22 (1)
Issue
2022
Subscription
Free subscription at
the electronic version of journal
Subscription index
in the Russian Post
catalogue – 43669
ANTINOMIES
Until 01.01.2019 - Scientific Yearbook of the Institute of Philosophy and Law of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences

ISSN 2686-7206 (Print)

ISSN 2686-925X (Оnlinе)

Archive

— showed 3 articles from3

Философия

The Myth of Karl Marx's Prometheanism: Analysis and Criticism

Kondrashov Pyotr
The article deals with the destruction of the widespread myth about Karl Marx as a “Promethean thinker”. Under Prometheism/Prometheanism is the point of view according to which nature is considered as a quantitatively “inexhaustible storehouse”, which must be known and conquered on the basis of scientific and technical knowledge in order to be used to meet constantly growing human needs through continuous growth of production and, accordingly, a permanent increase in the degree of aggressive exploitation of nature while completely ignoring the consequences of this exploitation both for the environment and for human society itself. Since the myth of the “prometheanism” of Marx, which is very tenacious to this day, was previously dispelled in the field of political economy (J.B. Foster, K. Saito, P. Burkett), sociology (A. Salleh, M. Musto), ecology (B. Clark, J. Moore, E. Alvater, K. Saito, T. Grassmann), political science (K. Royce), then in the proposed study the author focused only on some of the philosophical aspects of the problem. In the first part of the article it is shown that Marx (based on some of his statements) is mistakenly criticized by many thinkers for anti-environmentalism; in the second, relying on the texts of Marx himself, it is proved that these fragments torn from the general context of his philosophy are mostly false, because Marx, often praising technological progress, nevertheless, was not a Promethean, as he subjected the social and environmental consequences of the capitalist application of technology and science to radical scientific criticism; Finally, in the third part, through the reconstruction of Marx’s philosophical-anthropological and socio-philosophical ideas, Marx’s true attitude to environmental issues is shown. The author’s arguments are as follows. According to Marx, the ontological basis for the existence of any human society is social metabolism, i.e. the exchange of substances between man and nature through transformative activity, during the deployment of which all the “worlds” in which man exists are drawn into metabolic exchange (nature, society, “second nature” – material and spiritual culture, the world of others, their own inner world). Each socio-historical stage of development has its own specific type of metabolism, i.e. its own special form of ecological interaction between all “worlds”. Based on this method, Marx shows that metabolic rifts, i.e. disturbances in the processes of normal, balanced flow of social metabolism in the totality of all these “worlds” are most characteristic of capitalism due to its structural Promethean intentions (the desire to increase profits, which is associated with the need for permanent growth of production – the imperative “grow or die!”; and hence to increase the exploitation of nature). And in this sense, Marx’s philosophical ecology not only fully corresponds to the modern level of understanding of ecological/environmental problems, but also offers a holistic methodology not only for “explaining” these problems, but also for their “practical solution”. 
Keywords: Karl Marx; prometheism/prometheanism; ecological and environmental sciences; nature; man; society; culture; social metabolism; metabolic rift; historicity; capitalism; post-capitalism; growth for growth; de-growth; economy; chrematistics.
Download article TPL_IPL_ARTICLE_PDF

A “Hard Problem” of Lenin’s Theory of Reflection: Discussions of the 1930s and 1950s

Klimova Svetlana
This article discusses the versions of Leninist reflection theory in the Russian philosophy of the first half of the twentieth century. The very nature of the discussion made the problem of understanding the features of the theory of cognition a “hard” problem. This was facilitated by the ideological and political impurities characteristic of philosophical inquiry at the time. The “diamat” (short for “dialectical materialism”) reflection theory is compared with M.A. Lifshits’s “ontognoseology”. The task is to show the process of dogmatization of Lenin’s reflection theory in the discussions of the 30s–40s, as well as the transformation of this theory in Lifshits’s ontognoseology in the 1940–50s. The article highlights the variations of reflection theory in the Soviet philosophy of 1930–70s. This theory in Diamat is considered in comparison with the “ontognoseology” of Mikhail Lifshits. The ideological catalyst for the development of the “Leninist reflection theory” was the principle of partisanship. As its consequence, vulgar sociology and Diamat were fixed in the humanities, and only in the early 1950s they began to be gradually overcome. At the beginning of the Stalinist phase in the history of Soviet philosophy, the debates around Lenin’s book Materialism and Empiriocriticism became a landmark phenomenon. The tone was set by the students of the Institute of Red Professors, headed by Abram Deborin. The example of several works written by them in the mid-thirties shows the peculiarities of interpreting the concept of reflection, as well as the ideological conjuncture that largely determined the content and course of the philosophical discussion. The principle of partisanship demanded that class interests (as understood by the leaders of the proletarian party, of course) should come first, and in the theory of knowledge and consciousness, it meant that the dialectical-materialist position should be defended in the struggle against all varieties of idealism. It was under this sign that the discussion of Lenin’s theory of reflection took place. The article also analyses contemporary polemics, in the course of which opposite assessments of Deborin’s role in the formation of Soviet diamat and in solving the “hard problem” of Lenin’s theory of reflection are given. The postwar years of Soviet philosophy are represented in the article by Mikhail Lifshits’s “ontognoseology”. An associate and friend of Georg Lukács, Lifshits made the greatest contribution to overcoming vulgar sociology and renewing the tradition of creative Marxism. He described the dialectics of being and consciousness, of the subjective and the objective, proposing a profound and original interpretation of the theory of reflection. In Lifshits’s ontognoseology, the reflection of being in consciousness is conditioned by the property of reflectivity inherent in being itself. 
Keywords: “Materialism and empiriocriticism”; reflection; being; consciousness; partisanship; ontognoseology; M.A. Lifshits.
Download article TPL_IPL_ARTICLE_PDF

Natural Legal Law as Mathematics of Freedom (Four Mathematically Different Moral-Legal- Value-Functions “Freedom” and Four Ones “Slavery” Defined Precisely in Two-Valued Algebra of Formal Axiology of Ethics and Jurisprudence)

Lobovikov Vladimir
The article is aimed at extracting and investigating proper algebraic aspect of the natural legal law system. The metaphorical meaning of the sentence “Law is mathematics of freedom” is transformed into literal one of exact language of rational philosophy of natural legal law. The word “freedom” is recognized as a homonym having exactly four formal-axiological meanings which are nothing but moral-legal-valuefunctions determined by one moral-legal-value-argument (in the proper mathematical meaning of the words “function” and “argument”). The four functions called “freedom” and the corresponding four functions called “slavery” are precisely defined by tables. Lists of formal-axiological equations of two-valued algebra of natural law-and-morals are generated. The lists make up a discrete mathematical model of the system of natural morals-and-law concerning “freedom” and “slavery”. Within the framework of submitted two-valued algebra of natural law-and-morals, interconnections between natural legal law and natural theology are addressed in general and the nontrivial question “Is God’s slave a slave?” is explicated and answered especially. 
Keywords: two-valued-algebra-of-formal-axiology; moral-legal-value-function; formalaxiological-equivalence; formal-axiological-contradiction; ethics; freedom; slavery; natural-law; natural-theology; formal-axiological-law.
Download article TPL_IPL_ARTICLE_PDF