophical anthropology. It is my thesis that philosophical anthropology should place modality in the very definition of human nature and consider human being as a possibilia entis. We could illustrate the fundamental character of modality by demonstrating that modality is at the basis of constituting time as temporality. In view of this position only the modal being has a time in the sense of temporality. Or, to put it in a different way, we can see in nature only changes, but not temporal phenomena in the strict sense of the concept of time perceived as temporality.

Philosophy distinguishes life in general, inherent in all living things and social life – human life in a society. The last means the numerous relationships of man to nature, society, and all other people. To understand the social life, it should be considered at two levels: first, as everyday life, and, second, as «civilized», much higher according to its contents. The everyday life and the «civilized life» – are interconnected integrally with each other and at the same time are different from each other. Note the primary differences in the most general aspect. The usual everyday life is characterized by thing that people do daily, constantly. It is real, practical, biological-social life of each person: whether a man or a woman, an ordinary man and an eminent person. «The civilized life» is a life of higher level; it is penetrated by the theory, more comprehended and systematized; it is based on scientific and legal laws, philosophical truth and moral categories. Therefore people, on the basis of philosophical and scientific laws, regularities, and tendencies know the ancestral life, evaluate correctly estimate the present life and are able to predict the future life. Laws of everyday and civilized human life have been formulated.

The article considers Richard Rorty’s thought on pragmatic religion and meliorism. It begins with Rorty’s critique of theism and Platonism, and his attempt to rehabilitate religion using a pragmatist framework. The article then offers an analysis of Rorty’s “unjustifiable hope”. Here, the author distinguishes the differentsenses of unjustifiable hope. With a tension between the “romantic” and “utilitarian” aspects of this outlook, the paper concludes with the advent of Rorty’s pragmatic religion.

The aim of this paper is to consider the vicissitudes of “area studies” from the Second World War to the present focusing eventually on the normative imperative to develop a new paradigm of “planetary thinking.” First an overview of the history of “area studies” will be given from the start in the U.S. during the Second World War in response to the geostrategic imperative for America to know its new geopolitical responsibilities in a world divided by war. This security imperative morphed into the postwar requisite to develop a counterhegemonic strategy against soviet communism in the hot spot parts of Asia, Latin American, and later Africa. The latter military-oriented strategy was added to with research into development and modernization in the third-world through to the boundary displacement of areas studies at the end of the Cold War into the current era of globalization. At this very historical moment of transition a new rationale for area studies emerged in the form of a geoeconomic imperative – both in the U.S. and, with a different gloss, in South Korea in the late 1990s. Second, on the basis of this historical apercu, the argument will be proposed that, given the problem of global warming and the issue‐area of global inequality lurking behind the United Nation’s Millennium Development Goals, a pressing contemporary task for philosophy is to make a critical contribution to developing a new planetary perspective for area studies informed by a constitutive philosophical anthropology attendant to the species being of human beings.

The paper discusses a possibility of integral combination of various approaches for the adequate understanding of human being. In this regard, I analyze the feeling of love in the context of rational cognition and also suggest a secular interpretation of religious images and symbols that allow us to understand well-known heuristic and moral notions in a new light.

In this paper I explain the principle of tolerance in a double aspect, reference to truth and to the individual. Tolerance is diferent from another similar concepts and we analyze some socials paradoxes that the tolerance brings. In the base of tolerance is respect to the truth and to the individual. For that reason, the studyof the concept of respect as the fundament of tolerance is the sustain in which the real solidarity an peace are establish.

The problem of cultural environment is not new, but the use of the theory on cultural environment is clearly a new approach to the consideration of familiar questions. That is the problem, is it true that the context has become such that man, as an individual, is becoming increasingly smaller, weaker, more tightly defined and restrained, in a society which is steadily developing in the direction of becoming multi-dimensional and ambiguous with its “logic of imposition”? As for the cultural environment, is it true that the part in it where man has no right to choose, the part which he is compelled to adapt to, will grow bigger and bigger than the part each individual, each community can create, build, and amend? More concretely, is it true that the European rationalist and anthropological culture has become too “classical” and “secular,” now getting replaced by a “fast-food culture” or “stewing-pot culture”? Or is it only a “superficial choice” of globalization times? Is the present philosophy too weak, leaving society to the mercy of less-than-clairvoyant logics of life, in which “such environment, such man” is only one of many behavioral logics which are not too bad in modern social relation? Or has the role of philosophy itself changed - the “Flat world” philosophy now deprived of the responsibility to control, regulate, and, as necessary, determine the context, as it was in the past? Base upon reliable qualitative and quantitative datas, thepaper prover that: 1. If natural environment is the regrouping of factors outside the social-human system making conditions necessary for this system to exist and develop, then cultural environment is regrouping of factors inside the social-human system making sufficient conditions for each subsystem of this system to identify itself and progress. 2. Never in the past has the cultural environment in Vietnam been so rich and varied, so dynamic and positive, so encouraging and attractive, with so many opportunities and challenges as is now the case. The degree of richness and diversity, the dynamic and active rhythm of Vietnam’s cultural environment are now enough to foster good ideas and stimulate discovery and creation. But on the flip side, there are still many challenges andattractions, so hopefully every individual, family, and community will become vigilant before the risk of losing the way or making a mistake.

