Specifičnost današnjice je »kraj političkog«, pri čemu pojam demokracije i dalje predstavlja glavni zbirni termin za pružanje opsjene lažnih mogućnosti. Hannah Arendt ovdje je uzeta kao autor čiji pojam ‘djelovanje’ predstavlja odličan okvir onoga što bi ljudi u javnom području mogli zaista biti. U svezi toga, važne su njene analize kako se od početaka filozofije politike dogodilo reduciranje političkog odnosa na vladalački odnos. Također, njeno shvaćanje značaja slobode je u opoziciji spram tradicionalnog filozofskog ograničenja slobode na ‘unutrašnjost čovjeka’.Specificity (...) of present time is “the end of political”, where the term ‘democracy’ still represents the main collective term for making an illusion of false possibilities. Hannah Arendt is taken here as the author whose term ‘action’ represents what people in a public field could really be. Regarding that, her analysis about how did reduction of political relationship to the dynasty relationship happened, from the beginnings of philosophy of politics, is very important. Also, her understanding of the relevance of freedom is in opposition with traditional philosophical restriction of freedom to ‘human inside’. (shrink)

Ujedinjenje velikih teorija fizike − teorije relativnosti, kvantne mehanike i fizike svemira i čestica − ostaje snom fizike i filozofije znanosti i na početku 21. stoljeća. Sve se one u pogledu konačnih zakona svemira slažu da je početak bio, te da su konačni zakoni oni koji su već vladali u početku evolucije svemira. Početak svemira podrazumijeva njegovo stvaranje i nužno upućuje na Stvoritelja−religijskog Boga, na uspostavljanje mosta između moderne kozmologije i religije. U tome se podudaraju klasične kozmologije s modernim (...) kozmološkim modelima astročestične teorijske fizike, odnosno mišljenja vodećih modernih kozmologa: Einsteina, Weinberga, Penrosea, Hawkinga i drugih. Naglašavamo da su i veliki svjetski kongresi iz povijesti znanosti u 21. stoljeću naročito reafirmirali komplementarni odnos znanosti i religije kao pravog puta za univerzalnim horizontom svijeta u 21. stoljeću. Situaciju odnosa znanosti i religije, Einstein je izvrsno opisao slikom: »Znanost bez religije je kljasta, a religija bez znanosti slijepa« . Stvaranje svijeta u Knjizi postanka , napose u Prvome izvještaju o stvaranju jest Božje stvaranje: Bog stvara riječju ili djelovanjem − trenutačno i u stvarnome vremenu − u fazama stvaranja što se mjere u danima. Knjigu postanka rese svi moderni početni kozmološki uvjeti i parametri: postanak, početak i kraj svemira, vrijeme i prostor, struktura i evolucija svemira, uloga i značenje života u svemiru. Ovakva teološka kozmologija, sa svim živim bićima u njoj i njihovom hijerarhijom s čovjekom kao kraljem, koliko god u znanstvenome pogledu bila jednostavnom i kratkom pričom, može biti uzorom modernim kozmološkim modelima jer svemir što ga je stvorio Bog jest svemir tvari i života. Mogli bismo reći da kozmološke modele i simulacije, kao i velike pokuse u fizici visokih energija, izvodimo da bismo dokučili kako je Bog stvarao. S druge strane, u suvremenoj fizici, pogotovo u modernoj kozmologiji, pojam Boga se često »efektivno« iskorištava u definiranju pojedinih problema ili u interpretacijama računa, što ne valja promatrati kao osiromašenje teološke ili vjerske uzvišenosti toga pojma kakvu nalazimo u Newtona, Petrića, Boškovića, Kanta ili P. Daviesa.U članku se pregledno osvrćemo na principe i tzv. »velike uspjehe« što su nastali na mostu povezivanja suvremene kozmologije i religije: »sudjelujući« svemir i princip antropičnosti, te izazovni teorijski proboji u kozmologiji naših dana u sektoru M–teorije koji govore i o suparničkim scenarijima stanja svemira prije−velikog praska. Upitat ćemo se da li suvremena upućenost fizike i religije proizlazi možda iz karakteristične »eksperimentalne nemoći« moderne kozmologije koja trpi teški tehnički problem: iznalaženje golemih energija za eksperimentalna opažanja čestica kakve fizika Big Banga zahtijeva? To su, primjerice, energije oko 1019 GeV koje odgovaraju trenu od 10−43 sekunde nakon Velikog praska. U članku se, na kraju, na