Ihor Karivets

In this essay the author underlines the difference between philosophy and philosophical education. Recent debates on the problems of philosophical education have shown that they had not answered the main question: what is philosophy? The author stresses that philosophy is the understanding of unconditioned beginning; it is not the searching of such a beginning, but only the understanding. We see that philosophy is substituted for philosophical education. Such substitution is the death of philosophy, because philosophy became very specialized science, divided into many philosophical disciplines. Specialization and division of philosophy make it unuseful, second rated science, because it has lost its own subject: an unconditioned beginning. How can we revive philosophy? The author is sure that revival of philosophy is possible outside the institutions that give philosophical education, through reading the works of philosophers, who created ontologies, and translating them into Ukrainian, through opening the ideas which will orient us on the being and will help us to think about it.

In this article, the author proposes a nonscientific and nonanthropological resolution of “the problem of consciousness” and denies the possibility to explain the nature of consciousness with the help of physics, neuroscience, cognitive science and also analytic philosophy. The author stresses that 1) consciousness transcends Me (selfhood) and does not belong to it, 2) consciousness perceives being; being is consciousness. “The problem of consciousness” is not a theoretical problem at all. In order to know what consciousness is, it is necessary to work with consciousness. Therefore, we do not theorize about consciousness. It is a practical task of a human being. The author argues that meditation, as a kind of practice, is the best way to work with consciousness and enter into it.

In this paper the relation between being and becoming is analyzed and the Kierkegaard’s existential method is considered. Also the three stages of existence are described as the evolution of a human being. This evolution means gradual creation of true selfhood due to decisive choices and actions. The author stresses that Kierkegaard’s existential anthropology is a version of the dialectical religious existentialism. A human being is paradoxical and her or his conflicts cannot be resolved by rational way. Existence has its own logic, which differs from the dialectical logic of Hegel’s absolute idea or spirit. This logic is paradoxical and needs other laws, i.e. the laws of love, faith and repetition. Repetition is essential for religious experience, because it teaches to be humble. An individual’s humility means that he/she is not disturbed by any superfluous things and he/she does not pursue them. Such humble individual remains quiet in any situations. The author proves that Kierkegaard is one of the philosophers of Modern Time, who struggles against speculative and objective thinking, which depersonalizes a human being; a human’s being is totally subjective and on higher level it is a passion of faith.

In this article, on the basis of analysis of the classical definition of a miracle (from D.Hume to C.S.Lewis and R. Swinburne) and the nonclassical one (J.L. Marion and J.P.Manussakis), the phenomenological and the etymological aspects of a miracle are examined.Taking into consideration the historical development of the concept of a miracle, the author proves the connections between contemplation, miracle and novelty. They are necessary for the constituting of religious experience. Faith itself, in theological sense, is not determinative for religious experience.It has sense only when it is integrated into contemplation. True religious experience is based on the art of contemplation which helps a human being to look with astonishment. The author argues that phenomenological approach to a miracle combined with the etymological analysis is a valuable method for the study of a miracle in the context of the history of philosophy.

. The author has compared the world-view attitudes of oligarchy and capitalism on the basis of analysis of Ludwig von Mises’ writings. The results of such comparison allow us to maintain that there is neither market economy nor competition, and so nor capitalism in Ukraine. The world-view basis of capitalism is the philosophy of liberalism, which has such principles as equality, freedom, inviolability of private property, cooperation in favor of profits of the whole society. On the contrary, oligarchy based on the strong desire of infinitive enrichment and exploitation hasn’t any philosophical basis.

