Rakstu krājumi "Filosofiskā antropoloģija"

Permanent URI for this community

http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/15529

Browse

Now showing 1 - 20 of 40

Apziņa
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2015) Jankovskis, Ģirts
Arhetipi un mūsdienu cilvēks
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2024) Sīlis, Vents
In his article “The Modern Human Being and the Archetypes”, Vents Sīlis discusses the question of human nature in relation to the concept of the archetype, which occupies a central place in the analytical psychology of Carl Gustav Jung. Jung’s answer to the question “What is man?” includes an explanation of the intrapsychic structure, relationships between people at the private and social levels, and the path of personal self-development, i.e., the process of individuation. The human psyche is seen by Jung as a complex system charged with libidinal energy, where there is a constant interaction between different pairs of opposing elements: conscious and unconscious, rational and irrational, masculine and feminine, etc. Nevertheless, according to the principle of equivalence introduced by Jung, the libido that has been taken away from one aspect of personality usually reappears somewhere else. The principle of enantiodromia, on the other hand, means that any one of the elements will in time turn into its opposite, e.g., passionate love may eventually turn into deep hatred. The principle of opposites is found in all elements of Jung’s theory. Jung’s anthropology is based on a fundamental distinction between two main levels of the psyche: the conscious and the unconscious, each of which divides into two further levels, the personal and the collective. The life of the psyche is one of equilibrium, i.e., the relationship between the conscious and the unconscious can be described as mutually compensatory: if a conscious idea or tendency becomes too dominant, the unconscious tends to compensate with an unconscious tendency. Thus, the unconscious compensates for the one-sidedness of the conscious by emphasising those aspects of the whole psyche that the conscious has neglected – in essence it is a mechanism similar to homeostasis. Jung’s theory of archetypes is critically examined. The author asks whether the notion of innate, universal structures of the psyche are still valid. Jung himself speaks of archetypes as empirical (experientially verified) facts, but this understanding fails the current understanding of scientific psychology. Vents Sīlis points out that one might reasonably doubt whether archetypes, as forms of perception and organisation of empirical experience, are really independent of physical and social environment. The findings of modern cognitive science are applicable to Jung’s theory of archetypes through the concept of emergence: archetypes are fundamental patterns, initially unfilled with content, which are revealed in interaction with empirical experience, which fills them with actual content. Since the Self is the fullest expression of individuality, the psyche’s movement towards its Self as the archetype of inner core and orderliness is the ultimate goal of psychological development. Countless studies by modern anthropologists show that even in the most basic human traits and behaviours (e.g., child-rearing) there are not only similarities but also radical differences between different cultures, so it is not possible to speak only of universal traits. This argument must certainly be considered, emphasises Sīlis, when modernising Jung’s theory.
Ārprāts
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2018) Žabicka, Anna
Anna Žabicka’s paper “Madness” highlights historically and culturally shaped explanations, understandings, and approaches to madness and addresses such questions as whether madness is biological or socially constructed, universal or culturally relative.
Brīvība
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2015) Šauers, Edijs
Cilvēka dabiskais stāvoklis Hobsa, Loka un Ruso skatījumā
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2024) Graudiņa, Elīna
Elīna Graudiņa in her article “The Natural State of Human According to Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau” examines the views and visions of Enlightenment thinkers on the position of an individual and society in relation to the State, society and each other. Hobbes describes the natural human condition as a selfish desire for self-preservation, characterised by a spirit of competition, distrust and fear. It is the development of “natural law” according to which a man is free to do whatever they like, and “the state of war of all against all” begins. In his natural state, man has both external freedom of action and internal freedom of will, and therefore a natural right to everything. A state where duties and rights are based on contract is a system in which the individual’s selfishness is overridden by his duty to himself, to his neighbour and to the state at large. John Locke argues that there is no innate knowledge in the individual and that man is born as a “blank slate”. He believed that an individual’s personality, knowledge and character are formed as a result of the influences of the world around him. All human beings are free, equal and independent by nature. Thomas Hobbes’s social contract theory was further developed and simultaneously criticized by Jean Jacque Rousseau. He describes transition from the state of nature to the state of citizenship. This transition brings about a remarkable change in man, replacing instinct with justice in their behaviour, giving their actions a moral meaning. What man loses with the social contract is their natural freedom, limited only by the forces of an individual. It must be distinguished from civil liberty, which is limited by the general will and property. Rousseau defends the thesis that man is good by nature and only society corrupts them morally. The philosopher cites a faulty education as one of the reasons for this, and therefore calls for an immediate reform of pedagogy, replacing traditional methods of education with “natural education”. The reform in question is based on precise knowledge of the nature of the child. Several centuries have passed since Hobbes’s conclusions on the selfishness of human nature, but this does not change the fact that the “natural state” of man has not really changed, emphasises Elīna Graudiņa.
Cilvēka dabiskais stāvoklis mūsdienās
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2024) Graudiņa, Elīna
