The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Medicine"

Journal Information
ISSN / EISSN : 2226-0994 / 2414-5904
Current Publisher: V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University (10.26565)
Total articles ≅ 212
Current Coverage

Latest articles in this journal

Nataliia V. Zahurska
The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Medicine" pp 8-14; doi:10.26565/2226-0994-2020-62-1

This article considers the state of human beings in a post-postmodern conditions and focuses on obversion as one version of posthuman reality in polyversion, which is lusciousness. Obversion is regarded as a logical and at the same time dynamic figure of dis-identity and non-presence. Trying to find out if a real human being is written leads one to consider the relationship of real and written reality and the possibility of posthuman writing. Posthuman writing becomes apparent in tracks, traces, scars and vestiges such an @ as a signifier of becoming [email protected] The vestiges of a human being are being investigated through the appeal to an actual post-postmodern conceptions such as speculative realism, speculative posthumanism, dark ecology, etc. In the post-postmodern context concepts such as tru(s)t/h, faith and kindness as a counterweight to the excessive postmodern quotation and theorization are being examined. Thus, a human being as a post-postscript is becoming a preface at the same time. This article explores such crucial postmodern issues as iterability, signature and others in a contingent context, in which an immanence of living itself becomes a writing in the postdigitality, post-Internet and post-media extent in relation to the realization of the disaster of technical or even mechanical as human. This research realizes on a showcase of post-postmodern architecture as an immanent spatiotemporal contingency, en-vironment of a human being. It shows how a minimalistic style in post-postmodern ethics and aesthetics correlates with obversive rocking in contrast to binary opposition logic. Thus, it realizes a movement from human to posthuman as scriptor, writing a postscript, and beyond to post-posthuman as postscriptor, writing a post-postscript as a human being, writing itself in its contingent immanence.
Marina P. Smolyaga
The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Medicine" pp 70-78; doi:10.26565/2226-0994-2020-62-8

The idea is considered that T. Hobbs’s “Leviathan” is not only a particular example and a representation of classical Western European thinking, but turns out to be some “metatheoretical” place, in which the very potentiated field of the opportunity of clarification, and very production of a social order problem, and, ambivalently – all socio-theoretical discourse is formed. According to the author, after T. Hobbes problems which are “strategic” for all modern theoretical sociology and which, at the same time, are constitutive for her can be put. What “art” – which is in the middle of the life, in the middle of human reality – can collect particular human existence in the uniform and coordinated been, acting for the benefit of all? How does it turn out in such a way that creation which “master”, according to Hobbes, is the person gains universal dimension? How is transition owing to which individual free figures get the lives unified way which substantially is represented the general state is carried out? Whether such a transition is possible? How to think of it? By what force on what basis, according to what principles, by the action of what algorithm, due to what structure small figures keep in borders of a body of the Leviathan? The solution which is proposed by Thomas Hobbes for a problem of social order – that is the public contract on the utilitarian basement – has, on the belief of the author, secondary value in the face of opening by Hobbes the matrix of the social-theoretical thinking. Thus, contradictions and discrepancies which can be found in the text by Gobbes, the author seeks to consider as “a point of growth of a discourse” and as fixing and registrations of potential opportunities of the discourse of social order, as well as the phenomenon of society itself.
Volodymyr O. Abashnik
The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Medicine" pp 90-98; doi:10.26565/2226-0994-2020-62-10

In the article, a little-studied question of the critical interpretation of the philosophical and psychological position of the representative of Scotland tradition James Mill (1773–1836) in the university philosophy, especially in the work of Kharkiv Professor Fedor Zelenogorskii (1839–1908) is presented. At first, the main periods of scientific and creative career of Fedor Zelenogorskii, including his studying at the Kazan Clerical Academy (1862–1864) and the historical-philosophical faculty at the Kazan University (1864–1868) are considered. Then his scientific internship from 1871 till 1873 in Germany and Switzerland is emphasized. During that period, he attended lectures of such famous Professors as Moritz Drobisch (Leipzig), Eduard Zeller (Heidelberg), Friedrich Albert Lange (Zurich, and Marburg), who was the author of the work “Geschichte des Materialismus und Kritik seiner Bedeutung in der Gegenwart” (1866). Then the features of the teaching and the publications of Fedor Zelenogroskii in his “Kharkiv period” (1874–1908) are pointed out, during which he was, at first, private docent, then extraordinary and ordinary professor of philosophy. Fedor Zelenogorskii’s works at this time comprise three areas: 1) Antique philosophy (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Aristippus of Cyrene), 2) works in the history of philosophy, for instance, Kharkiv university philosophy and Ukrainian philosophy (J. B. Schad, A I. Dudrovich, M. N. Protopopov, G. S. Skovoroda, at al.), 3) logic, psychology and pedagogic. In the last group, his doctoral monograph “On mathematical, metaphysical, inductive and critical research and proof methods” (1877) was of great importance. Fedor Zelenogorskii’s very important work was his monograph “Essay of Development of Psychology from Descartes to our Time” (Kharkiv, 1885). The positions of well-known philosophers (Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, Berkley, Leibniz, Locke, and John Stewart Mill) and less-known thinkers (Glisson, Bonnet, and James Mill) were here analyzed. Fedor Zelenogorskii’s critical interpretation of the psychological viewpoint of James Mill in his two volumes work “Analysis of the phenomena of the human mind” (1829, 1869) occupies an important place in this analysis. According to him, Chapter III. “The Association of Ideas” of James Mill's work played a key role. James Mill appears here as a representative of associative psychology (David Hartley, Thomas Brown, J. F. Herbart, John Stewart Mill). The Kharkiv philosopher gave credit to James Mill for his contribution to the development of the causal law in Chapter “XXIV. The Will” of this work. In turn, Fedor Zelenogorskii’s important achievement was the popularization of the ideas of the Scotland philosopher and psychologist James Mill, in particular, because of his translation of extracts from the work “Analysis of the phenomena of the human mind”.
Vladimir V. Prokopenko
The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Medicine" pp 53-62; doi:10.26565/2226-0994-2020-62-6