In this article the heritage of Hryhorij Skovoroda is considered from the metaphilosophical point of view. This point of view is useful because it allows seeing some syncretism as unity of philosophy, theology, religion, myth, and poetry in the heritage of Hryhorij Skovoroda. Therefore, the author stresses that when we analyze the Hryhorij Skovoroda’s heritage it is wrong to divide it into such parts as philosophy, theology, religion, myth, and poetry. This division doesn’t lead to the whole understanding of Hryhorij Skovoroda’s personality and works. The author argues that Hryhorij Skovoroda is the follower of Philosophia Perennis’ tradition, which is characterized by syncretism. Such syncretism of the Skovoroda’s heritage is neither bad nor good. We see the unique unity of philosophy, poetry, religion and mythology in the Skovoroda’s life and in his works. The author argues that such unity is useful for the deeper understanding of the world and a human being. Syncretic unity of Skovoroda’s worldview helps to overcome the different oppositions of classical philosophy (subject-object, inner-external, immortal-mortal, natural-supernatural, human-divine, relative-absolute etc.). We live in the times of analysis and fragmented world. Therefore syncretism is very hard to understand. In order to understand syncretism we should return to synthetic thinking, we should rediscover the synthetic function of our consciousness. The life and the works of Skovoroda show us how a human being can think synthetically and regain the whole worldview. The whole worldview helps live in the harmony with others and nature. This harmony is very needed in our times of “moral blindness” (Zygmunt Bauman), decay of traditions, which were oriented us towards common values. Keywords:, metaphilosophical approach, unity of opposites, mythopoesis, syncretism, synthesis of philosophy and religion, vocation.

This article is dedicated to possibility of overcoming the subject-object ontoligy, which is based on intentionality.The author proves that such dualism is rooted into the transcendental level. The transcendental level makes possible our empirical experience on the basis of subject-object relations. The author considers Parmenides' famous sentence "For it is the same thing that can be thought and that can be" and Husserl's well-known claim "Back to things themselves!" as essential for possibility of discovering non-intentional relation between Self and Other, between human being and nature/cosmos. There are the division and the rupture between subject and object in a natural attitude. Parmenides and early Husserl show the way to the truth as a wholeness without struggle between subject and object

In this article the author shows the connections between contemplation, miracle and novelty. They are necessary for the constituting of religious experience. The author argues that faith itself, in theological sense, is not determinative for religious experience. It has sense only when it is integrated into contemplation. True religious experience discloses the chain of routine, repetitive everydayness and lets a human being to see the new in the usual. The author maintains that religious experience is based on the art of contemplation which helps a human being to look with wonder.

У західноєвропейській соціальній філософії та соціальній теорії осмислення повсякдення має довгу традицію. У статті аналізуються не лише наявні теорії повсякдення, але й робиться спроба вийти на метатеоретичний рівень, щоб визначити межі цих теорій та тих методів, які використовувалися для їхньої побудови. Автор статті доводить, що на часі запровадження такого дослідження повсякдення, у якому б органічно поєднувалися метатеоретичні пошуки з конкретним феноменом повсякдення, таким, яким він постає перед свідомістю звичайної людини.

Purpose. The author will show that metaphysical concepts and the concepts of empirical sciences derive from experience. The only difference is that metaphysical concepts derive from unusual experience, i.e. out-of-body experience, while empirical sciences – from usual one. The example set metaphysical concept of pure being. Methodology. In order to obtain this goal the author uses two methods. The first one is comparative method. With the help of this method the stories of men who experienced clinical death and returned to life are compared with the famous philosophers’ metaphysical statements (Plato, Descartes, and Bonaventura). The second one is transpersonal method. It helps to study the peculiarities of the extraordinary experience in the state of clinical death or mystical ecstasy. Such experience lies in experience of transcendence, pure being as light, ultimate awareness of truth, which are identical to the metaphysical statements of philosophers and mystics. These ultimate experiences belong to different people, who lived and grown in different cultures, but nevertheless metaphysical statements of philosophers or mystics and statements of the ordinary people who experienced clinical death are the same. Therefore we can say that out-of-body experience is transpersonal. Originality. Metaphysics is neither speculative nor withdrawn from experience of a human being sphere. It arises from out-of-body experience while empirical sciences – from usual experience. Therefore, metaphysical concepts, in particular, pure being, are empirical, because they are based also on (extraordinary) experience. In general, metaphysics becomes possible on the basis of out-of-body experience. Conclusions. In this article the author argues that the concepts of metaphysics are not a priori because they originate from out-of-body experience that is from the experience of the distinction between body and soul or body and mind. As a result of such experience appear, for instance, Plato’s metaphysics, Descartes’ metaphysics, and the Christian mysticism of Bonaventure, which theoretical constructs are deriving from experience of pure being (light). In this context metaphysics is seen as the path of gradual separation of a human being from his or her physical body, i.e. “the art of dying” (Plato). Therefore, the author proves that there are no a priori concepts. All concepts are aposteriori, in empirical sciences and in metaphysics as well. We simply talk about two different experiences: usual and unusual experience. The author also argues that there is direct connection between out of body experience and metaphysics, mystics. In the case of out-of-body experience, the temporary death of a human being is the cause of his/her change in perception of himself/herself and the world; it is the cause of metaphysical knowledge.