Here is told about necessity to create new anthropological paradigm based on the ecological approach. The matter is a man in ecological world, and subjects are the phenomena of consciousness, deciding direction to this world. Ecological world differs from physical world. Ecological world is the ontological unity of person and natural world, and it is characterized with combination of all items, events, occurrence in each other. Person’s attitude to the ecological world determines with notion “ecological consciousness”, it describes person’s structural attitude to the world and it has morally value character. The main description of ecological consciousness is its orientation to the ecological world. The methods of new anthropological paradigm are phenomenal and topological approaches, which help to create the complete ecological – anthropological picture of the world.

This paper focuses on Italian philosopher’s Paolo Virno concept of public intellect. He starts from the analysis of emotions and dispositions as they appear in Martin Heidegger’s work Being and Time, and he undertakes na criticism of Heideggerian distinction between fear and anguish/anxiety. Virno argues that, incontemporary world, this distinction is becoming increasingly blurred, insofar as the so-called ‘substantial communities’ tend to disintegrate and human beings become more exposed to the world as such. This exposition to the world makes one feel any concrete fearful situation as rather an anxiety-ridden situation whereuncertainty and endangerment reigns to its utmost. As a rather spontaneous response to this insecurity of ‘not’feeling-at-home’, Virno sees the emergence of the so-called ‘public intellect’ which contains some elementary linguistic structures that appear as collective. Virno sees public intellect as an outcome of ‘not-feeling-at-home’ that, to some degree, forces people to become thinkers as they are made strangers to this world.

Based on the philosophic hermeneutics, this text wants to open horizons of meaning around the dialogue between social sciences and philosophy, from what I have called in this work hermeneutic subjectivity. In the first part, there is an approximation to Heidegger concept of dasein, as an antithesis of the modern subject. Then, based on memory, utopia, self-understanding and narration, it presents a theoretical contribution to understand how hermeneutic subjectivity isconstituted. Finally, it makes an invitation to a necessary dialogue between social sciences and philosophy.

En 1981-82 Foucault a consacré son enseignement au Collège de France à la question du souci de soi antique. À ce cours, publié en 2001, il a donné le titre énigmatique d’«Herméneutique du sujet». Ma communication vise à élucider le sens de ce titre en montrant comment les travaux généalogiques entrepris par Foucault au cours des dernières années de sa vie visaient à combattre un mode de rapport à soi dominé par l’interprétation. Mon but consiste donc à montrer que si le dernier Foucault s’est concentré sur le souci de soi antique, c’était en vue d’opposer une résistance à la tendance contemporaine à l’herméneutique de soi.

“Radical understanding” – an expression recalling Quine’s “radical translation” and Davidson’s “radical interpretation” – concerns that necessary presupposition of every understanding that is shown in extreme cases of indecipherability. Such a minimum content consists in understanding an existence. Indeed, Heideggerian ontological hermeneutics has weaved together understanding and existence to the point that it is possible to establish an analogy between the existential analysis and the several grades of text decipherability: the passage from the inauthentic to the authentic existence can be read as a passage from the semantic (radical interpretation) to the syntactic (radical translation) and to the ontological level (radical understanding). The level of radical understanding is the one in which the minimal content of understanding coincides with its formal condition of possibility, in which understanding is to understand an existence.

The theme of reading and relation to the textual production is persistent in works of the Danissh philosopher and theologian of the 19th century Soren Kierkegaard. This, in turn, is closely related to his project of existential communication. One of the decisive qualifications of the project is distance, or distancing between the self and the other. The distance makes it possible for self to reflect upon his/her own existence. Kierkegaard develops this theme in his conception of existential maeutics as opposed to the Socratic one that presupposes closing the gap between interlocutors. Important role in the process of distanciation is played by the text, as well as by specific reading practices, and Kierkegaard metaphorically speaks of the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ modes of reading. The ‘bad’ one means loosing oneself in the text, while the ‘good’ one – retaining some level of integrity of the reader. The distanciation is a theme also in reflections of French phenomenologist Paul Ricoeur, but if for him the distance is a difference within the field of language itself (as text versus discourse), then Kierkegaard takes into account mainly extratextual (ethical, religious and other) aspects, and difference is between text and reader. The present paper gives examples of ‘good’ reading practices employed by Kierkegaard in his Journals and Papers.

