Presents Newton's unifying idea of gravitation and explains how he converted physics from a science of explanation into a general mathematical system.

Sredi I︠A︡, MY i ONI -- Na kremnistom puti -- V dialektike gumanizma -- S kli︠u︡chami sovesti.

Издание содержит: Есть ли ошибка в формуле мира?; Бегство от смысла; Секрет формулы мира - закон притяжения?

Predvaritelʹnye zamechanii︠a︡ -- Konformizm, ili Spasenie zdesʹ i seĭchas -- Soprotivlenie, ili Risk -- Nasilie, ili Nakazannai︠a︡ smertʹ -- Gedonizm, ili Poisk utrachennoĭ realʹnosti -- Tradit︠s︡ii︠a︡, ili Prisposablivai︠u︡shcheesi︠a︡ soprotivlenie -- Bessoznatelʹnoe, ili Aksiologicheskai︠a︡ mashina mozga.

Study on the philosophy of Cārvāka, classical Indian materialist.

Urielʹ Dakosta.--Filosofskai︠a︡ sistema Spinozy.--Sot︠s︡ialʹnai︠a︡ ėtika Mabli i Morelli.--Zhak Nėzhon i ego ateizm.--K voprosu o politicheskikh vzgli︠a︡dakh Zh.-B. Robinė.--"Sot︠s︡ialʹnai︠a︡ sistema" Golʹbakha i ee russkiĭ perevodchik XVIII v.--Tragedii︠a︡ russkogo materializma XVIII v. (filosofskie vzgli︠a︡dy A. N. Radishcheva).--I. P. Pnin i ego mesto v istorii russkoĭ obshchestvennoĭ mysli.--Filosofskie vzgli︠a︡dy dekabrista I︠A︡kushkina.

Many different writers have employed what might be termed the ‘existence criterion’ when offering realist analyses of perception. In all these realist accounts, a basic argument may be detected. If any experience—e.g. the having of either a sensory or a mental image—is to be a form of perceiving, then the statement reporting that experience must satisfy a condition which applies to all perceiving-statements. Any putative perceptual statement of the form ‘S perceives x’ must entail a statement to the effect that (...) x, or some y, does exist as a public perceptual object in S’s perceptual range. For example, my statement ‘I see Peter’ will be a proper perceptual statement only if Peter is a public perceptual object now in my line of vision, or only if I take some other public perceptual object now in my line of vision to be Peter. Statements about our having images of things, this basic argument continues, cannot satisfy this condition. The object imaged —e.g. Peter—is not always present in the subject’s perceptual range at the time of the imaging, and the subject does not necessarily take a public perceptual object in his perceptual range to be that object. Hence, any statement reporting our imaging something must be false if it is construed as a report of a perceiving. (shrink)

We do not usually draw conclusions and summarize the results of our round table meetings. The speakers share their ideas, divergent viewpoints are discussed, and a certain level of approach to the problems under discussion is formulated. Therefore, today I will also not attempt to draw a conclusion.