In this article, the author considers the particularities of Franz Brentano’s psychognosy in the context of notion of “basic” or “analytic” truths and his methodological approaches to scientific, philosophical investigations as well as his influence upon Kasimir Twardowski, who was the pupil of Brentano and accepted the main points of his methodological program. The author also stresses that the study of Brentano’s and Twardowski’s heritage is important for tracing the origin of scientific/analytic philosophy. It is very important to investigate Brentano-Twardowski relations in the context of the concept of “basic truths” or “analytic truths”. Brentano stresses that “basic truths” can be found thanks to “psychognosy” or “pure psychology”. For Twardowski, psychology is the base for philosophical investigations because it helps to understand the formation of notions and judgements. This article is also dedicated to the inquiries of Brentano’s and Twardowski’s legacy provided by Ukrainian scholars Borys Dombrowskiy and Yanosh Sanotskiy. The reception of Brentano’s theory of judgement in Dombrowskiy’s works and the problem of Brentano’s psychologism in Sanotskiy’s works were examined.

This article examines the interaction of ideas of Modern Western philosophy, including Polish philosophy, and Ukrainian philosophy in Eastern Galicia in the late eighteenth century through the early twentieth century. The authors argue that during this period the methodological foundations of Ukrainian philosophy and its history, both in periodization, and the development of philosophical terminology, were intensively elaborated. This is proved by the analyzing works of such Galician thinkers and cultural figures as Klym Hankevych and Ilarion Svientsits’kyi. Both were able to involve Ukrainian philosophy in Central-Eastern philosophical discourse. Such an involvement was fruitful because it contributed to the development of Ukrainian philosophy and its methodology for both historic-philosophical researches and the formation of philosophical terminology.

This article is dedicated to 130th Anniversary of German thinker Martin Heidegger. The main goal of the article is to develop Ukrainian reception of Heidegger’s philosophical heritage. The author considers the particularities of Heidegger’s understanding of thinking in the context of Dasein’s fundamental ontology. Thus, thinking is understood as being in a "tradition without tradition"; this, in turn, means the immediacy of thinking, which will never be past, never become a memory or a system of memories (beliefs). The element of thinking is the element of spontaneity, that is, of voluntaries: it is impossible to "develop" thinking or "teach" to think meaningfully, because it is a voluntary affair. The voluntary cause of meaningful thinking reveals the truth (unconcealedness) of being. The author considers the scenario of falling now-being into its non-existent existence, interpreting it in Heidegger's terminology as a state of "forgetting of being". This status is updated if it is transformed into a "techno-technological" object, which must act on certain algorithms and provide "development" or "progress" metrics. The author develops the thesis that Dasein’s fundamental ontology of Heidegger reveals its condition as being-between. Being-between is not anthropological, but ontological category. The world of Dasein is everydayness between the birth and the death. The very being-between of Dasein induces its meaningful thinking. Following Heidegger, the author states that Dasein, that is lost in being-between, becomes centered (by subject) which pointlessly deploys power under the being. Therefore, in this context of Heidegger’s understanding of thinking the author also interprets the causes of such pointless existence of Dasein and its consequences. According to the author, now-being can save only reflection.

In this article the author proposes nonscientific and nonanthropological resolution of “the prob- lem of consciousness” and denies the possibility to explain the nature of consciousness with the help of physics, neuroscience, cognitive science and also analytic philosophy. The author stresses that 1) consciousness transcends Me and does not belong to it, 2) consciousness perceives being; being is consciousness. “The problem of consciousness” is not theoretical problem at all. In order to know what consciousness is, it is necessary to work with consciousness. Therefore, we do not theo- rize about consciousness. It is a practical task of a human being. The author argues that meditation, as a kind of practice, is the best way to work with consciousness and enter into it.

