The present paper deals with the Russian cosmism in the conditions of modern society and views. The cosmism is conveyed in both philosophical and naturalistic aspects. The idea of the so-called cosmicity of the human and cosmic outlook is one of the most attractive features of the Russian cosmism for our contemporaries. Among the fundamental issues elaborated by the Russian cosmists is an idea of dynamic evolution. It is the lack of integral system of social actions that indefinitely postpones the implementation of the projects, elaborated by the Russian cosmists. Many ideas of the Russian cosmism are topical, in a view of new discoveries in the field of science, technology and cosmos development they have become even more convincing.

We could ask: how national could be a culture or another? The modernist or postmodernist perspectives seems to be unilateral here. Could be transmodernism the right sollution? The distictions between modernism, postmodernism and transmodernism are actually a pretext to set into discussion again the old dispute between Culture, regarded as a humanity universal feature and national cultures, perceived as a human community tradition symbol (community that claims a territory, a language, a religious belief and a certain government form).

In this paper, I will approach the problem of normalization within the context of crime and punishment in Nietzsche and Foucault. In modern theory and law, a linear, causal relationship has been established between crime and punishment with no regard to the socio-cultural context in which crimes and punishments take place. It was not until the nineteenth century that the problems of this relationship were exposed most notably by Dostoyevsky in fiction and later by Nietzsche in his theoretical writings (the essays) and in his introspective reflections (the aphorisms). Although, according to Foucault, the reformists of penal institutions around the turn to the nineteenth century expanded the domain of crime and punishment to other areas and social contexts, they too were not radical enough tounderstand the problem of crime and punishment in-depth and were not, therefore, capable of exposing them as a syndrome that is deeply rooted in the Occidental world-interpretation, its values and institutions. What I would like to show in this paper is how the syndrome of crime and punishment in the West is intricately tied to, what Nietzsche calls, the morality of good and evil (the slave morality, its absolute truth, and its normalizing trend and power) and how Foucault transplants the Nietzschean critical project to its institutional context. Despite agreements and continuities between the two thinkers, no doubt their differences toowill come to surface in this study.

One of the main characteristics of the post-modern society is the democratized diffusion of knowledge even on issues of which the average citizen could hardly be aware: social, cultural, ecological and economical risks. However, many philosophers and thinkers (Chomsky, Barber, Zizek, Sartori) argue that we live rather in information societies than in knowledge ones, because the content of information on political actions of major importance are ideologically-oriented and therefore misleading. In the present paper we study two examples of political and scientific rhetoric, trying to interpret not only their political and moral determinants but also their possible impact on international welfare. Aristotle and modern semiotic theories will provide the methodological tools of thisanalysis.

At The paper analyzes the problems of cultural diversity and universality as elaborated in the concepts of “intercultural philosophy” (Ra 1 Fornet-Betancourt), “transculture” (Mikhail Epstein), and “discourse ethics” (Jürgen Habermas, Karl-Otto Apel, and Seyla Benhabib). In the postmodern theories of culture, there is an internal tension between multiculturalism and deconstruction. Multiculturalism implies an essentialist connection between cultural production and ethnic or physical origin. In contrast, the paper argues for a concept of cultural diversity free from determinism and representation. The paper articulates a criticalphilosophical-methodological approach at the heart of which is Mikhail Bakhtin’s dialogical philosophy and the idea of “vnenakhodimost” (“outsidedness”). According to Mikhail Epstein’s concept of “transculture,” each culture is incomplete, thus needs to transcend its borders in dialogue with other cultures. Transculture is a path of liberation of the individual from the symbolic dependencies of culture itself and self-imposed identities. It is a state of virtual belonging of one individual to many cultures. Critical universality means diversity as a property of a single individual or a single culture insofar as they can include the diversity of others. It is viewed as an internal diversity of individuals, their dialogical openness to others and self-identification primarily as members of humanity. The paper focuses on Jürgen Habermas’s analysis of the problem of cultural identity and diversity in terms of the liberal conception of equality and cultural rights. Multiculturalism itself is not immune from knowledge/power relations. Its paradox is that individual basic liberties are restricted in the name of the securing collective rights of culture groups. Habermas argues that these problems can be solved only from the perspective of “the difference-sensitive egalitarian universalism of equal rights.” Mutual recognition requires a transformation of interpersonal relations through discourse and public debates over identity politics. Attention is paid to David Rasmussen’s analyses of conflict and toleration within the confines of a post-secular society.

