The ongoing controversy about sweatshop labor has mainly focused on economic, on the one, and ethical aspects, on the other side. While proponents of sweatshop labor have argued that low wages would attract foreign investments, would create new workplace opportunities and thus improve economic welfare in less-developed countries, opponents of sweatshop labor argue that such treatment of laborers would violate their dignity, and they prompt western buyers to stop this kind of exploitation. However, the arguments in this debate are not (...) new. As we will show, they can be traced back to the early “sweatshop” debate between social reformers and classical liberals in the 19th century. Interestingly, the 19th century debate identified sweatshop labor not as an industrial system but as a social phenomenon which becomes more likely when several social preconditions are fulfilled. It will be shown that the social preconditions identified in this debate determine working conditions till today and can be used to identify industries were sweatshop labor is more likely than in others—even in western countries. (shrink)

The crisis of the theory of socioeconomic formations has recently become clearly apparent in our social philosophy. Earlier as well, the "formational" approach, with its presumption that the new order has "decisive advantages," caused perceptible epistemological difficulties associated with the effect of "inverted perspective." It followed from the theory that socialist Mongolia, Vietnam, and Cuba were a "whole epoch" ahead of the USA and other developed countries of the West that had preserved the outmoded capitalist order.

Mikhail Psel i vizantiĭskii︠a︡t khumanizŭm na XI vek -- Palamitskite sporove.

The statement of Heinsius that was the reading of all his manuscriptsis described by Henry2 as a mere blunder, and it must surely be so regarded.Henry claims to have examined seventy-four manuscripts, in none of whichdid he find, and more recent commentators and editors, though some3 prefer to adopt the emendation, are unanimous in acknowledging thelack of manuscript support for the change.

Purpose. The paper is aimed at analyzing in a comparative way the philosophical conceptions of the human, proposed by Ludwig Wittgenstein and Martin Heidegger as the main representatives of the analytic and continental tradition of philosophizing in the XXth century. The theoretical basis of the study is determined by Wittgenstein’s legacy in the field of logical and linguistic analysis, as well as Heidegger’s existential, hermeneutical, and phenomenological ideas. Originality. Based on the analysis of the philosophical works of Wittgenstein and Heidegger, (...) the initial principles of their anthropological concepts in the unity of transcendental preconditions, essential foundations, and correlations to the world in the technosphere are reconstructed. It is demonstrated that, despite the difference in the explanation of the peculiarities in the interpretation of the realm of the transcendental and basic characteristic of the inner world of human, both philosophers emphasized the understanding of the human being through the prism of language and the need for anthropologization of science and technology. Conclusions. Wittgenstein and Heidegger developed their own original considerations on the nature of human being, which fully conform to the basic theoretico-methodological principles of their philosophical conceptions. The former focused on how language reflects a human’s world and serves as a means of expressing their knowledge and aspirations. The latter, on the contrary, interpreted the world as a reflection of language that expresses itself through human. As a supporter of analytic methodology and, accordingly, of accuracy in formulations, Wittgenstein came to the concept of the unspeakable in the process of reflection on the being of human over the language. But in Heidegger’s existential discourse, which is full of metaphors and neologisms, being of human is limited by the concept of Nothing. As a consequence, it is noted that the ontological status of values is transcendental to the world according to Wittgenstein, but it is immanent to the world, according to Heidegger. It is argued that the Austrian thinker developed a linguo-psychological approach to the study of human through the prism of the mental, but the German philosopher comprehended the human on the basis of the concept of self in the ontological sphere. It has been demonstrated that both thinkers have pointed to the challenges faced by humans in the development of science and technology while emphasizing the importance of substantiating their anthropological foundations. (shrink)

Social psychological research on youth intergroup relations has primarily examined interactions between dichotomous groups through cross-sectional and self-report measures in single contexts. Such traditional approaches, however, are not adept to capturing the dynamic nature of intergroup relations for youth growing up in multicultural societies. In this chapter, we briefly review the existing literature on youth interethnic interactions. We next discuss some theoretical and methodological limitations of this research. We then review the handful of studies focused on youths’ behaviour in diverse (...) contexts, as well as emerging research examining youth and behavioural trajectories when moving beyond the dichotomies of Black and White. We end the chapter by proposing a new research agenda which brings youth into context and extends theoretical boundaries by drawing on a range of innovative methods. We argue this broader approach is needed if we are to truly understand the implications of growing ethnic diversity for youth. (shrink)