The author considers the particularities of Jiddu Krishnamurti’s negativism. Jiddu Krishnamurti is a well-known thinker, spiritual teacher, and master, who did not join in with any trend of religion, philosophy or social and political movements. The atypical nature of his negativism is that Jeddah Krishnamurti rejects the external forms of achieving freedom and truth, emphasizing the impossibility of cultivating and developing a sense of love, and draws attention to the need for an internal revolution here and now. It is carried out only on the basis of a choiceless, total, and careful observation of the whole field of life, which includes the individual and society, the observer and the observed. Such observation leads to the destruction of the self as a centre in which the past (experience) and projection (future) are intertwined. Being here and now, without any support for the past or for the future, a person realizes truth and freedom, and her/his only feeling is the love for the whole creation. The significance of the basic concepts used by Jiddu Krishnamurti several times to explain his position during meetings, as well as in his books is analyzed. These are concepts of active now, unconscious awareness, conditionality, denial, nothingness, emptiness, that make possible certain streamlining of his philosophy and defining its basic concepts.

У статті автор досліджує два стратегічні підходи до повсякдення: об'єктивістський і феноменологічний. Автор розглядає процес об'єктивації, унаслідок якого повсякдення стає об'єктом. При цьому зауважує, що, з іншого боку, необ'єктивоване повсякдення є феноменом, який дивує. У повсякденні об'єкти й феномени співіснують. Синтезуючи об'єктивістський та феноменологічний підходи, автор доходить висновку, що так можна створити вищого рівня теорію повсякдення. Її можна розглядати як реалізацію гасла "раннього" Е. Гуссерля: "Назад до самих речей!"

The reform of higher education continues in Ukraine more than a year; however it does not pay much attention to the changes in the teaching of philosophy. In the article the author investigates different technologies of the problem-based teaching of philosophy and its methods, substantiates the necessity of introducing such technologies in the teaching of philosophy and also shows the specifics of the application of such technologies during the teaching of philosophy at the Lviv National Polytechnic University. Any problem-based education is searching and cognition of unknown. It is based on mental, volitional, and emotional activity, but, above all, it requires to be interested in the subject of study. The author stresses that problem-based education can be practiced in small student groups, which have the sufficient level of interest and motivation to study philosophy. Also, the author introduces his own classification of problem solving tasks in teaching of philosophy, which will help to apply educational material in accordance with the level of students, for example: 1) problematic situations that contribute to the formulation of new concepts ; 2) historical and philosophical problematic situations - these are situations based on historical and philosophical material, when students compare the solution of some philosophical problem in the philosophy of a certain epoch, compare the approaches of different philosophers; 3) developmental problematic situations which help students to understand the logic of defining some philosophical concept, to understand one or another philosopher and his methods of creating concepts.

The article defends the thesis that Skovoroda is a representative of syncretic culture and thinking, which combines philosophy, religion (faith), poetry (literature), theology into an unity. His universality, as a talented and comprehensively developed personality, also lies in this combining different sphere of a human activity. To combine all this, Skovoroda must be the bearer of syncretic thinking and perception of the world. But, such combination includes also philosophy and, therefore, subordinates it to spirituality. Skovoroda is a sage, who imparts wisdom and sets an example of a morally clean life and strong faith. The works of Skovoroda should be viewed from the standpoint of syncretism. He did not create a new philosophy for Ukrainian culture, as did, for example, Socrates for Ancient Greek culture, Descartes for French culture, and Kant for German culture. To consider Skovoroda only a philosopher means to reduce him to a «highly specialized mental worker». It is necessary to read Skovoroda's works universally and syncretically, not philosophically (analytically and critically). The article examines also the weak and strong aspects of the syncretic creativity of Skovoroda for Ukrainian culture in general and Ukrainian philosophy in particular. In Skovoroda's works, there is no analysis and criticism of philosophical problems, there is no consistent rational-logical (step-by-step) construction of a philosophical conception, which he would defend with arguments. Instead, we find in Skovoroda's works many biblical quotations and their interpretation, that is, he uses the Bible to confirm his position and way of life. The authority of the Bible for Skovoroda is indisputable, so it is a source of wisdom for him. The author argues that Skovoroda is «internally new» for Ukrainian culture. He brings into Ukrainian culture Christianity, which differs from the traditional church, biblical symbolic hermeneutics and vegetarianism as a way of life. Skovoroda's life represents a life of integrated personality.