For so long a time it has been getting increasingly formidable, if not possible, to define art in general ever since the advent of the so-called “found art” or “ready-mades” of Marcel Duchamp and Andy Warhol, among other avant-garde or pop artists. But this does not have too much constraint over some philosophers who have made persistent attempts in this regard. What have turned out to be considerably influential are the “artworld” framed by Arthur C. Danto and the “institutional theory” proposed by George Dickie. Nevertheless, Li Zehou, a contemporary Chinese philosopher, argues that the two theories aforementioned are not self-sufficient and convincing enough. For they could not well explicate the distinction between art and non-art, not to speak of the difference between artworks as artifacts and those as aesthetic objects. He then continues to treat art as sedimentation from an anthropo-historical viewpoint peculiar of his practical aesthetics (shijian meixue). His argument is underlined by a transcultural approach that is deployed to expand the intellectual horizon and consequently bear the theoretical fruit.

The report brought to the section members’ notice issues consideration of the major tendencies of religious and aesthetic medium transformation laying the emphasis on the major factors of this transformation together with its socio-cultural basis. Based on the comparison of the processes taking place within Catholicism, Protestantism and Orthodoxy the report marks the concurrency of religious and aesthetic processes present within the named confessions which challenges the idea of absolute uniqueness of religious and aesthetic experience of the orthodox in Russia nowadays. The syncretism in the first place and dialectical unity of fundamentalism and modernism in the second, can be considered as the leading tendencies of transformation of religious and aesthetic medium of modern Christianity.

The basic risk for culture in conditions of globalization consists in full submission of its existence to economic (market) rules. The masscult deprived a variety - a product of such submission. But a source of creative development was and there is a cultural variety. Domination of a masscult leads to decrease in creative potential of the person and a society. Becoming of metaculture as culture of gift of a modern society represents alternative as to principles of a masscult, and ideas of multiculturalism and tolerance. The principle of tolerance is a recognition of powerlessness to involve cultures in productive dialogue, de-facto it is recognition of the established cultural barriers. The culture of gift (metaculture) is based on following principles: 1) reflexivity, 2) ethicness, 3) positive role ofOtherness, 4) the sacrifice of an autonomy to (accept of gift), 5) new cultural-historical type of rationality is focused not on things, but on events, 6) more easy approach to products of cultural creativity and in this direction - alternative to deadlocks of protection to intellectual property (copyright). Development of metaculture corresponds to principles of a symbolical exchange and «copyleft».

The report is devoted to elaboratation creative philosophical models for optimization multi-cultural dialogue into “post modern” global society. The main idea of the article is to describe the basic philosophical models (rooting in ancient philosophy, as the most seriously and fundamental theoretical positions for solution the problem of many-pole's world), connecting them with the main points of modern philosophers (F. Fucuyama, A. Toffler, S. Hantington, S. Averintsev, A. Panarin, Y. Lotman, S. Filatov, A. Malashenco, E. Volkhova etc). The dialogue of cultures is the “other side” of the process of globalization. The question about possible strategies of intercultural interaction, its opportunities and limits, as well as potential grounds for mutual understanding is ultimately vital todayfor contemporary philosophy of culture. Its solution determines perspective of consolidation of sodium as well as selection of definite position in the dialogue itself – whether it will be an isolationism leading to the “end of history” as to the returning to cyclic model of life of human community; or there will be retained an orientation for mutual displacement of value priorities (war of ideologies) as competitive adaptive programs. In any case the globalizing world in the order of self-organization in the next decades will stop at the selection of any definite strategy.