In the first article of this volume, Elīna Graudiņa examined the “natural state” of human in the works of three Enlightenment thinkers: Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau. Further research on the topic has led to the insights summarised in the new text entitled “The Natural Condition of Human Today”. The link between Enlightenment ideas and modernity begins with Kant’s anthropology. In this section Graudiņa focuses on the theme of values and its correlation with the concept of freedom, education, development of democracy and civil society. In this context, Hannah Arendt’s analysis of totalitarianism is relevant, which leads to conclusion that in totalitarian regimes human right to life is devalued to its lowest point. Crowd thinking is the key: the masses of people have reached a stage where they can believe in everything and nothing at the same time, they can think that everything is possible and nothing is true. The author discusses Habermas’s ideas in more detail, since the theoretical framework he developed is dedicated to discovering possibilities of reason, emancipation and rational-critical communication hidden in modern institutions and in man’s capacity to become aware of and pursue rational interests. In further development of Arendt’s thesis of power as a collectively constructed phenomenon, Habermas points out that political power derives from communicative power, which is generated in the public sphere between members of civil society. It is defined as the result of free interaction in the public sphere, where important policy issues are discussed, new ideas are generated, socially significant problems are solved and development of the country is thereby promoted. Habermas stresses that democracy is not inherently rooted in civil society or individual autonomy but in communicative relations, as these foster both mutual harmony and reasoned discourse. Consequently, education systems in democracies must be able to provide full understanding of the meaning and basic principles of democracy. Elīna Graudiņa discusses Habermas’s theory of communicative rationality in light of current problems. Namely, as the amount of information increases, so does misinformation that affects individuals and civil society, which is so important for democracy. Nowadays, every individual, whether in office or not, is able to address the public, not only by expressing their opinion, but also by influencing it. The threat to an individual is that there is a growing disbelief in facts, in science, in reasonableness, and a growing tension in society which could lead to the “state of war of all against all” as referred to by Thomas Hobbes. Communities of supporters of certain ideas are formed in the vast information space, which, without verifying veracity of the information, end up denying the role of public institutions. The author quotes Timothy Snyder, who argues that the individual begins to succumb to tyranny the moment he fails to notice the difference between what he wants to hear and what is actually the case. Against the background of the problems of the present, Kant’s insights, discussed at the beginning of the article, on the nature of man, which allows a free choice of the path of moral life – one can choose good or evil – are particularly relevant. Actions are not necessarily contrary to the law, but the mindset of their subject can be corrupted, and that subject can therefore be considered evil.
Cilvēka uzlabošana
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2018) Neiders, Ivars
In the paper “Human Enhancement”, Ivars Neiders discusses the problems of defining human enhancement and the way how different definitions of human enhancement relate to different conceptions of human nature.
Cilvēks socioloģijas skatījumā
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2024) Bite, Dina
Dina Bite focuses on sociological aspect of looking at people. Accordingly, in her article “The Human Being from a Sociological Perspective”, she gives an insight into the most important sociological paradigms, emphasising their relation to interpretation of human nature. The presentation of the topic uses classical division of sociological theories into macro and micro levels in chronological order, with the aim of highlighting their different perspectives on human nature. Dina Bite first discusses the definition of man in sociology, considering that the main focus of sociology is the interaction between man and the surrounding society, which implies an endless debate on the question “who came first – society or man?” In the study of man, the term homo sociologicus is used to explain man’s place in the social structure or cultural, economic and political context that determines their consciousness and way of life. The term homo sociologicus was first used by the German sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf to emphasise the influence of morals and values on an individual’s choices. The individual, although subject to set expectations, norms and sanctions, can nevertheless vary their performance in role fulfilment. The author emphasises that early sociological paradigms focused on a macro-level approach to the analysis of society, identifying the needs of society as a whole and the most important social structures in society, while later theoretical approaches emphasised the influence of the individual in shaping social reality and sought to find a compromise between a strong macro and micro-level approach. Man, in the social theoretical sense, is a complex product of various internal impulses and external environmental factors. Human nature is characterised by biological and psychological traits, as well as by economic, political and cultural regimes of a given society. The task of sociologists would therefore be to look for commonalities and differences in combinations of the above-mentioned characteristics. Theories of collectivism are synonymous with macro, structuralist and objectivist theories (e.g., structural functionalism). In contrast to the macro approach, the so-called individualist theories are emphasised. In their interpretation, social reality is the result of actions and interactions of individuals and groups. In this case, autonomy and value of an individual is relatively high, since it is up to individuals to determine what meanings will be assigned to certain objects and what consequences this will have. Theories of individualism include the so-called subjectivist, micro, elementalist