Kantovu tragu, promišlja jesu li suvremeni teorijski proboji što se čine u kvantoj kozmologiji na Planckovoj skali relevantni i za Kantovu kozmološku skalu − onu do koje se dolazi jednostavnim proširenjem kategorija do neuvjetovanog, što sintezu odvodi do stupnja što nadilazi svako moguće iskustvo.Uniting the great theories of physics – i.e. the theory of relativity, quantum mechanics and astroparticle physics – continues to remain a dream of both physics and the philosophy of science even at the beginning of the 21st century. In respect of the ultimate laws of the universe they all agree that there was a beginning and that the ultimate laws are those that have already ruled at the beginning of the evolution of the universe. The beginning of the universe implies its creation and necessarily points to a Creator – a religious God, to building a bridge between modern cosmology and religion. In regard to the above classical cosmologies correspond to the modern cosmological models of astroparticle theoretical physics, i.e. the reflections of the leading modern cosmologists: Einstein, Weinberg, Penrose, Hawking and others. The author highlights that even great international symposia on the history of science keep on reaffirming the complementary relation between science and religion as the true and only path to a universal horizon of the world in the 21st century. Einstein describes the state of affairs of the relation between science and religion exceptionally well with the following words: »Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind« . The creation of the world described in Genesis, particularly in The Beginning, is God’s creation: God creates by the agency of words or actions – immediately and in real time – in the phases of creation measured in days. Genesis is adorned by all the modern initial cosmological conditions and parameters: creation, the beginning and end of the universe, time and space, the structure and evolution of the universe, the role and meaning of life in the universe. Irrespective of the extent to which, scientifically speaking, it is a simple and short narrative, this theological cosmology – including all the living creatures in it and their hierarchy with man as king – can indeed serve as a role model to the modern cosmological models, since the universe created by God is a universe of matter and life. We can say that we design cosmological models and conduct simulations and great experiments in the high energy physics in order to reach and understand the way in which God created. On the other hand, however, in contemporary physics in general and in modern cosmology in particular, the concept of God is frequently »effectively« used either in defining certain problems or in interpreting scientific calculations, which must not be viewed as the impoverishment of the theological or religious eminence of the concept as can be found in Newton, Petrić, Bošković, Kant or Davies.This paper also surveys the principles and the so-called »great successes« achieved on the bridge that connects contemporary cosmology and religion: ‘participatory’ universe and the anthropic principle, as well as the challenging theoretical advances in today’s cosmology in the field of M−theory which also discuss rival ideas of the pre-big bang scenarios. The author also poses the following question: does the contemporary crossroad of physics and religion perhaps issue from modern cosmology’s peculiar »experimental helplessness« taking shape in a grave technical problem, i.e. finding immense energies for experimental particle observations required by the physics of the Big Bang? These energies are, for example, approximate to 1019 GeV , which corresponds to 10−43 of a second after the Big Bang. A thinking in the paper was finally concluded, on the Kant’s trail, whether the contemporary theoretical advances achieved in quantum cosmology at Planck’s scale are also relevant for Kant’s cosmological scale – the one arrived at by a simple expansion of the categories to the unconditioned, which brings synthesis to a point that surpasses all possible experience. (shrink)

