Actual Problems of Mind

The elimination of metaphysics through logical analysis of language

2023-12-16T21:18:56+02:00

Translation of Rudolf Carnap's program article "The elimination of metaphysics through logical analysis of language", made according to the edition Carnap R. Uberwindung der Metaphysik durch ¨ logische Analyse der Sprache. Erkenntnis. 2. Bd. 1931. S. 219-241.

How and why did Rudolf Carnap overcome metaphysics?

2023-12-16T21:19:00+02:00

The article gives a brief outline of the genesis of Rudolph Carnap’s fundamental article “The Overcoming of Metaphysics by the Logical Analysis of Language“. We consider the scientific path of Rudolph Carnap which, together with the orientation of the Vienna Circle, leads to an anti-metaphysical attitude embodied in the “Logical Construction of the World“ and the “Scientific Understanding of the World“. We highlight the cultural and historical conditions for the emergence of “Overcoming Metaphysics through the Logical Analysis of Language“, its scientific and philosophical foundations, and analyse the influence of contemporaries on the development of Carnap’s relevant ideas. We then carry out a detailed analysis of Carnap’s method of overcoming metaphysics. We have attempted to reconstruct the movement of Carnapian ideas in a broad philosophical context, drawing on his earlier works and the explorations of the philosophers on whom he relied. We trace not only the philosophical but also the cultural component of Carnap’s attempt to reject Heidegger’s metaphysics. We extend the context of opposition to traditional metaphysics and attempts to rethink it, beginning with Kant, who was the last significant common figure of analytic and continental philosophy, and at the same time a harbinger of the divergence of their paths. We argue that the philosophers whose work we now regard as the origins of the separation of the analytic and continental traditions, including Heidegger and Carnap, shared a common philosophical background shaped by the intellectual space of post-World War I Germany, which was particularly filled with the neoKantianism of the Baden School, Husserlian phenomenology, and the life philosophy of Dilthey and Nietzsche. All these trends criticised traditional metaphysics and contributed to the renewal of philosophical methods. Carnap’s approach to overcoming metaphysics expressed the orientation of a whole galaxy of philosophers whose aim was to create a new way of doing scientific philosophy. Despite further debate and even criticism of Carnap by his followers, the influence of his methodological guidelines on the rethinking of metaphysics cannot be denied. Modern analytical metaphysics is a full-fledged methodological adherent of Carnapian methods - definiteness, reductiveness, explication, the purpose of which is the construction of categorical systems that allow the best description of reality from the position appropriate to a given study.

Modern philosophy of science: prerequisites of formation and main directions

2023-12-16T21:19:04+02:00

The article examines the problem of forming the image of modern philosophy of science defining the major stages and trends of its development. This issue is being researched in the light of the following points:

A complex relationship between science and philosophy as well as a changing shift of emphasis towards scientific paradigm have determined specific features of social and educational inquiry related to philosophical research. The above situation has caused the formation of such an image of the philosophy of science which could represent the spectrum of its most relevant and acute problems as well as outline the leading approached to their solution focusing on science and scientific rationality.
A historical-philosophical analysis, which failed to avoid certain orientation and conceptualization, has become a basis for constructing the image in question. In view of this background there formed a unified approach (reflected in the majority of modern educational literature) that presented generalized ideas about the evolution of philosophy of science. Yet, this approach which, besides all, claimed to answer the question to what philosophy of science is, eventually turned out to be rather limited as it focused, on the one hand, on the pro-scientific tradition in philosophy within a narrow historical framework from the 1920s to the 1980s, and on the other hand, characterized its final stage as a crisis in relation to the values of scientific rationality.
Under the circumstances there arises a problem of the validity of such an approach from historical, methodological and even educational points of view. One of the ways to overcome its limitations is the use of a broader, pluralistic approach which expands the discourse of the philosophy of science by embracing a significant number of philosophical trends, including those belonging to the continental tradition. Another way to solve this problem is to search for updated rational guidelines for the development of modern philosophy of science.
Thus, discussions about the status of modern philosophy of science, its research possibilities in the direction of the rationalist tradition, prospects for the development of this tradition, and its significance remain relevant in many ways.

The proposed article is an attempt to analyze the outlined problems and consider the most promising approaches to their solution. Its first part highlights the key prerequisites of the modern philosophical study of science as well as their features and advantages. Then, taking into account these prerequisites, historical types of philosophy of science are considered basing on one of modern approaches. Considerable attention is paid to the formation of the image of modern philosophy of science and its main trends.