The article mainly tries to discuss the dialogue between China and Western countries from the aspect of logic. There were three sources of logic, including formal logic in ancient Greek, logic in Early Qin of China as well as logic in ancient India. While, among all the schools in ancient China, Mohist and Virtuoso valued logic most. But as the rulers of Han Dynasty only paid their homage to Confucianism, the two schools gradually sank, logic in Early Qin of China discontinued, without entering the main headstream of logic development worldwide. Later, logic in China had little influence on Chinese society although Indian logic was introduced in Tang Dynasty, a scholar-bureaucrat named Zhizao Li in Ming Dynasty, translated logic textbook Discussion of Name and Science, and German philosopher G.W. Leibniz explained Chinese changing theory with binary system. In the early 1900s, during the process of introducing western science, logic, regarded as the basis of science and a tool of scientific research, was highly valued by Chinese scholars, in fact, western logic entered China through two channels. After Chinese scholars learnt from western logic, they made their contribution to the development of logic.

In introducing a course on critical thinking or reasoning, many emphasize the philosophical background of the idea of critical thinking, that is, the Socratic motto: “life without examination is not worth living”. It is actually right to do so, because critical thinking is basically the activity of doing philosophy. However, in manyuniversities, the course on critical thinking is taught mainly as a basic course for first year undergraduates who may not go on to major in philosophy. Beside the fact that critical thinking as an activity of doing philosophy provides a good tool for arguing about any subjects, there is a political agenda in making the course a requisite one for non-philosophy students, that is, the ability to think critically is a desirable property for being a “good citizen” in a democratic society. Underlying this idea is the model of rational man in the age of Enlightenment. Putting aside the controversy over the notion of rationality, my question is what exactly is the activity called critical thinking or reasoning, and then on such understanding, what should be the right direction in teaching critical thinking. My answer is that critical thinking is an examination of thoughts because reasoning is rule-governed. However, grasping a thought requires the idea of an agency. Hence, the main aim of teaching critical thinking is not to get just a technician game kids, rather it is to reveal the possibility of being a philosophical mindfulness person. Thepaper consists of three main parts. The first part concerns the idea that critical thinking is an examination of thoughts. Thoughts are inferentially structured and are constrained by truth. This means that thought content are conceptual – reasoning is inherently logical or rule-governed. The second part considers the connection of content of thoughts, truth and thinkers. An individuation of thought content is by object of thoughts. The idea of object of thoughts involves the idea of truth which is perspectival. Therefore, to understand what truth is requires an idea of agency, the one who grasps thoughts. In the last part, I then propose that the rightdirection in teaching critical thinking is to accommodate an independent ability to see the world aright.

This paper reconstructs the concept of the «feeling» elaborated by William James in the text The Varieties of Religious Experience: a study in human nature as a mean towards a moral education. The analysis of the feeling expecially the religious one is structurally connected, in this writing of James, not only with thebiographical problem of the conscience and the knowledge of the self, but also with the strategically wider issue, of «a study of the human nature». The analysis of the experience conducted from the pragmatist perspective allows us to specify the pedagogical function of the «spiritual feeling» in the path of consciousness of the subject: the faith, in fact, seen in its operative dynamic, increases the experimental conviction that the world can improve and it prepares in such way to raise and to invigorate the relationship with the life. In such perspective it is underlined the «therapeutic» function of moral emotions for the existence in general, and their specific impact on the process of formation and behavior of the human being.

The gist of this paper is to closely examine the actual demands of the students under the education of philosophy, and execute such a philosophy education as to meet the demands, so that any plan of securing the proper status of philosophy education in the university society might be made. While it says that the philosophy education should be newly programmed, such a new programming cannot be talked about without considering the new trends or framework in the university education on the whole, which is called the “convergence education.” In case the convergence education is highlighted more intensively, the significance of the philosophy education becomes prominent more and more, and this is very encouraging thereto.

