The article is dedicated to the memory of Professor D.D. Ivanenko and Yu.G. Sbytov. The author recalls his development in theoretical physics and the assistance provided by D.D. Ivanenko and Yu.G. Sbytov in writing his PhD and doctoral dissertations.
In this paper, I deal with Heidegger’s evolving account of metaphysics, since Heidegger’s persistent concern, the question of being, is a basic metaphysical question. To date, most Heidegger scholars have focused only on a particular stage of Heidegger’s philosophy: either his early attempt to deconstruct metaphysics, or his efforts to overcome metaphysics in the 1930s, or his late embrace of ‘releasement’ from metaphysics. However, these limited approaches fail to address Heidegger’s different understandings of metaphysics, which lie at the root of his changing approaches to the question of being. They also fail to explain whether there is any inner connection between the various approaches. Further, given Heidegger’s unremittingly negative attitude towards metaphysics, some scholars have even maintained that Heidegger thought it both possible and desirable to leave metaphysics behind altogether. I address these issues first by arguing that metaphysics for Heidegger has three interconnected meanings: initially it is the representation of the totality of things that are present-at-hand, a view subsequently developed into subjective representational thinking, and finally radicalized into an expression of the will to power. At each stage, Heidegger critiques the metaphysical tradition but never claims that it can be fully eliminated, since it is a mode of Dasein’s being and ultimately possiblized by being itself. For this reason, Heidegger’s own philosophy of being remains inseparable from metaphysics.
Opponents of Russian culture have spent a lot of effort to prove that our culture has not reached the level of development at which European and Western culture in general is. It did not reach it, if only because it did not develop its own national philosophy. The article shows why such a false idea has developed in the minds of Western ideologists. The fact is that they are looking for Russian philosophy only in a purely religious area, in the so-called “Berdyaevshchina”, far from the scientific achievements of Russian civilization. And in scientific achievements, as the author shows on a number of examples given in this article, national philosophy is contained. They do not notice it because it is presented in a logical form, mediated by a special dialectical logic, which was later rediscovered in the fundamental ontology of the German thinker Martin Heidegger. Since this logic permeates both the sphere of scientific and philosophical thinking, Russian philosophy, the Russian national worldview, originates in it. This can be seen in the example of the logical structure of Lobachevsky’s non-Euclidean geometry, it is the origin of Russian philosophy, Russian national worldview. It is no coincidence that D.I. Mendeleev saw in Lobachevsky’s geometry something more than a particular mathematical discipline of thought, and said: “Geometric knowledge formed the basis of all exact science, and the originality of Lobachevsky’s geometry was the dawn of the independent development of sciences in Russia. The scientific sowing will sprout for the harvest of the people...”. An equally high assessment of Lobachevsky’s geometry was voiced by prof. V.F. Kagan: “I take the liberty of asserting that it was easier to stop the sun, that it was easier to move the earth than to reduce the sum of angles in a triangle, to reduce the parallels to convergence and push the perpendiculars to the straight line to divergence”. This is one of the results of applying dialectical logic.
The problem of existence in philosophy and modern fundamental physics is discussed. In quantum mechanics, the attribute of existence is attributed not only to objects and physical fields, but also to wave packets, the main functions of which are to indicate the list of possibilities that can be realized after the reduction of the wave packet. At the same time, the wave packets gravitate . Therefore, from the point of view of philosophy, wave packets ( Possible ) should be ranked among the Being as its separate element in addition to objects and physical fields. Further, using an example from mechanics, the statement is made that the true reality is described precisely by quantum mechanics, while the classical theory gives only a description of reality that is close to reality, but nevertheless an illusory description. In this sense, the complementarity principle of N. Bohr is not an addition or a contradiction but must be resolved by the primacy in favor of quantum mechanics.
The paper deals with the problem of lacunarity, that is, the allomorphism of languages of different structures on heterogeneous material: translations of different times, lexicographic sources and opinion poll data of native speakers of the same language who study Russian, ways of eliminating lacunae at various historical stages in the development of the lexical system of different languages and the mismatch of signs of nomination, and also describes vector lacunarity in the speech etiquette of the Russian language from the point of view of translation into Arabic. The main approaches to the study of the phenomenon of lacunarity in modern linguistics are considered. A typology of lacunarity is proposed based on the material of languages with different structures.
The article raises the following question. How to explain the equivalence of the whole set of real numbers and its correct part? Our most general conceptual answer to the question posed: the whole infinite set |А| and its correct part |В| can be equivalent only in the case of the existence of an equally powerful set |C| , the elements of the system of which are in a state of superposition with respect to the elements of the sets |A| and |B|. The universal principle of the superposition of the module of a real number is formulated and justified: the absolute and variable magnitude of any real number is in a state of superposition with respect to the numerical line and the effect of the mathematical system of absolute quantities is the set of all real numbers.
The work is devoted to important aspects of the cardinal phenomenon of scientific and philosophical thought, with other words cosmism, or cosmic thinking, which began to form in the late 19th - early 20th centuries and continues to develop today. The work reveals the actual problem of understanding two main ways of knowledge - empirical scientific and metascientific (the comprehension of objects and phenomena by a person through his inner, spiritual, space), the synthesis of which is presented in the works of Russian scientists and cosmist philosophers. This synthesis is a new system of knowledge, which is the subject of research and allows us to understand a phenomenon or process in the most complete and deep way. This understanding is particularly relevant, because science faces a number of major problems that cannot be explained in terms of traditional, outdated approaches.
Chapter 7 examines a principle Aristotle formulates in Nicomachean Ethics I.3: ethics must be adequate for its domain. The ethicist must ask herself what her inquiry is about, study the nature of her theory’s subject matter, and observe norms of theorizing that are adequate for it. The subject matter of ethics is value as it figures in human life. Aristotle ascribes two features to this value: difference and variability. Other theorists, he notes, are misled by difference and variability and become relativists. They observe a lack of strict regularity and falsely conclude that the domain of value is messy, unsuitable for any general insights. In Aristotle’s view, the sphere of agency displays for the most part regularities. The chapter defends this proposal as an important metaphysical insight and discusses how it adds to the much-debated claim that situations in which agents act are particulars.