Living in “the Machine Age” (dem Maschinenzeitalter), we can not avoid asking ourselves, whether every one of us lives as "a Part" (ein Bestand) in the world much like a cog in “a Machine” (einer Maschine). Heidegger made this concept clear by his phenomenology. In addition, he regarded a human being as a special Part, that could transform all beings into Parts. In order to overcome this dangerous situation, namely, "the Desolation of the Being" (dieSeinsverlassenheit), he considers deeper at “the Essence of Technology” (das Wesen der Technik), the most important element of the Machine Age. Founding on this consideration he finds a way of overcoming, namely, “Art” (die Kunst). By Art can we begin to ask about “the Being” (das Sein) and to think about the change of "the Understanding of the Being" (das Seinsverständnis). What makes this change possible is "the Basic Mood" (die Grundstimmung). Therefore this Basic Mood must above all things be awoken. Drawing on Heidegger's philosophy, I would like to make several observations on the Machine Age and its overcoming. In this way I hope to make a contribution to the Machine Age, so that the modern world will not be regarded as a Machine, all beings will not be regarded as Parts and the modern human being will not be regarded as a special Part.

Process hermeneutics attempts to solve the philosophical problem of the destructive effect of relativism in order to establish a common ground on which our metaphysical and ethical dialogue can be possible. In the postmodern context, we confront a very different hermeneutic task from that of modern hermeneutics. As Jean-François Lyotard characterizes postmodernity as “a war on totality,” postmodern hermeneutics criticizes the modern triumphalist rationality that claims such absolutisms as scientific objectivism, epistemological foundationalism, and moral universalism. Process hermeneutics welcomes this postmodern iconoclastic urge against modern absolutism. However, it suspects the postmodern transition from meta-narrative to local-narrative that causes a difficulty for apossible common scholarship. In the postmodern relativization, an astute thinker asks whose interpretation, whose authority, whose criteria counts, and why. This paper proposes that process hermeneutics offer an alternative understanding to our postmodern studies and dialogues.

In Truth and Method, Gadamer tries to show that the understanding of art is scientific (wissenscaftlich). But even though the understanding of art is a kind of science, it is different from natural sciences. As objects of human sciences (Geisteswissenschaft), works of art should be dealt differently than in dealing with theobjects of natural sciences. But if the understanding of art is somewhat scientific, it means that in artistic understanding there is a claim to truth which is different from such a claim as in the natural sciences. Then how can this truth be assured? The task of assuring truth in art understanding can be achieved by the hermeneutical circle. Thus, we investigated the role and significance of the hermeneutical circle in scientific understanding of art.

At present, when we live under the duress of the speed/quantity/fleeting impressions dictatorship, no possibility avails to formulate one’s total identity in horizontal and vertical dimensions, and therefore a serious danger confronts us to loose our historical consciousness and the taste of the wholeness of life. Intrying to reach ever-new modes of acceleration, we tend to forget what is really worthwhile. Loosing of memories as to the events, emotions, places, people and things, culminates in the total loss of memory concerning Memory itself – not only as a psychological quality of remembering, but Memory as a phenomenon of life-consciousness. This leads us to the question of memory and its connections with consciousness, with being (also with the forgetting of being) with time, with the past and with the future; also with death and the wholeness of life. In the paper different understanding of memory have been considered: memory as being inphilosophy of St. Augustin, memory as Bildbewustsein in Husserl’s phenomenology and memory and narrative in W. Benjamin’s philosophy.

Different forms of life can be described making use of hermeneutical description of the life-world (Lebenswelt) the field of vision of which encompasses the changes of value systems and lifestyles. Contemporary life forms typical of Europe are: upward, forward, on the surface. Life forms display differing attitude towards space, time, universal ideas, differences, hierarchy, mind, body, causal relationships, chance, language and etc. Contemporary changes are not a string of spontaneous incidents, but a relationship of life forms where the form upward gives way to the form forward, the form on the surface following. Contemporary Europe is peculiar in none of these forms being lost or having emerged victorious. The characteristic manifestation of the life form upward is Christianity. The life form forward is typical of capitalistic ideas with the predominance of history and economical development, the main categories being progress, more and more. The majority of people in contemporary Europe live leaning forward, be a citizen and workforce. Man is perceived as a functional totality, pragmatism arepredominant in societies. Things tend to rule over man, ideals turn into ideologies. That certainly strengthens the technological and military might, but it does not form the common idea of Europe. The form on the surface finds manifestation in post-modernism, which spread up around the world. A question arises: can there appear a fourth form of contemporary life – perhaps we might call it a dimension of depth, which comes from the dialogue between civilizations?