Ľubomír Dunaj, Čínska filozofia , Bondy a hľadanie ciest k eliminácii hypertrofovaneho ega (SK 2018)
V súvislosti s rozmanitými procesmi, pre časť ktorých sa v posledných desaťročiach zaužíval termín globalizácia, Egon Bondy už v Júliiných otázkach na začiatku sedemdesiatych rokov hovorí o novej osovej dobe. Hoci nepoužil slovo globalizácia, podarilo sa mu identifikovať podstatnú časť toho, čo ju v súčasnosti charakterizuje. S tým sú azda najviac naliehavý dôvod, prečo sa dnes venovať čínskej filozofii. Ten tkvie práve v historicky bezprecedentnom náraste globálnych interakcií, v rámci ktorých Čína zohráva stále významnejšiu rolu. Preto je nevyhnutné oboznámiť sa s „ideovou chrbticou“ tejto krajiny. To znamená, že nestačí študovať len napríklad čínsku históriu, kultúru, politiku, ekonomiku či geopolitiku a jej stále výraznejšie globálne implikácie, ale je nutné poznať aj čínsku filozofiu – tak v jej historických podobách, ako aj u súčasných autorov, a to nielen v Čínskej ľudovej republike, ale i na Taiwane, v Hongkongu, Singapure či ďalších čínskych enklávach vo svete, pričom nemožno vynechať ani dôležité interpretácie od nečínskych autorov…
The paper deals with Foucault‘s course The Hermeneutics of a Subject whose main theme is the genealogy of the care of the self in Greek and Roman Thought Traditions. Author focuses on the ways in which Foucault distinguishes between classical Socrates and Plato‘s self-care and Hellenistic forms of the care of the self. While the original Socratic-Platonic model of the care of the self is of a political and pedagogical nature, self-referencing techniques in the 1st – 2nd century. A.D. acquire an autonomous form that results in the culture of the self. The care of the self becomes the art of the self, the art of one‘s own existence.
Academic journal Human Affairs (Vol. 27, 4/2017, pp. 466–484) published “The inner conflict of modernity, the moderateness of Confucianism and critical theory”by Ľubomír Dunaj.
This paper deals with Care of the Self under globalization. The first part refers to Johann P. Arnason’s interpretation of Jan Patočka’s work on super-civilization and shows the contradictions facing people in the Modern Era. It suggests that the concept of moderateness is an adequate point of departure for handling the various contradictions of the current epoch. The second part looks at selected aspects of Confucian philosophy in which moderateness, that is, the permanent search for a “middle position” is an integral part of that philosophical tradition. The critical actualisation of Confucianism as proposed for instance by Heiner Roetz is seen as an appropriate way of developing the dialogical characteristics of Confucian philosophy. In the last part it is stressed that critical theory is of relevance when identifying various forms of suffering and because of its ability to understand and critically evaluate diverse cultural and social contexts.
Profesor politickej filozofie na Univerzite Paris XII a Inštitúte politických štúdií, zostavovateľ posledných Foucaultových prednášok na Sorbonne, Frédéric Gros uvádza týmito slovami svoje filozofické reflexie o tej najobyčajnejšej z ľudských činností – chôdzi. Kníh na túto tému už vzniklo niekoľko. Okrem Laurie Leeho, Kerouaca, Wordswortha je asi najznámejšia Chôdza H. D. Thoreaua. Svoj okruh čitateľov si tieto knihy nájdu vždy. Ale kniha Grosa ich všetky jasne predčí, nakoniec, len vo Francúzsku sa predalo viac ako 100.000 výtlačkov. Dôvodov tohto čitateľského úspechu je niekoľko.
Vladislav Suvák, The Essence of Truth (aletheia) and the Western Tradition in the Thought of Heidegger and Patočka (EN 2017), In: Jeff Love (ed.), Heidegger in Russia and Eastern Europe, London – New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Heidegger’s influence in the twentieth century probably outstrips that of any other philosopher, at least in the so-called Continental tradition. The ‘revolution’ Heidegger brought about with his compelling readings of the broader philosophical tradition transformed German philosophy and spread quickly to most of Europe, the United States and Japan. This volume examines Heidegger’s influence in a region where his reception has had a remarkable and largely hidden history: Eastern Europe and Russia.
The book begins by addressing two important literary influences on Heidegger: Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. It goes on to examine Heidegger’s philosophical influence, and features three crucial figures in the reception of Heidegger’s thought in Eastern Europe and Russia: Vladimir Bibikhin, Krzysztof Michalski, and Jan Patočka. Finally the volume deals with an often vexed issue in current treatments of Heidegger: the importance of Heidegger’s philosophy for politics. The book includes essays by an international team of contributors, including leading representatives of Heideggerian thought in Russia today. Heidegger’s thought plays a key role in debates over Russian identity and the geopolitical role Russia has to play in the world. The volume surveys the complicated landscape of post-Soviet philosophy, and how the rise of widely differing appropriations of Heidegger exploit familiar fault lines in the Russian reception of Western thinkers that date back to the first stirrings of a distinctively Russian philosophical tradition.