theories (e.g,. symbolic interactionism, phenomenology). Dina Bite points out that sociology does not consider an individual in isolation from the surrounding social environment, so the most important difference between the theoretical perspectives that explain interaction between an individual and the environment is the extent to which the individual is able to influence the environment. In a sociological perspective, issues of power, conflict and inequality are always present for the full expression or realisation of human nature. Macro-level theories emphasise dependence of the expression of human nature on historically established forms of social organisation, which vary from time to time and from society to society. They see an individual as a socially and culturally organised being, willingly or unwillingly subject to the influence of society – in the range between instinctive and social human behaviour, macro-level theories represent social, economic, political, and cultural determinism. Microsociological theories, on the other hand, offer analysis of society in terms of individual experience and action. Even from an individual level, social structures are comparatively active in influencing beliefs, attitudes and behaviour. Sociological theories describe human nature not only as a duality but as the result of interaction of multiple factors. Contribution of sociological perspective to the study of human nature is related to analysis of interaction and relationship between an individual and society. The author stresses that the challenge and opportunity of contemporary sociology is to develop an integrated and interdisciplinary view of the various aspects of human nature, taking into account diversity and variability of social life.
Cilvēks un franču filosofiskā antropoloģija starp Polu Rikēru un Mišelu Fuko
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2024) Rubene, Māra
In her article “The Human Being and French Philosophical Anthropology between Paul Ricoeur and Michel Foucault”, Māra Rubene not only focuses on the ideas of the best-known philosophers, but also provides a broader insight into the 20th century tradition of philosophical anthropology, including Latvia. The author first identifies the period of the 1920s and 1930s, when the concept of philosophical anthropology took on a modern shape, coming to the fore at the intersection of philosophical debates, explaining human life, the human world, and human nature. In the 1960s and 1970s, debates about man were particularly heated, seeking answers to the questions: what happened? Why did it happen? How could it have happened? These questions were still present after the Second World War. The third period in the development of French philosophical anthropology dates back to the first decades of the 21st century, which, according to scholars, is characterised by a “recovery of courage”, when “after the death of man, his disappearance or his end”, the “category of anthropology” is once again addressed. Philosophical anthropology is understood in a wide range of terms, from the “doctrine of human nature” and transdisciplinary study of human plurality in what is termed historical anthropology, to collective designation of individual philosophical fields, while at the same time “resisting a single definition”. Philosophical anthropology focuses on the question of the possibilities of man and the human, social and natural sciences, which also means answering questions about the foundations and interrelationships of these sciences. Paul Ricoeur asks rhetorically: why do I pose the human problem as a milieu problem? Ricoeur doubts that the concept of finitude, which has received so much attention, could be promoted as central to philosophical anthropology; instead, he proposes to speak of a triad, namely finitude-infinity and mediation. In Ricoeur’s philosophical anthropology, the human desire to be, finitude, is turned towards the miracle of birth, the beginning of an ever-new life; towards the continuation of life rather than existence towards death. Māra Rubene also looks at Michel Foucault’s anthropological insights, stressing that already in one of Foucault’s first philosophical texts, preserved for the course “Human Cognition and Transcendental Reflection” at the University of Lille in 1952, Foucault addressed the anthropological theme in the 19th century works by Kant, Hegel, Feuerbach, Marx, Dilthey and Nietzsche. Foucault argues that in philosophical anthropology the fourth question “What is man?” does not mean an answer to the question “What is the truth of human existence”, but rather “How can human beings respond to truth”. Philosophy must return to the question already posed by the ancient Greek philosophers of what is a good life and must build on those forces which ensure our ability and power to resist its assimilation to a thing, its transformation into a mechanism. Foucault’s insights on the art of life and the aesthetics of existence must be seen precisely in this light.
Cilvēks un tehnoloģiskā domāšana: Heidegera skatījums
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2024) Bitiniece, Laura
Laura Bitiniece explores “Human Beings and Technological Thinking: Heidegger’s Perspective”. In the course of this article, she focuses on two themes: existence and interrogation of the self, looking at the way humans are (analysing what Heidegger calls existentials, i.e., authenticity, inauthenticity and being-toward-death), and the opposition between freedom and control, or what Heidegger calls technique. The notion of technique is linked to the human need to exploit and subjugate nature, while simultaneously subjugating one’s own freedom. The article concludes with Heidegger’s ideas on how to overcome technical thinking. Heidegger distinguishes between two types of definitions: technique is a means to an end (instrumental definition) and technique is a human activity (anthropological definition). Heidegger proposes to view the nature of technology not only through instrumental and anthropological prisms, but to recognise that technology today is becoming the only environment for man, the environment of the unfolding of being, when everything – self, nature, the world – is seen only through technological perception, technological (un)thinking. Modern technology demands that we reduce everything to resources, which are just waiting to be incorporated into a technological system. What can we do? Is it possible to free ourselves from the technical setting