The author considers the particularities of Jiddu Krishnamurti’s negativism. Jiddu Krishnamurti is a well-known thinker, spiritual teacher, and master, who did not join in with anytrend of religion, philosophy or social and political movements. The atypical nature of his negativism is that Jeddah Krishnamurti rejects the external forms of achieving freedom and truth, emphasizing the impossibility of cultivating and developing a sense of love, and draws attention to the need for an internal revolution here and now. It is carried out only on the basis of a choiceless, total, and careful observation of the whole field of life, which includes the individual and society, the observer and the observed. Such observation leads to the destruction of the self as a center in which the past (experience) and projection (future) are intertwined. Being here and now, without any support for the past or for the future, a person realizes truth and freedom, and her/his only feeling is the love for the whole creation. The significance of the basic concepts used by Jiddu Krishnamurti several times to explain his position during meetings, as well as in his books is analyzed. These are concepts of active now, unconscious awareness, conditionality, denial, nothingness, emptiness, that make possible certain streamlining of his philosophy and defining its basic concepts.

The reform of higher education continues in Ukraine more than a year; however it does not pay much attention to the changes in the teaching of philosophy. In the article the author investigates different technologies of the problem-based teaching of philosophy and its methods, substantiates the necessity of introducing such technologies in the teaching of philosophy and also shows the specifics of the application of such technologies during the teaching of philosophy at the Lviv National Polytechnic University. Any problem-based education is searching and cognition of unknown. It is based on mental, volitional, and emotional activity, but, above all, it requires to be interested in the subject of study. The author stresses that problem-based education can be practiced in small student groups, which have the sufficient level of interest and motivation to study philosophy. Also, the author introduces his own classification of problem solving tasks in teaching of philosophy, which will help to apply educational material in accordance with the level of students, for example: 1) problematic situations that contribute to the formulation of new concepts (they help to generalize all previous knowledge and extract from it a new one); 2) historical and philosophical problematic situations - these are situations based on historical and philosophical material, when students compare the solution of some philosophical problem in the philosophy of a certain epoch, compare the approaches of different philosophers; 3) developmental problematic situations which help students to understand the logic of defining some philosophical concept, to understand one or another philosopher and his methods of creating concepts.

Šiame straipsnyje XX amžiaus egzistencializmo kontekste nagrinėjamos mažai žinomų šiuolaikinių Ukrainos rašytojų Valeriano Pidmohylny’o ir Mykhailo Yatskivo novelės. Jos gali būti laikomos kultūriniu reiškiniu, sujungiančiu filosofiją ir literatūrą. Pidmohylny’o novelės visų pirma buvo ryškiai paveiktos XIX a. pabaigos ir XX a. pradžios Europos filosofų minčių. Todėl panašių motyvų galime ieškoti tiek Pidmohylny’o, tiek ir egzistencialistų, kuriuos paveikė Schopenhauerio, Kierkegaard’o ir Nietzschės idėjos, kūryboje. Be to, autoriai, pasitelkdami kertinių egzistencializmo sąvokų – likimo ir mirties – perspektyvą, nagrinėja Yatskivo noveles. Remiantis retrospektyvia novelių bei XX amžiaus egzistencializmo tematikos analize, Pidmohylny’ą ir Yatskivą galima priskirti egzistencializmo literatūrinei srovei.

In this article the author considers the essential connection between liberal individualism, reforms and initiativeness. The author shows that liberal individualism has nothing in common with robinsonade, egoism and narrow view upon the things. On the contrary, it sets free the initiativeness of people and makes them active in social, economic and civil spheres. Consequently, if Ukrainians want the decentralization in all the spheres of life, then it is necessarily to realize the ideas of classical liberalism: liberty, equality and justice. For the western countries of the later capitalism it is the passed way. Therefore in the article the author also considers the obstacles and the perspectives of the realization of ideas’ classical liberalism in Ukraine.