Vladislav Suvák: The Art of Living between Socrates and Epictetus (Umenie života medzi Sókratom a Epiktétom SK 2017)
Filozofia, 2017, Vol. 72, No. 2, pp. 81-91
The concept of philosophy as an art or a way of life is an invention of Socratic philosophy. During the Hellenistic era, later Stoics developed the original Socrates’ conviction of the care of the self into a systematic attitude called “art of living”. The paper deals with differences we see between Socratic and Stoic concepts of philosophy on the background of the lectures on ancient problematizations of life given by Michel Foucault. The main purpose of the paper is an interpretation of Epictetus’ concept of art of living as a philosophical attitude to the life of the individual, which is not primary connected with philosophical knowledge (mathēsis) but rather with constant work of the self on the self (askēsis).
Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 2016, 6 (3–4), 135–145
This paper consists of two parts. The first deals with the issue of whether it is possible to coherently employ the term ‘critical Confucian’ in general, i.e. whether it is a paradox or oxymoron. It will be argued that Confucianism should not be identified with any particular ideology and, therefore, can be critical. This critical potential, in turn, can be developed by bringing it into dialogue with Critical Theory. As such, the second part indicates, in an introductory way, some possible overlaps between Confucianism and Critical Theory by comparing Heiner Roetz’s and Axel Honneth’s respective interpretations of these traditions.
Keywords: Chinese philosophy, Confucianism, Critical theory, Global ethics
Academic journal Filozofia published an interview with Zdeněk Neubauer (CZ 2016)
Pavol Sucharek: “Abstraction as a subject of the care for the soul in contemporary art.” In: Jaroslava Vydrová (ed.): Care for the soul: The Lives of Subjectivity and the Forms of Thought.
VEDA Publishing House of the Slovak Academy of Science has published the collections of essays about Pragmatism and Neopragmatism written by Emil Višňovský. The book is the result of long-year studies, analyses and interpretations of the American philosophy of pragmatism and its present form, the neopragmatism. It is not only a historical and philosophical perspective as the author also deals with the topical questions such as cultural identity, participative democracy, norm, globalization, and biotics. The studies present an insightful overall characteristics of this philosophical line of thought, its development and its principal representatives, especially J. Dewey and R. Rorty. The last chapter of the book deals with the art of living from Pragmatist perspective.
GEORGE BOYS-STONES, CHRISTOPHER ROWE: The Circle of Socrates. Readings in the First-Generation Socratics. Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Co. 2013.
In addition to works by Plato and Xenophon, we know of dozens of treatises and dialogues written by followers of Socrates that are now lost. The surviving evidence for these writings constitutes an invaluable resource for our understanding of Socrates and his philosophical legacy. The Circle of Socrates presents new—sometimes the first—English translations of a representative selection of this evidence, set alongside extracts from Plato and Xenophon. The texts are arranged according to theme, with concise introductions that provide an overview of the topics and the main lines of thought within them.
The aim is to give a fuller account of the philosophical activity of Socrates’ immediate followers: both to shed light on less well known figures (some of whom inspired schools and movements that were influential in the development of later thought), and also to improve our grasp of the intellectual context within which Plato and Xenophon, the most important of the Socratics, lived and wrote. Included are a general introduction to the history, content, and character of these writings; a bibliography; an index of sources; and an index of the Socratics and their works.
Review of the book The Circle of Socrates published in Slovak academic journal Filozofia by Lívia Flachbartová (SK 2014)
Vojtěch Hladký: Změnit sám sebe. Duchovní cvičení P. Hadota, péče o sebe M. Foucaulta a péče o duši J. Patočky. Pavel Mervart 2010 (CZ)
The present work attempts to trace the mutual relations between the conceptions of spiritual exercises of P. Hadot, the care of soul of M. Foucault, and the care of the soul of J. Patočka. P. Hadot aims to provide a new interpretation of ancient philosophical texts which he considers to be a kind of spiritual exercises the goal of which is a deeper, existential transformation of man. At the same time he wants to remind us of a certain dimension of philosophy which to much extent has been forgotten in modern times. M. Foucault uses the historical material, namely the ancient and Christian ethical behaviour, in order to show different manners of constitution of subject. It is conceived by him as the relation to oneself and which he connects with his concept of knowledge and relations of power which are present in a given society. The presentation of a different, past ethics that is always connected with subject is then used by Foucault to relativize the way we understand ourselves. Finally, J. Patočka uncovers the leading thread behind the history of European civilization. According to him, it is the care of the soul that takes its form from its relation to truth transcending and questioning the every day life.
In the second stage the study examines the places where the three authors meet as well as the points of convergence and divergence among them. Such a confrontation of their key concepts – rather than pure comparison – may help to understand the limits of their approach which is most urgently felt in the approach of P. Hadot who underestimates the systematic and theoretic aspect of philosophy.