in order, as Heidegger says, to access more original ways of discovery, more original truth? This question is in line with his question about authentic existence in the “Being and Time” stage. Heidegger generally places his hope in art, which can change us, as an alternative way of discovering the world; a way that is more original and closer to human existence. Art is to be thought as the opposite of the tendency to “technologise”, produce and use. Art shows that the world is not just a petrol station. Heidegger stresses that liberation from technique is to be found in the discovery that technique is a mode of discovery. It is as if he were urging us to stop, to suspend our technical, exploitative and applied thinking; to be silent in relation to nature. Not to try and be intrusive. First the silence of thinking, and then to think and be free, in philosophy and art. Just like taking a step back in humanity’s race towards absolute technologisation. Not everything can be done forwards.
Drosme
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2015) Sīlis, Vents
Dzimums un dzimte
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2018) Vēja, Ginta
Ginta Vēja’s paper “Sex and Gender” discusses distinction between the two concepts: historical motivation for its endorsement in feminist writings and other issues surrounding their definitions.
Dzīvesmāksla
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2018) Bitiniece, Laura
In Laura Bitiniece’s paper “Art of Living”, two modern-day stories set the tone for continuous and fundamental human questions: what constitutes a good human life and what the ways of reaching it are. The answer is searched upon in the teachings of the so-called Ancient Greek schools of philosophy – cynics, stoics, epicureans and skeptics.
Emocijas
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2015) Jankovska, Maija
Filosofiskā antropoloģija I: Rakstu krājums
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2015) Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte
The task of the book “Philosophical anthropology” is to introduce the reader to the contemporary philosophical anthropology – a science of man, which has its beginning in works of ancient Greek philosophers and continues through current advances in science. Philosophical anthropology is defined as an interdisciplinary field, which organises and interprets the knowledge and insights of various branches of sciences and humanities addressing the questions about human nature, its specific attributes and qualities, and problems that characterise the physical, mental and social aspects of human existence. This collection gives an overview of what are the basic concepts and most common terms of philosophical anthropology, what methods are applied to explore the issues. This is a first collection of original articles focusing particularly on philosophical anthropology that is being published in Latvian. At the same time, the current book is thematically linked to the previous publications in history of culture and philosophy, as well as translations of most significant thinkers, where the history of human self-inquiry and various anthropological theories are discussed. Authors of the collection are members of the faculty of Rīga Stradiņš University Department of Humanities and doctoral students. Collection consists of an introduction and ten chapters devoted to such human existence in the context of the problematic issues, such as courage, emotions, consciousness, creativity, values, freedom, identity, love, happiness, and death. Structurally each chapter contains the semantic interpretations and definitions of the central concepts. It is followed by a historical overview of the ideas of most prominent thinkers in order to relate the anthropological issues to the history of ideas. Significant attention is also paid to the contemporary interpretation of the topic. The collection is orientated towards the widest possible audience of the readers who are interested in the central issues and terminology of philosophical anthropology, from those who are interested in transdisciplinary approach to humanities to the attendants of the university courses.
Filosofiskā antropoloģija I: Rakstu krājums. Sākuma papildinformācija
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2015) Sīlis, Vents; Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte
Filosofiskā antropoloģija II: Rakstu krājums
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2018) Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte
The collection of papers “Philosophical Anthropology II” is the second volume of papers in philosophical anthropology that contains papers written by members of the Department of Humanities at Rīga Stradiņš University. The collection consists of a foreword and ten chapters. Each chapter addresses its individual topic. The collection is oriented to general reader and does not presume background knowledge of philosophy or philosophical anthropology.
Filosofiskā antropoloģija II: Rakstu krājums. Sākuma papildinformācija
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2018) Sīlis, Vents; Neiders, Ivars
Filosofiskā antropoloģija III: Rakstu krājums
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2024) Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte
This third volume is identical to the previous ones in its structural form, but conceptually different in its attempt to answer the fundamental question of philosophical anthropology: what is man? A question that is difficult to answer in general, and even more difficult to answer in a single volume – however, the authors dare to try, because their desire to find an answer, or at least to come close to it, is too great. The process of looking for an answer is also cognitively exciting and stimulating, even if there is no hope for a positive result. In their search for an answer to this question, the authors have taken considered not only the multidisciplinary approach but also the most important thinkers and movements, specificity of the anthropological perspective in the context of Western culture. The answer to this question is also sought within a limited time period – from the Enlightenment to the present day.
Filosofiskā antropoloģija III: Rakstu krājums. Sākuma papildinformācija
(Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte, 2024) Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte

Browse

Browsing Rakstu krājumi "Filosofiskā antropoloģija" by Title

Results Per Page

Sort Options