Social Epistemology today is argued to allow an adequate formulation of questions for exploring the issues in the process of scientific cognition. A formulation of such questions is claimed to have been impossible in the framework of classical thinking. One such issue is claimed to be the theme of transhumanism which moved from the realm of science fiction to the sphere of rational discussion. The author argues that today philosophers and scientists are discussing the question whether material objects, both natural and man-made, can think. Obviously, the author continues, we cannot assume that the thinking of man-made devices is human. Material carriers of programs also differ radically by the type of their materiality from the human body and brain. But, the man is also changing in his communication with the machine, adapting to it. The process of thinking itself is argued to have become different, especially given that an increasing number of organs of the human body are now replaced with artificial ones. The author states that today one of the central problems of philosophy is what would result from such humanization of machines and mechanization of humans. This problem is argued to be open.

The difficulties of the biological taxonomy development are argued to have been historically associated with two main problems: 1) the problem of searching for essential features which was unachievable within the framework of empiric taxonomy andcould be solved as a part of the mature theory; 2) the problem of developing of a model of the biological object the remedies of which were developed only in the XX century. The author argues that both problems are associated with the development of classificatory and system ontology and the relevant methodologies. The classificatory methodology from its inception is argued to have developed as a means of classification of biological diversity; furthermore it is claimed to have been assumed that the features representing classes possessed ontological nature that is they actually represent individual objects. The author concludes that taking into account the empiric nature of taxonomy that assumption turned to be false. In the modern taxonomy along with the classical approach a classificatory-system approach was developed. Fundamentally, it is a transition from the classical approach to the modern one which is held to imply the development of a system model of the study subject.

The author investigates the content of the notion of subject from the evolutionary-epistemological point of view. She claims that evolutionary epistemology does not clarify this problem by itself and argues that this state of affairs raises a number of problems such as absolutization of adaptationism, biologism in knowledge, lack of a clear demarcation between animal cognition and human cognitive activity. It is argued that a man is the only subject of cognition in evolutionary epistemology. Inasmuch as person constructs and enriches the environment he becomes a pressure factor by himself. This claim is argued to counter the thesis of adaptation. So adaptationist interpretation of the evolution of human cognitive activity is insufficient. The phenomenon of environmental change through the development of cognitive abilities by the person is represented in society, communication and culture. Cognition is determined by anticipating the result of purpose. In this connection, the constructive activity of the cognitive person confronted with the limitations of her own cognitive capabilities and environmental restricting factors. Thus, the evolution of man is considered as self-development, which is carried out through the creative overcoming external and internal constraints through the constructive activity of the agent of cognition.

The paper discusses one of the central problems of contemporary formal semantics — counterexamples to the predictions of the theory of binding (due to N. Chomsky). In particular, the author addresses cases of the so-called coreferential readings of reflexive pronouns which are standardly predicted to receive only the bound reading. The author examines theories of T. Reinhart and I. Heim and suggests an extension ofthe latter theory in order to enable it to account for the aforementioned readings of reflexive pronouns.

The fifth volume of Richard Rorty's "Philosophical papers" published by Cambridge University Press, consists of the works which American philosopher wrote at the very dawn of his career in 1960s and early 1970s. In these essays Rorty addresses issues of transcendental argumentation, the internalism/externalism controversy, mind-body dualism and psychophysical monism, semantic truth, reference and justification. Supplemented by Daniel Dennett's Foreword, the book gives an excellent idea of Rorty's «analytical» writings and his evolution from eliminative materialism to pragmatism.