To the main body of the study dedicated to Hadot, Foucault, and Patočka “Secret Appendix” is added which tries to develop the thought of the previous three authors – with further help of the work of R. Brague and R. Chlup – in a kind of overview of the constitution of the self in relation to different conceptions of the world and its transformation during the transition from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. More specifically, the different conceptions of time and will by Aristotle, Plotinus, and Augustine are examined in order to show the progressive changing of the conception of man which consists mainly in his liberating from the structure of the cosmos in ancient thought and relating him directly to his creator in Christianity. During this process the concept of free will in the modern sense also emerges (in the work of Augustine). Similarly, a confrontation among the different Neoplatonists (Plotinus, Proclus, Dionysius the Areopagite) is made in order to support this claim further and to trace the development of the idea of the all-compassing hierarchy connecting the God with his creation which is widespread in the Middle Ages.
This collection features the revised versions of the papers presented at ‘Socratica III – a conference on Socrates, the Socratics, and the ancient Socratic literature’.
This conference is the latest of a series of Socratica symposia, previously held in Senigallia (2005) and Naples (2008), which were devoted to the developments of the research on the complex world serving as a context for Plato and his dialogues.
This volume approaches the ‘Socratic question’ from a viewpoint that departs radically from mainstream lines of interpretation. The focus is not on the ‘formal order’ of the Socratics, that is on their subdivision in ‘schools’ and the ‘doctrines’ peculiar to each, but on the theoretical issues that these thinkers were able to develop in the fierce struggle among themselves. The papers dwell on the dynamic context in which these issues were posed, discussed, and eventually fixed in dogmatic theories within the philosophical and non-philosophical Greek literature of the V and IV centuries B.C.
Following topics are examined: 1. the ‘intellectual movement’ around Socrates, i.e. Aristophanes and Comedy, Isocrates, Antisthenes, Chaerephon, Aeschines, Plato, and Xenophon; 2. the literary context in which the texts of the Socratics are framed; 3. major topics discussed within this movement, and their development within and outside the Socratic circle (apologetics, dialectics, politics, misology, eudaimonia, eusebeia, Eros, enthousiasmos, parrhesia, protreptics, spoudaiogeloion, epistemology and teleology); the reception of these issues in Late Antiquity, from Aristotle up to the Stoic, Neoplatonic and Arab traditions; 4. the state of the art of the ‘Socratic question’, and reviews of the major publications that appeared on Socrates and the Socratics between 2010 and 2011 (D. Morrison’s Companion, L.-A. Dorion’s and F. Bevilacqua’s editions of the Memorabilia, and V. Gray’s works on Xenophon and G. Danzig’s book on the apologetic side of the earlier Socratic literature).
Fulvia de Luise is Adjunct Professor of Ancient Philosophy at the University of Trento. She has published several books and articles on the hermeneutics of Platonic texts and the ethics and politics in the tradition of Socratic thought. She is author (with G. Farinetti) of Felicità Socratica (Hildesheim 1997) and Storia della felicità. Gli antichi e i moderni (Torino 2001).
Alessandro Stavru holds a research and teaching appointment at the Freie Universität Berlin. Since 2005 he is the Co-Organizer of the Socratica colloquiums and the Co-Editor of the Proceedings arising from them, having published a number of books and articles on Socrates and the Socratics.
Comenius University Press has published Antisthenis Fragmenta. The book contains surviving fragments of Antisthenes – one of the closest followers of Socrates. Andrej Kalaš has translated the complete edition of Antisthenes’ fragments by Giannantoni from Greek and Latin into Slovak. Vladislav Suvák has edited Greek and Latin fragments and elaborated extensive commentaries (in Slovak). The title includes complete corpus of Antisthenes’ fragments and refers to the most important interpretations and commentaries of Antisthenes’ thought written over the past two centuries.
O dialektickom charaktere Antisthenovho “Aianta” a “Odyssea” (On the dialectical character of Antisthenes’ “Ajax” and “Odysseus”). Filosofický časopis 1/2013 (SK)
The aim of this study is to introduce Antisthenes’ declamations Ajax and Odysseus into the wider context of Socratic literature. The interpretation has as its starting point the question of whether it is possible to read these declamations from the viewpoint of Socratic dialectic. The first part reminds us of the difference between rhetoric and dialectic, which Plato adumbrated in the Protagoras, where the long monological declamation (makros logos) is opposed to the short dialogical declamation (brachulogia). The second part is devoted to the interpretation of some of Antisthenes’ fragments which adumbrate how Antisthenes connects brachulogia with the investigation of virtue (aretē), but at the same time criticised Plato’s attempts to find an essentialist understanding of them. It was against Plato that he evidently aimed his concept oikeios logos and the thesis concerning the impossibility of contradiction, which we might understand with the help of the Socratic doctrine of the harmfulness of unknowing. The last part tackles the various aspects of Antisthenes’ declamations, relates them to the foregoing interpretation and shows their dialectical character, as well as Antisthenes’ peculiar understanding of the relation between rhetoric and dialectic.