This article seeks to highlight and present two seemingly different conceptions of the philosophy of mind belonging to Ludwig Wittgenstein and Richard Rorty. In this context, we first consider Wittgenstein’s critique of private languages, which is then used to reject and deconstitute the privacy of consciousness. In addition, the paper follows the evolving and deconstitutive character of Rorty’s philosophy of mind, showing how the American philosopher constantly defined consciousness, mind, or later selfhood – using naturalistic methods. The authors maintain and (...) justify the thesis that both philosophers have a common denominator which manifests itself in the rejection of traditional and metaphysical conceptions of consciousness and identity, but they also try to point out certain shortcomings and inconsistencies within the two conceptions of the philosophy of mind. (shrink)

The paper discusses the position of young people in Serbia today, as can be inferred from the evidence collected in the study "Politics and everyday life - three years later". Starting from the typology she developed in her 2002 analysis of young people?s interviews, the author traces the changes that have intervened over the past three years in the attitudes of these same respondents concerning politics, personal engagement, views of the future and of their own selves. The fact that the (...) expectations, awakened by the events of 5 October 2000, have been betrayed, has brought strong disappointment, and it is the context in which young people in Serbia once again are losing faith that they will ever find their place in their own society. Against the background of a basic tension in relation to politics - between excessive interest and disgust - there basic strategies of young people in 2005 are formed. "Withdrawal", as the most common strategy, indicates a return of the young to their narrow personal, private, imaginary world, after a short exit into reality and active participation in creating the conditions of their own social existence. The increasingly frequent strategy of "aggression and imposition of one?s own worldview" points to the rising radicalization of the young generation. Finally, it is only the "planning strategy", espoused by just a handful of respondents, that retains traces of faith in future improvement of social conditions. Tekst razmatra poziciju mlade generacije u Srbiji danas, onako kako se ona moze iscitati iz empirijskog materijala prikupljenog studijom "Politika i svakodnevni zivot - tri godine posle". Oslanjajuci se na tipologiju koju je izgradila prilikom analize intervjua s mladim ljudima pre tri godine, autorka prati promene u stavovima prema politici, sopstvenom angazmanu, pogledu u buducnost i dozivljaju samih sebe do kojih je kod istih ispitanika doslo tokom protekle tri godine. Razocaranje zbog izneverenih ocekivanja, probudjenih dogadjajima od 5. oktobra 2000, stvara kontekst u kojem mlade ljude u Srbiji ponovo napusta vera da ce pronaci za sebe mesto u vlastitom drustvu. Na pozadini osnovne napetosti u odnosenju prema politici - izmedju preterane zainteresovanosti i gadjenja - formiraju se tri dominantne strategije mladih 2005. Najzastupljenija "strategija povlacenja" iskazuje povratak mladih u uski licni, privatni, imaginarni svet, posle kratkog izleta u realnost i aktivno sudelovanje u oblikovanju uslova sopstvenog drustvenog zivota. Strategija "napada i nametanja svog pogleda na svet", koja je u porastu, ukazuje na radikalizaciju mlade generacije. Konacno, "strategija planiranja", koju zastupa mali broj ispitanika, jedina zadrzava tragove vere u poboljsanje stanja u drustvu. (shrink)

Za pretpostaviti je da identitet, čak ukoliko ga se i provizorno fiksira, biva promatran kao nestabilna, socijalno uvjetovana kategorija, označena i prepoznata ovisno o preraspodijeljenosti moći i trenutnim diskurzivnim relacijama. Pretpostavka teksta jest da se problematika identiteta promišlja kroz konfliktan suodnos dominantno i marginalno pozicioniranih društvenih aktera. Kontekstualizirano unutar ovakve dualne distribucije moći, aplikativni dio teksta tematizira temu proučavanja problematike identiteta u dva različita društvena diskursa . Pritom, film se promatra kao medij popularne kulture, dok bitan segment znanstveno-teorijskog pristupa temi (...) koji omogućuje raspravu pripada domeni kulturne kritike.Inicijalno zadirući u sferu estetskog, tekst započinje primjerima iz teorije prakse. Tiče se inkorporiranosti filmskih sadržaja u osobne identifikacijske procese svakodnevnog života. Praktična pretpostavka jest: budući da se relevantnost kinematografije u velikoj mjeri očituje u dostupnosti plasiranih sadržaja, sam film se tako predstavlja kao privatni i kolektivni itinerar kulturnih znanja i putokaz življenom iskustvu.Teorijski se pak dio priče odnosi na prenošenje znanja specijaliziranim kodovima koje potvrđuje činjenicu disciplinarnog zatvaranja kao identifikacijskog procesa. Ukoliko pretpostavimo da je inicijalna tendencija prepoznavanja, uspostave i upisivanja identiteta u matricu svakodnevice oblik kritičkog djelovanja, utoliko se s pravom možemo pitati postoji li nešto što možemo zvati paradoksom uspostavljanja identiteta? I ukoliko postoji, sabotira li zapravo taj paradoks vlastitu inicijalnu tendenciju, a ta je, ponovimo to – djelovanje? Zaključak sugerira dijalektički i interdisciplinarni pristup problematici čiji su cilj etički i politički korektnije politike predstavljanja. Preciznije, umjesto danas razvidnih i dominirajućih perpetuiranih reprezentiranja manipuliranog znanja, ovaj rad nastoji otvoriti mogućnosti za samoartikulacije i samoprezentiranja različitih identifikacijskih pozicija.It is procurable to postulate that identity as such, even if tentatively fixed, is being beheld as an unstable, socially conditioned category, marked and recognized depending on the distribution of power and current discourse relations. The assumption of this text is the politics and the problematic of identity viewed through the conflict nature of the dominantly and marginally positioned relation of social actors. Contextualized throughout this binary distribution of power, the applicable part of this text introduces the subject of identity studies and the problematic it beholds within identity itself in two different social discourses . In this perspective, the film is seen as the media of popular culture, while the important part of scientifically-theoretical access to the subject which allows debate, is in the domain of cultural critique.Interfering initially in the domain of esthetics, the text begins with examples in theory of practice. It concerns embeddedness of the film epitome into personal identification processes of everyday life. The practical assumption is: given the fact the relevancy of cinematography is broadly shown in the availability of the placed substance, the film itself is presented as a private and a collective itinerary of cultural knowledge and a signpost for lived experience.The theoretical part of the story relates to the transfer of knowledge using specialized codes while confirming the fact of disciplinal closure as well as the identification process. If we were to assume that the initial tendency of recognition, establishment and inscription of identity into the matrix of everyday life is indeed a form of critical action, than it is right to ask if there is a thing that could be called the paradox of establishing identity. And, if there is indeed such a thing, is this paradox actually sabotaging its own initial tendency – that being – acting? Conclusion suggests dialectical and interdisciplinary approach to the problematic which aims to the more correct politics of representation, both in ethical and political sense. More precisely, this text tries to open the possibilities of self-articulation and self-representation of different identification positions instead of nowadays apparent and dominate representations of manipulated knowledge. (shrink)