In the decision of modern problems of education and, first of all, removal of extreme measures of unification and autonomic of its development the significant role is got with strategy of optimum forming of a harmonious parity of sensual and rational approaches in the organization and conducting educational processes in preparation of youth for a life. Educational process is indissoluble unity sensual and rational as preparation of the person for a life it is necessary includes as purchase versatile and a profound knowledge and skills, and the certain personal attitude (feelings, behaviors) it to the world, other people and to itself. If sensual approaches are characterized mainly by problems of formation of practical knowledge of the person about the validity, progresses of its first-hand experience and the attitude to a life within the limits of culture of the nearest environment rational approaches at the most are focused on progress of intelligence of the person, on formation of its capacity completely to capture and interpret great volume of the information. Both that, and another approaches contain the dignity and the lacks. Therefore, in rational strategy of education scholastic theoretical speculations quite often replaces everyday, practical knowledge. As a result, the person not always correctly understands and estimates the importance of the decision of those or other problems in sphere of the activity and development of the country.Rational approaches dominate over modern education systems. Rational domination in educational processes shows that there is a gap between scientific and personal models of an image of the world of the modern person. All this considerably affects moral consciousness of modern youth and its civil socialization. For this reason, it is important to lead at reforming education systems to conformity (harmony) of sensual and rational approaches.

In this essay, I shall explore some of the constitutive features associated with a philosophy of Islamic education. Firstly, I argue that the rationale of Islamic education is to engender a good person – a person of virtue who has the capacity to enact justice to everyone wherever he or she might be. Secondly, I shall show how such a form of universal justice can be achieved through the acts of ummah (communal engagement), shūrā (public deliberation) and jihād (just striving, including the recognition of the rights of others).

This paper is a section that is included in a philosophy of education doctoral thesis on John Locke’s educational epistemology. In this part, I argue that Locke’s conception of liberty as limited based on the natural law and later the civil laws can shed a light on our understanding of freedom in our educational practice. Lockean call for the balance between limited freedom of individual and limited governance of political authority is theoretically translated at the end of this paper into the call for the practical balance between limited freedom of students and limited governance of teachers. Then this paper will offer logical ground for Locke’s understanding of freedom and its limitation, and suggest a theoretical connection to an argument on epistemic liberty in education.

The aim of this presentation is to show that philosophy of education must seriously engage itself with horizons of education. After a brief explanation of the term “horizon”, the horizon of modern pedagogy, which was inaugurated by Pestalozzi and Herbart, is examined. Modern pedagogy with its special emphasis on method unravels itself as one of the major streams of modern epistemology, for which inspection of inner ideas is crucial. The modern epistemology, on the other hand, presupposes the atomistic self represented by the Lockian dark room. This is the horizon of modern pedagogy. One of the deficiencies of this horizon is that it is not capable of articulating the educational aim on its own terms. Thus, dealing with the aim of education, modern pedagogy was obliged to use terms such as God or Nature, the terms, of which philosophical origin goes back to the Cave metaphor of Plato. This takes us to the second part of the presentation: the examination of the Cave metaphor in order to unravel the horizon of the classical education, paideia. The comparison of the two horizons will show the importance of horizon, about which philosophy of education must be sensitive.

Today in education as well as in a society suppression and aggression reveal itself very actively. The word "suppression" in a modern society is used in many meanings; it includes all forms of physical, psychological and economic suppression. There is no system or mechanism to oppose it, to protect the education area of suppression and aggression, they are not outworked. Philosophy of education considers non-aggressive activity as a modern trend in Russian education, which developing non-aggressive relations as a standard of social life will help the society to overcome the revealed suppression and aggression. Non-suppression is a principle, action, position. Non-suppression is an ideological, ethic and vital principle, which is based on recognition of all living, a man and his life, rejection of suppression as a way of relation of a man with the world, the nature and other people. There are many methods of non-suppressedactivity in education. First of all, it is a refusal of force; non-suppressed action as a collaboration, joint activity; non-suppressed action as a help; non-suppressed action as a reduction of aggressive value of opposite side.