In this paper we prove some results about the complexity of proofs. We consider proofs in Hilbert-style formal systems such as in [17]. Thus a proof is a sequence offormulas satisfying certain conditions. We can view the formulas as being strings of symbols; hence the whole proof is a string too. We consider the following measures of complexity of proofs: length , depth and number of steps For a particular formal system and a given formula A we consider the shortest (...) length of a proof of A , the minimal depth of a proof of A and the minimal number of steps in a proof of A . The main results are the following: a bound on the depth in terms of the number of steps: Theorem 2.2, a bound on the depth in terms of the length: Theorem 2.3, a bound on the length in terms of the number of steps for restricted systems: Theorem 3.1. These results are applied to obtain several corollaries. In particular we show: a bound on the number of steps in a cut-free proof, some speed-up results, bounds on the number of steps in proofs of Paris-Harrington sentences. Some papers related to our research are listed in the references. We were especially influenced by Parikh's paper [17] on the famous conjecture of Kreisel . Many important problems in this field remain open. We hope that our paper will contribute to progress in this area. It should be noted that some results of this paper can be equally well obtained using unification theory , by translating a complexity-of-proof problem into a unification problem. A unification algorithm solving the unification problem can then be constructed and the complexity of the unification algorithm analyzed. As pointed out by the referee this method can be used to solve the problem stated in Section 3 for some non-simple schematic systems. (shrink)

The paper is an analytic retrospective of the author’s work during the preceding research period, involving the study of role, meaning and place of stereotypes in identity discourses. In order to explain the reasons for and ways of dealing with stereotypes, she reviews the evolution of her own research approach and the alternative approaches to the topic from the perspective of various scholarly disciplines. Seeking to avoid the trap of “interpreting stereotypes stereotypically”, the author chooses not to follow the usual (...) method whereby ethnic stereotypes are “deconstructed” as false and generalizing image of oneself and others, and exposed to social-psychological and political-anthropological critique. Instead, the author looks at stereotypes primarily in terms of their linguistic and social “semiotics” and their theoretical and practical usability. Stressing the necessity of relativizing the binary structure of discourse, the author argues that stereotypes, though indispensable as elements of the “economy” of language and thought, should be socially conceptualized and historicized in analysis. (shrink)

Sights of gothic cathedrals in Zygmunt Krasiński’s letters are proves of his great and deep fascination of medieval times. Following the examples of Goethe, Chateaubriand, and Friedrich he defines beauty of gothics churches. Such conact with a monumental architecture seems to be a pretext to estetic and philosophical reflections. Not only did he touch a matter of light in order to show the organic style of architecture, but also emphazised the importance of this case in creating a special style. View (...) of the church remains have got also some kind of a metaforic meaning fог the times that passed by and a symbol of previous generations. It makes us think about the significance of our life. (shrink)

Ne samo da Mediteranska filozofija pridonosi postanku i daljem razvoju svjetske filozofije, nego joj daje osnovni pečat. Kratka analiza glavnih sastojaka, kao što su: 1) grčko-judejska i latinska skolastika; 2) uloga magije i misticizma; 3) otvaranje znanstvenog interesa naročito od arapske skolastike; 4) povijesno vrijeme i čovjekova borba za sebe, od Renesanse sve do dvadesetog stoljeća, treba pokazati da je osnovni vid Mediteranske filozofije oplemenjivanje svijeta. Budućom zadaćom Mediteranske filozofije naznačit će se pronalaženje putova kako da se (...) koncept mogućnosti, kao njezina glavna tekovina u dvadesetom stoljeću, osigura u perspektivi oplemenjivanja svijeta – najvjerodostojnijoj perspektivi svjetske filozofije.Not only does Mediterranean philosophy contribute to the genesis and susequent development of world philosophy, but it also lends it its original stamp. A breaf analysis of elements such as: 1) Greco-Judean and Latin scholasticism; 2) the role of magic and misticism; 3) the stimulation of scientific interest especially in Arabic scholasticism; 4) in history of human beings the struggle for themselves from the Renaissance to the Twentieth Century should show, with a special emphasis on Croatian philosophers, that the basic conception of Mediterranean philosophy consists in enrichment of the world. Through futures tasks for Mediterranean philosophy it will be indicated how to find ways to secure the concept of possibility as the main currency in the perspective of enriching the world – a most authentic perspective for world philosophy. (shrink)