The article discusses the concept of political Gnosticism, developed by the philosopher Eric Voegelin. This concept is one of the main elements of Voegelin’s political philosophy, in which he answers the question about the essence of modern politics. Voegelin believes that modernity is the result of the historical victory of the ideology of “Gnosticism”. The historical roots of Gnosticism, says Voegelin, should not be sought in late antiquity, but in the Middle Ages. Based on the ideas of Christian mystics, such as Joachim of Flore, an ideology of Gnosticism was formed, which spread in the Western world and became a powerful political force. This force accomplished the “great Gnostic revolution” and shaped modern society. Examples of modern Gnostic regimes are progressivism, positivism, Marxism, psychoanalysis, communism, fascism, National Socialism. Modern political science is not able to give a critical understanding of Gnosticism, since it itself is a product of Gnostic ideology. Therefore, modern political science needs to restore its fundamental principles, which were established by ancient philosophers, the founders of the philosophy of politics. Voegelin calls this the reteoretisation of political science. The author of the article analyzes the theoretical and historical grounds of Voegelin’s concept and concludes that one of the sources of his theory of political Gnosticism is Hegel’s doctrine of unhappy consciousness. The article also proves that Voegelin’s concept of Gnosticism is not identical with historical Gnosticism. The author also analyzes the reasons why political science of the twentieth century did not accept this concept and did not draw conclusions from criticism of political science in the work “New Science of Politics” by Voegelin. The article concludes that the changes that are taking place in the modern world force us to reconsider and overestimate Voegelin’s concept, which, in our opinion, has great heuristic potential.
Tetiana P. Zaika
The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Medicine" pp 193-204; doi:10.26565/2226-0994-2020-62-21-1

The article is devoted to the problem of coherence of the categorical apparatus of researches of the competence approach in the cultural and philosophical context. Researches of domestic and foreign scientists in the field of cultural competence are analyzed by the author. The main approaches to understanding the content and scope of the concept of “cultural competence” are presented. It is determined that the formation of a culturally competent personality is connected with the process of inculturation and socialization, that is, with decoding of cultural codes and social roles that determine the content of socio-cultural existence of a person. Correlation of etymologically similar concepts of “cultural”, “general cultural”, “sociocultural”, “ethnocultural”, “intercultural” and “cross-cultural competence” is carried out. The author has established that general cultural competence, as the individual’s ability to navigate in the spiritual and cultural space of interpersonal interaction, and sociocultural competence, as the individual’s ability to organize their own life in accordance with social roles and behavioral scenarios, is varieties of cultural competence. A pattern has been established: 1) if the context of the study is a monoethnic cultural space, then the concept of “ethnocultural” and “cultural competence” is synonyms, and this does not require their differentiation; 2) if the context of the study is a multiethnic culture, then the concept of “ethnocultural” and “cultural competence” must be distinguished semantically. The communicative skills of the individual are an important aspect of the formation of cultural competence. The article argues that the realization of intercultural competence takes place in the space of communicative interaction. Cultural and intercultural competences have been identified as both coherent and relevant phenomena; and that the concepts of “cultural” and “cross-cultural competence” are concepts of different cognitive order. The relation of intercultural to cross-cultural competence is also not synonymous. Cross-cultural competence as a fact of communicative interaction is a semantic part of intercultural competence for which, in addition to communication, it is important to be aware of its causes and consequences.
Galina V. Zhukova
The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Medicine" pp 205-208; doi:10.26565/2226-0994-2020-62-22

The non-academic education as the development of socio-cultural experience that takes place outside the pedagogically organized process is considered in the article. The freedom of human cognitive activity, the expansion of the range of his hobbies, the enrichment of the spiritual world is ensured through a network of institutions of non-academic education. Non-academic education institutions transfer the knowledge and skills necessary in the field of work, which does not belong directly to the scientific content of professional activity. The term “non-academic education” is not yet widespread, it is used mainly by practitioners in the field of solving general problems of education, based on human educational needs. However, the reality it reflects is well known to all, it is learning in the process of daily life. In essence and content, it is the same process of acquiring knowledge and skills, deepening worldview and enriching personal potential, which is in academic education. The difference is that it takes place outside the walls of institutions that are part of the education system. Non-academic education takes place in social institutions that perform other functions in the social division of labor: in the family, in the field of work, in various formal and informal groups and associations. A clear training goal is not necessary. Non-academic education is spontaneous, without time limits, not certified, unlike academic. Non-academic education may have some kind of documentary evidence, albeit of a non-state type. A teacher in academic education is necessarily an employee of an educational institution, and in non-academic education it is an employee, a coach, and a teacher. Training in non-academic education can be carried out on the educational portal through social services, distance learning courses of various organizations, mass open courses.
Back to Top Top