Theoretical and methodological program in the context of the formation of linguistic phenomenology

2023-12-16T21:19:07+02:00

The study of language in the horizon of interdiscursiveness preserves the request for an adequate methodology, which includes classical methodological guidelines, considered from a different paradigmatic point of view. An example of such an approach is the phenomenological paradigm, its concepts, and methodological correlations. The use of phenomenological methodology demonstrates the possibility to shed light on the essential dimensions of language, in particular to investigate the problem of meaning. The purpose of the article is an attempt to demonstrate the methodological fruitfulness of the phenomenological approach in the field of language, to consider its structure, categories, and perspectives. To realize the set goal, the methodological foundation, which includes general theoretical, philosophical, linguistic, and psycholinguistic methods, has been researched. The phenomenological method was used as a basic method, which consists in "phenomenological reduction" – the separation of the essences of the semantic triad "sign-meaning-meaning"; text, context, discourse. The article uses methodological projects of classical phenomenology, represented by the teachings of E. Husserl, M. Heidegger, and, accordingly, social phenomenology of N. Luhmann, Y. Habermas, and M. Foucault. In this way, understandable language is presented not as a set of signs, but as a discursive practice that systematically forms objects.The assumption is justified, that meaning – the "phenomenon" of categorization of meaning, a phenomenon connecting subjective mental and communicative intersubjective horizons; an ontological principle related to the systems of thinking and language, which implements hermeneutic, medial, syntagmatic (understanding) functions; discourse is an incomplete semiosis, which is built on intersubjective bases and is characterized by the partial coherence values, as it is composed of a discursive set of discourses of different types. It can be assumed that the discourse, its relevant components, implement the function of meaning construction. At the same time, the meaning (text) functions in the context given by the discourse as a specific linguistic and social structure. It is possible to interpret meaning as a semantic field, a set of possible meanings determined by a related discourse.

Digitalization: realities and simularies of parallel reality

2023-12-16T21:19:11+02:00

The article defines the essential features of the concept of "digitalization", which is ambiguously evaluated by researchers. It also focuses attention on the positive and negative consequences of digitalization, and defines the development trends of the digital society.Among the indisputable advantages of digitalization, the following stand out: the expansion of opportunities to meet needs of both a spiritual and material nature, a significant improvement in the quality of life, an increase in the opportunities for intellectual and creative development, an increase in the ability to career growth and opportunities for self-realization and self-development. Emphasis is made on the opportunities, open to people with disabilities, limited opportunities for employment, inclusion in the social life of those persons, who under normal conditions due to various reasons could not take an active social position is ensured.The danger of digitalization is the blurring of the boundaries between public and private life, which was especially evident during the pandemic, when a large part of the population was forced to switch to work and study online; interference in private life; the polarization of society as a result of digital inequality, which tends to deepen.It has been proved that the result of digitization is the creation of a new image of society - a digital society, where the boundary between reality and virtuality is leveled, its own system of signs reigns, and a new system of values and norms is formed.Considerable attention is paid to the phenomenon of the "digital man", who exists in virtual space, creates and transforms information relationships, perceives the world as a simulation game model, is convinced of his ability to control the digital world, but at the same time is a hostage of an alternative reality generated by the digitalization process.

On explication of concept of quantum entanglement

2023-12-16T21:19:13+02:00

Genesis of concept of quantum entanglement is explored in context of the controversy regarding the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen thought experiment and, more broadly, the debate about the completeness of quantum mechanics. Taking into account the concepts of mixture and statistical operator, which were introduced by von Neumann and borrowed by Schrödinger, it is argued that the concept of entanglement is not necessary in quantum physics.

The in-depth comparative analysis of some Schrödinger’s, von Neumann’s, and Landau’s theoretical works concludes that presentation of a complex quantum system as a quasi-mechanical aggregate was gradually being overcome. Its objective wholeness was being substantiated. Therefore, wholeness is inherent not only to quantum phenomena, but also to quantum systems themselves. Complete explanation of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen thought experiment requires consideration of both these appearances of the quantum wholeness. Therefore, main result of the long-term discussion of the EPR thought experiment is the exhaustive recognition of wholeness of quantum reality.

Study of "the rise and fall" of the quantum entanglement concept, as well as Bohr's substantiation of the concept of wholeness of phenomenon, confirm irreducibility of the Universe to a set of Democritus' atoms and their combinations, aggregates. Moreover, all these enrich picture of the Universe as an undivided wholeness, which is revolutionary replacement for the still popular worldview in the spirit of Democritus.

Analysis of contemporary use of the concept of entanglement finds out that, on the one hand, it grasps undividedness, wholeness of complex quantum systems of various kinds and, thus, is an instrument of rational holism. However, on the other hand, the concept of entanglement was call into life within the framework of imagining quantum systems as quasi-classical aggregates. Until now, this results in a shallow everyday-descriptive understanding of it, in principally limited attempts to model or think holistic systems as a set of separate objects, albeit in any entangled states.

Values, evaluations, and emotions in the justification of decision-making

2023-12-16T21:19:18+02:00

Decision-making is one of the main structural components of social interaction. When asked to justify a decision in question, the usual response is to construct arguments. They establish preferences between alternative actions. Such arguments rely on preferences between values. Preferences between values, in turn, are established by evaluating them, and assigning them the degrees of importance for decision-making. In this way, the evaluated values are included in the decision-making justification process. The success of the justification of the decision depends, to a large extent, on the transmitting of the evaluated value to the person to whom such justification is addressed.

When decision-making is emotional, values gain degrees of importance through emotional evaluation. And the perception of the justification of the decision can also be emotional. An emotional reaction to it is an evaluative reaction. It shows whether the transmitting of value is successful, whether the value is accepted and, in the result, whether the proposed justification for the decision is accepted or not.

The question is how arise the emotional evaluations that determine preferences between values. It is proposed to consider emotional evaluation as the result of an intuitive inference – emotional evaluation induction. Making an inference is a consequence of perceiving an expression of emotion, a reaction to an emotional expression of an evaluative attitude to value.

Emotional inferences are plausible inferences. Their conclusions are potentially cancellable. Usually, the reasons for cancelling the conclusion of an argument supporting a decision are inconsistency or incompleteness of information. The dynamics of emotional states is added to these reasons.

Transmitted and accepted values lead to the emergence of collective intentionality which, apart from everything else, arises due to a series of inferences, which, to some extent, are «guided» by emotions.

«One as all». Mental foundations of solidarity action

2023-12-16T21:19:22+02:00

Analyzing the problem of the «semantics of action», M. V. Popovych gave an anecdotal example, according to which in a dialogue between two competitors (traveling salesmen) who suspect each other of deception in advance, one of them, convinced that the opponent will not believe him anyway, decides to tell him the truth, thus «confounding his cards». Taking the competitor's information as true, the opponent, at the same time, makes it clear to the opponent that, despite his words, he fully understood his real intention -- to mislead him. In addition to the story about these «like-minded» competitors, the proposed publication cites other cases of understanding each other without words, albeit non-antagonistic. This is an old married couple, according to O. Spengler, and the original team, according to O. M. Freudenberg. In both examples the so-called «We» stands out very clearly, for which thoughts on a certain occasion are common, without the need for prior agreement. Accordingly, the article draws attention to an interesting, from the point of view of the philosophy of action, phenomenon, which the author repeatedly observed in the student group during his studies at Kyiv University named after T.G. Shevchenko (1980-85). According to him, a group of people (students) reacts to a certain challenge as a «collective individual» -- «all as one», or the same «We». There is a peculiar phenomenon of an instant solidarity protest reaction to some challenge, as a result of a «conspiracy without language», which is based on certain worldview markers of acceptable and unacceptable and reveals a structure in the form of a series of step-by-step actions that characterizes equanimity (mental measurement). This manifestation of «We» is opposed to two other, more traditional, manifestations of this category -- a mechanical «we», united by a common language or belonging to the same reference group, but not devoid of internal contradictions (the example of traveling salesmen, according to M.V. Popovich), and -- «we» of the totalitarian society, formed by the opaque way of hypnosis, deception (propaganda), violence by the leader-«puppet master». The latter can be characterized as «we are the victims». In a free society, priority is given to the authenticity and value of the unintended, spontaneous expression of «We», which opposes the phantom power of an illegitimate leader.

Comparison of practical and metaphysical approaches to the problem of personal identity in analytic philosophy

2023-12-16T21:19:25+02:00

Abstract. The paper considers the problem of personal identity in analytic philosophy, which is a question of why a person remains identical to themselves over time, and what personal identity grounds on. In analytic philosophy, the problem of personal identity is usually considered in metaphysics. However, as Derek Parfit has shown, the problem of personal identity is not what matters in metaphysics. He suggests that it should be revised in ethics. Due to his influential works, the problem of personal identity starts being considered in practical philosophy. Since the 1980s, analytic philosophers have been developing two approaches to the mentioned problem. The first approach is the normative one. According to it, personal identity turns a human being into a moral agent. Without identity, an individual cannot become a person at all. The other approach is narrative one, which explains that a person combines different experiences into a narrative, and that is the way for a person to remain the same over time. Despite the differences between the two approaches, they both base on the same conceptual model – the notion of practical identity. In this paper, we suggest that narrative and normative theories of personal identity should be viewed within the practical approach to the problem, which opposes the metaphysical approach. This article outlines the key ideas of the practical approach to personal identity and compares it to personal identity in metaphysics. These three key points are the understanding of the notion of a person, the interpretation of identity and the way to consider the problem of identity criterion or criteria. In the practical approach to identity, a person is an agent. Identity is viewed through the concept of the attribution of actions. Personal identity consists of the unity of one’s self. The question of personal identity criteria becomes a question of reidentification. Personal identity is based not on criterion but on the mechanism of action attribution. As compared to the understanding of personal identity in metaphysics, the practical way to consider it highlights that identity is a process of keeping the unity of one’s self over time using action attribution.

Logic in educational literature of the XVII and XIX centuries

2023-12-16T21:19:31+02:00

The «Port Royal Logic» is one of the most famous works not only in the field of logic but also in philosophy. Written under the influence of Jansenism and Cartesianism in the 17th century, it became one of the first works that departed from the classical exposition of logic. It's difficult to say the same about another work that came from the pen of the German philosopher and logician Sigwart — «Logic». What could these works have in common? In this article, I briefly analyze these two works based on certain criteria and address the question posed above. Thus, we will pay attention not only to the structures of the works and their main ideas but also to the authors' personalities and the peculiarities of the environments in which these works could have emerged.