Članak predstavlja komentarski prikaz glavnih tema knjige Wu Xiaominga, Filozofija i Zhexue. Put k drugome i natrag te diskusiju o pojmu tzv. ‘druge’, ne-evropske filozofije, o njegovu sistematskom mjestu između povijesti filozofije, kulturne antropologije i postkolonijalne teorije diskursa. Nastojanje autora da pomoću Derridinog pojma différance i kineskog dao revolucionira hijerarhijski odnos interpretirajućeg i interpretiranog intelektualnog nasljeđa vrednuje se u članku kao genuino filozofsko nasuprot kulturno-antropološkim pristupima filozofiji, što je suprotno negiranju kineske filozofije od sâmog Derride. Usporedno s (...) glavnim tekstom, u pratećem aparatu, članak donosi pregled i komentare novije, interdisciplinarne literature, zapadne i kineske, o tematici komparativizma i njegovim osnovama u filozofiji, humanističkim i egzaktnim znanostima.The article gives a detailed review and commentary on the main topics in the book Philosophy and Zhexue. The Way To the Other and Back by Wu Xiaoming and a discussion about the very notion of the so-called ‘other’, non-European philosophy, its systematic place between history of philosophy, cultural anthropology and post-colonial discourse theory. The effort by Xiaoming to revolutionize, by means of Derridean différance and Chinese dao, the hierarchical pattern in the relation between the interpreting and the interpreted intellectual heritage has been estimated as genuinelly philosophical and different from cultural anthropological approaches, which is even contrary to late Derrida’s denial of Chinese philosophy. Parallel to the discussion in the main text, the article provides a survey with commentaries of recent cross-disciplinary publications, both Western and Chinese, in related issues such as comparativism in philosophy, in human and exact sciences, including Chinese authors. (shrink)

U članku se najprije tematizira diskrepancija između oštre kritike fenomenologije Edmunda Husserla u Heideggerovim ranim freiburškim i marburškim godinama, s jedne strane, i afirmativnog spominjanja Husserlova imena u "Bitku i vremenu", s druge strane. Ovaj "okret" može se interpretirati na temelju tumačenja prema kojem Heidegger u svojem glavnom djelu nije ostao pri stavu o nedostatnosti fenomenologije, zato što mu je ona služila kao polazište za izlaganje vlastite filozofske pozicije. Nakon kritičkog razmatranja onih pozicija prema kojima je Heidegger kroz kritiku Husserla (...) ciljao na ontološku kritiku spekulativnoga idealizma, autor propituje razloge odgađanja razračunavanja s Hegelom, koje je Heidegger iznio u svojem habilitacijskom spisu. Provedba ovog razračunavanja na temelju nacrta destrukcije povijesti ontologije od početka se nije trebala razvijati sistematski, budući da je prevladavanje sistematskog izlaganja povijesti filozofije i povijesti uopće bilo postavljeno u središte poželjnih učinaka destrukcije.Der Artikel thematisiert zunächst die Diskrepanz zwischen scharfer Kritik an der PhänomenologieEdmund Husserls während der frühen Jahre in Freiburg und Marburg und die affirmative ErnennungHusserls Namen innerhalb von Sein und Zeit. Diese »Kehre« kann aufgrund der Deutung in-terpretiert werden, dass Heidegger in seinem Hauptwerk nicht bei der Einsicht der Mängel derPhänomenologie stehengeblieben ist, weil sie ihm als Anfangspunkt für die Auslegung der eigenenphilosophischen Position dienen. Nach kritischen Erörterungen derjenigen Interpretationen, die behaupteten,dass Heidegger durch die Kritik an Husserl auf die ontologische Kritik des spekulativenIdealismus zielte, befragt der Autor die Gründe für die Verzögerung der Auseinandersetzung mitHegel, die Heidegger in seiner Habilitationsschrift angekündigt hatte. Die Durchführung dieserAuseinandersetzung aufgrund des Entwurfs der Destruktion der Geschichte der Ontologie solltevon Anfang an nicht systematisch entwickelt werden, da die Überwindung der systematischenAuslegung der Geschichte der Philosophie und die Geschichte überhaupt – in den Mittelpunkt derwünschenswerten Wirkungen der Destruktion gelegt wurde. (shrink)

The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy.