Вестник Томского государственного университета. Философия. Социология. Политология №4 (32) 2015

Стр.3

Стр.4

Стр.5

Стр.6

 : .   XX–XXI », 1–7  2015 . . .  ............................................................................................................ 7 .  . .   « » ..................................................................................... 11  .,  .        ...................................................................... 17 .      ..................................................................................................................... 26  .         .................................................................. 36 ..  .-.  ............... 46 . «»  ............................................... 54 . .  .............................................. 65  .   . ,     ............................................................................................................................... 71 , ,   .   :   ............................................................................................................................... 85 . ............................ 94 . : pro et contra...................................................................102 .     « »                  ...........................................................................................................................115 . :  .............................................125  .     (  )........................................................................................................134   .       :    ...............................................................141 .  :  . ............................................................................................................151 ...............................159 .: .................170 .  .........................................................................................................175  .    : ?.................................................................................184 . ............190

Стр.3

. . «»   2011–2012  ............................................199 ............................................................209 ., .   ...................................................................................222 .........................230  . «»   ...................................................................................................................................240 .  ..................................................................255  .  «»  : . , . , , .-...............................................................................267  .,  . .   . :  .......................................................................................................................278 .......................................................................287  . , , :    ..................................................................................................................................298 .  – : ............309 ., .  » .............................................................................................................................318  .    :    .  ..................................................................................................................326 . ....................................................................333  .        .......................................................................................................................345 ……………………………………………………………...………….…353

Стр.4

CONTENTS PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE: "PHENOMENOLOGICAL-ONTOLOGICAL CONCEPTION G.G. SHPET AND HUMANITARIAN PROJECTS XX–XXI CENTURIES ", 1–7 JUNE 2015 Mazaeva O. G. On the study of the legacy of Gustav Shpet at The Sixth Shpet Readings................................................................................................................................ 7 Venditti M. Philosophical language of G.G. Shpet. Some observations about the experience of Italian translation of «The inner form of the word»............................................. 11 Denn M., Tepp F. The problems of translation of Appearance and sense in the context of the intersection of phenomenology and hermeneutics .......................................................... 17 Evstropov M. N. Social ontology of Gustav Shpet and the problem of empathy in phenomenology...................................................................................................................... 26 Inishev I.N. Gustav Schpett's notion of the hermeneutic intuition in the light of actionist approaches to the theory of perception....................................................................... 36 Laurukhin A.V. The Phenomenon of art in G.G. Shpet’s and H.-G. Gadamer’s philosophy ............................................................................................................................ 46 Malyshkin E. V. Homonymy of “I” and distributive knowledge.............................................. 54 Naiman E. A. G.G. Shpet about the nation and the nationalism problems................................ 65 Plotnikov N.S. Art and reality. Hegel, Shpet and Russian aesthetics........................................ 71 ONTOLOGY, EPISTEMOLOGY, LOGIC Borovinskaya D. N. The modern theory of creativity: the levels of scientific knowledge ............................................................................................................................. 85 Domanov O. A. A mathematical model of Deleuze’s ontology of becoming............................ 94 Ladov V.A. Formal realism: pro et contra..............................................................................102 Lobovikov V. . Formal limiting domain of applicability of “Hume’s Guillotine” and explicating the border-line between the nature-metaphysics and the classical physics by means of two-valued algebra of metaphysics as formal axiology ............................................115 Makhaev M.R. Metaphors and meaningless expressions: about genesis the problem of metaphors in the analytical philosophy....................................................................................125 Nesterov A.Y. Projective semiosis in hermeneutics (in the context of technical consciousness) .......................................................................................................................134 SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY AND PHILOSOPHY OF HUMANITY Agafonova E. V. The concept of responsibility and the problem of imputation in the ethical and legal discourse: a critique of theories of causation in ethics.....................................141 Antukh G. G. To a question about the psychologism: problem of logical ruleimplementation ......................................................................................................................151

Стр.5

Butakov P. A. Analytic metaphysics of Eucharistic time.........................................................159 Didikin A. B. Causality and responsibility: philosophical and legal analysis ...........................170 Melik-Gaykazyan I. V. Symbolism of bioethics in research of modern culture transformations ......................................................................................................................175 Mescheryakova T.V. Sociocultural Foundations of Bioethics’ Genesis: Individuality or Identity? ............................................................................................................................184 Postnikova D. I. Sociolinguistic characteristics of feminist utopias .........................................190 Rogovich T. V. Anti-language as a social form of language on the example of Russian protest discourse (2011–2012) ................................................................................................199 Syrov V. N. The role of the principles in the moral decision making........................................209 Chernikova I. V., Sherenkova V. V. The problem of human nature conservation as a new dimension identity crisis..................................................................................................222 Shamis D. A. Moral feeling as the foundation of knowledge in the field of morality ...............230 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Berestov I. V. “Unity of being” in Parmenides as indistinguishability noema’s constituents............................................................................................................................240 Boyko V. A. Friedrich Nietzsche’s apology of war..................................................................255 Krechetova M. Yu. Concept of "experience" in a hermeneutics: F. Shleiermacher, W. Diltey, M. Heidegger, G.-G. Gadamer ...............................................................................267 Kruglova I. N., Kruglov V. L. S. Frank and J. Derrida : the need for the impossible ...............278 Maslov D.K. Essence of skeptical investigation......................................................................287 Miroshnichenko M. D. Sound, object, projection: Wittgenstein and understanding music.....................................................................................................................................298 Mishura A. S. The will is not an experience: the philosophy of action in Ludwig Wittgenstein’s later works ......................................................................................................309 Ogleznev V. V., Bryanskiy S.N. Isaiah Berlin and problems with the definition of freedom.................................................................................................................................318 Pavlov I. I. Compositional techniques and inexpressible: to L. Wittgenstein’s philosophy of music ...............................................................................................................326 Rogonyan G. S. Davidson and the principle of distrust ...........................................................333 Shevchuk E. S. The pluralism and egalitarism of Wadysaw Tatarkiewicz’s aesthetical conception.............................................................................................................345

Стр.6