RUDN Journal of Philosophy
Latest Publications

The study of education systems as social phenomena has led scholars to question the role of education in modern society. The question of how to improve education naturally leads to concerns about what is wrong with the present education system. If education is meant to elevate the next generation, how can it meet the goal of ensuring a meaningful existence for those being educated? Scholars have demonstrated that education has been reduced to a process of the construction of objects, where curriculum as techne commodifies students into products with market value. We propose that the tendency of interpreting techne as technology is a perspective of the modern age, and the rules of modern education are based on the rules of modern technology, under the guidance of the paradigm of productivity. We will introduce a broader interpretation of techne which frames it as the cultivation of virtue, i.e., virtue-techne. On this basis, education could be viewed as techne in the sense of praxis (practice, exercise), rather than as fabrication in the sense of production. We highlight the rising rate of student suicides in Taiwan in recent years, where we determine the education system lacks a focus on praxis. This article investigates alternative praxis-oriented notions of education, from Aristotle's cultivation of virtue to Hadot's "spiritual exercises," to advocate for a shift away from the production paradigm. Indebted to Heidegger, we clarify his "techne as revealing" by emphasizing two frameworks for education: The first, modern education being valued by its adherence to metrics based in the paradigm of production. The second, education as a process wherein its value is derived from the life context of the participating individual. Finally, as a comparative study, we explore the current state of education in Russia and Taiwan, and present the case of one high school in Taiwan which has adopted the practice of spiritual exercises in its curriculum, including a required hike to the peak of Taiwan's tallest mountain, to cultivate a sense of (and value for) the liberated life before its students graduate.

The aim of this article is to describe the basic parameters of a value-oriented approach to assessing the education results as a possible basis for the methodology for assessment of the educational work in the general system of education. The key methods we used were content analysis of text sources, cross-reference analysis, comparative analysis, and humanitarian examination of juristic documents. The interpretation of education as a unity of teaching and upbringing for the state as a key subject of education, which forms the requirements for the results and organization of the educational process, sets the task of assessing personal, subject and metasubject educational results. The philosophy of education faces a challenge regarding the determination of the expediency of assessing educational results, the conceptual basis of assessment, fixing the orientation of assessment on the conditions of educational organzations' activities, and (or) on the results achieved by students. A practical managerial task is to develop an attitude towards using formalized procedures and methods for assessing educational results. The article proposes a value-oriented approach to assessing the educational work in the general education system of the Russian Federation based on an analysis of key regulatory documents of the Russian education system, the interpretation of upbringing as a process of forming value-semantic attitudes. The approach is based on identifying three main groups of value orientations to build a possible system of indicators that fix educational results: "Value orientations related to life, health and safety"; "Value orientations of social interaction"; "Value orientations of personal development". Values are an essential element in regulating human behavior, which guides the process of defining goals and choosing the means to achieve them. Values acquire a functional character in value orientations and can serve as indicators of education results at the level of students as a collective subject. It seems impossible to single out the contribution of individual actors to the output of education and to avoid contradictions between the value-semantic attitudes that exist in the space of modern culture. For the education system, the subject of assessing the quality of upbringing as a purposeful process can be both the quality of the organization of upbringing work and the outcomes of upbringing efforts. The results of education as a manifestation of value orientations in the activities of students can be considered based on quantitative and qualitative indicators, which is significant for making managerial decisions at different levels.

The Lancet stated in its editorial on the 9th of May 2020 that the situation in Brazil was very problematic insofar as the COVID-19 pandemic was concerned. More than a year later, Brazil already registered more than half a million deaths from complications of COVID-19, which places it in second place in the world ranking of deaths despite having the seventh-largest population in the world. Despite this utterly tragic situation, in July 2021, almost 40% of the Brazilian population approved of the federal government's role in confronting the pandemic, and the Brazilian elites have defended openly the view that the economy was more important than individuals' lives. Given this context, in this article, we reflect on the issue of plutocracy, demonstrating its platonic authoritarian foundations, in order to understand the Brazilian elites' attitude toward the pandemic, which had no proper regard or care for the most vulnerable in society. Through this philosophical inquiry we indicate the importance of education, particularly of philosophy of education, in encouraging educationists and educational systems to reflect on problematic issues and self-reflect so as to identify possible educational deficiencies and shortcomings that created the conditions for individuals' attitudes of indifference to the victims of the pandemic and the vulnerable in society.

Muhammad Abed Al-Jabri (1935-2010) is one of the significant philosophical and scientific figures who left their strong and broad imprint in various fields of contemporary Arab culture. Al-Jabri created his philosophy towards various aspects of Arab history. This included philosophy, theology, politics, ethics, and other aspects. His philosophical works culminated in his famous book on "The Arab Mind," in which he dealt with "The Structure of the Arab Mind" and supplemented it with his famous book - "Critique of the Arab Mind." The article's primary task is limited to addressing the intellectual path of Al-Jabri by tracing what he wrote and the content of these works. Besides, in this article, what Al-Jabri wrote is arranged in chronological order in order to clarify the features of the general and particular course of his philosophical creativity. It is a necessary task for scientific research in his philosophy. It provides the reader and researcher with the complete basic set of his books.

Introduction A good example of emergentism - interpreted by M. Siderits [1] as - Buddhist reductionism) is an excerpt from the dialogue between King Milinda[4] and the monk Nāgasena[5] about the self, which is part of the text close to the Abhidhamma tradition entitled "Milindapaha" (or "Questions of King Milinda"). The text was published by V. Trenckner in 1880 in [2] and translated into English by T.W. Rhys Davids [3] in the series "Sacred Books of the East". Furthermore, there is an English translation by I. B. Horner [4] and Bhikkhu Pesala [5] and into Russian by A.V. Paribok [6]. There are also German [7] and French translations [8; 9]. Yet the classical translation by Rhys Davids is currently largely obsolete. Paribok's translation into Russian is not convenient for practical use as it would need to be further translated into English, and this double translation, which is not very good from the point of view of the philological approach to the text. We have therefore decided to make our own, new translation of the passage from "Milindapaha", in which the dialogue about the self is being held.

Georges Gurvitch (1894-1965), from the 1920s to the end of his life, was solving the problem of combining unity and plurality in the justification of society. He believed that individualism and collectivism represented social processes in a limited way because they were based on the preconception that the binding power of law derives respectively from a private or corporate actor's will. Gurvitch contrasted individual law with the social one, which was intended to overcome the opposition between individualism and collectivism. Social law bases on legal sociology's assumption that social interactions as such are already legal relations. This conclusion allows Gurvitch to consider any social interaction as a source of law and to assert legal pluralism as a way of constructing society. The integrity of the latter is a condition for the mutual correlation of the multiplicity of legal regulations generated by internal social interactions into the unified structure of social law. In a holistic approach to comprehending social interactions, Gurvitch, in his Russian-language works in the migr period, uses the philosophical-legal interpretation of sobornost to describe society's integrity. In French- and English-language works from the 1930s, Gurvitch uses the term "totality," which he learned from Marcel Mauss, to describe social integrity. This article compares sobornost and totality as variants of denoting social integrity in Gurvitch's social law doctrine. The researcher determines that Gurvitch, using the concepts of sobornost and totality, interpreted society's development differently, 1) as anti-hierarchical sobornost equality, and 2) as a hierarchical inordination of totalities. Having analyzed the peculiarities of the interpretation of sobornost and totality in Gurvitch's works, the author concludes that these concepts should be considered multilingual equivalents in denoting communal unity as sources of law, which reflect changes in the interpretation of society in Gurvitch's social law doctrine.

The well-known epistolary conflict between Fyodor Dostoevsky and Nikolai Strakhov over the latter's slander of the great Russian writer's terrible sins is considered in the article from the point of view a philosophical anthropology and relations not two but between three participants of this story: Dostoyevsky, Strakhov and Tolstoy. This conflict is presented through anthropological, existential, and class prisms of description, based on a reconstruction of Strakhov's concept of man as a controversial, dual, and undefined being reflected in Dostoevsky's work. A direct relation between the definition of the dual nature of man in the works of Strakhov and Dostoevsky and interpersonal conflicts within "boundary forms of literature" is substantiated. Special attention is paid to the class of seminarians, the object of Dostoevsky's targeted criticism. He saw their worst characteristics in Strakhov personality. Tolstoy plays the role of an arbiter in this controversy, assessing the situation both in terms of literary, existential and religious thought. In the course of his examination of this conflict, his unexpected closeness to Dostoevsky was discovered in regard to assessment of Strakhov. The point of their coincidence was the "pink Christianity" of the writers, who justify man in a quite similar manner, in terms of their religious consciousness.

In the article analyzes the origin of Chinese ritualism based on the ideas expressed by well-known Sinologist V.V. Malyavin. The ceremoniality of Chinese culture, which has survived to the present day, is often presented to Europeans as a "relic of the past", a "retarding" mechanism in the civilization of Celestial. The author also demonstrates the fallacy of such beliefs and the closeness of some of the oldest complexes of the Chinese mentality and the postmodern mentality. In parallel, the basic foundations of the European and Chinese consciousness / unconscious are traced: cosmos and emptiness; man and the world as substances and as networks; the ratio of the signifier and the signified, the idea of true reality as such in European and Chinese traditions.

Muhammad Abed Al-Jabri (1935-2010) is a famous philosophical and scientific figure in contemporary Arab thought. He is the author of the philosophy of "the Arab mind" and "the criticism of the Arab mind." He tried to establish his theory of looking at the ancient Arab heritage and modern Arab thought. He also tried to view them according to the critical vision criteria, which he laid the methodological foundations for in his essential philosophical writings, especially in the critique of the Arab mind trilogy. In this study, I seek to analyze and study various aspects of his analytical and critical approach towards Al-Ghazali and his theoretical creativity. As well as revealing the specificity of his position on the intellectual path of Al-Ghazali himself, based on the sequence of his books, Al-Jabri considered Al-Ghazali's personality as a large and complex problem, so that It is challenging to define entirely and accurately. However, this does not exclude him from the possibility of defining the criteria of science in general and philosophy in particular. In this research, I tried to reveal that the position of Al-Jabri himself represents in some sense the continuation of the problematic and complexity of Al-Ghazali himself. Al-Jabri raised more problems than the answer to them. And the controversy remains and is getting stronger. The research into the personality and works of Al-Ghazali seems to have been and will remain for a long time due to the problematic character of Al-Ghazali himself, the diversity and differences of his intellectual, creative writing, and his tortuous nature. Hence, this study constitutes a contribution in this field.

-