The aim of the article is to interpret Heidegger’s theory of understanding as a specific contribution to the investigation of human action. First, Heidegger’s notion of understanding as practical copying is explained and is distinguished from the analytic theory of action based on the concept of intention. Second, the possibility of grasping intentional action as an answer to the situation of disturbed understanding is analysed against the background of Heidegger’s concept of the worldliness of the world. The article attempts to supplement Heidegger’s conception. The genesis of intentional action may be sought in the notion of the identity of self-understanding that is grounded in Dasein’s elaboration of the overall interpretation of the world and in Dasein’s explicit reflexion of the possibilities of his or her own existence. In this context, the relationship between the analysis of action and the lifeworld concept is outlined and it is stressed that theoretical reflection may play an important role in deliberation over possibilities of action. At the end of the article, Gadamer’s concepts of dialogue and play are employed to highlight some conditions that result from social dimension of action and restrict the formulation of intentions. The article approaches Heidegger’s notion of understanding in an unorthodox way: through a hermeneutical dialogue with different interpretative and philosophical positions., Martin Ďurďovič., and Obsahuje poznámky a bibliografii
Schelerova kritika Kanta a jeho pojmu apriori na jedné straně v mnohém navazuje na Husserla, avšak Scheller Husserlovu kritiku ještě doplňuje a prohlubuje. Na druhé straně však Scheler kritizuje i Husserlovo chápání pojmu „apriori“. Materiální apriori jakožto ideální předmět je u Husserla spojeno především s takzvaným „bozanovským obratem“. Schelerova kritika Husserla se prohlubuje spolu s tím, jak stále hlouběji proniká do vztahu mezi Bolzanem a Husserlem. Podle Schelera Husserl nepodléhá bezduchému platonismu, přesto však postupuje vždy „platonisticky“, podléhá totiž „neoplatonismu“, resp. logickému platonismu. Protože fenomenologická redukce není u Husserla podle Schelerova názoru prováděna „čistě“, je Husserlova fenomenologická zkušenost (kategoriální názor) problematická, přesněji řečeno, problematický je vztah mezi kategoriálním názorem a smyslovým názorem. Konečným Schelerovým cílem je zajistit primární postavení pro kategoriální názor a jeho obsahy (materiální apriori), právě tak jako pro mravní náhled a jeho koreláty (materiální hodnoty) a v neposlední řadě pro fenomenologicky materiální hodnotovou etiku., Scheler’s critique of Kant and his concept of a priori does, on the one hand, show a notable debt to Husserl, although Scheler adds to and deepens Husserl’s critique. On the other hand, however, Scheler also criticises Husserl’s own understanding of the concept of a priori. The material a priori as an ideal object in Husserl is, above all, connected with the so-called “Bolzanian turn”. Scheler’s critique of Husserl is rendered more profound as he increasingly penetrates the depth of the relation between Bolzano and Husserl. According to Scheler Husserl does not subscribe to soulless Platonism, allow he always conducts himself in a Platonist way. He subscribes instead to neo-Platonism, or rather to logical Platonism. Because the phenomenological reduction in Husserl is not, according to Scheler, conducted in a “pure” way, Husserl’s phenomenological experience (categorical intuition) is problematic. More exactly the relation between categorical and sensory intuition is problematic. Scheler’s ultimate goal is to ensure a primary status for categorical intuition and its contents (material a priori), as well as for the moral view and its correlates (material values), and last, but not least, for the phenomenologically material value ethics., and Wei Zhang.
The article deals with selected aspects of science and research policy of the EU (R&D policy) relevant to the development of innovation culture. Present changes in this field are related to the changes in production and distribution of knowledge, to the new goals and priorities in science and research of the European knowledge society, and to the new social, economic, and political challenges, presented by the broadening and intensifying global competition. The study points out the role of the central administration of science by the European Commission, the function of the Framework Programs of the EU, and its consequences for the science policy in the Czech Republic. and Adolf Filáček.
Článek popisuje postupnou změnu postoje vůči přístrojům a materiálům ve filosofií a historiografií vědy a konfrontuje současné snahy o přehodnocení materiální kultury vědy s koncepcí experimentálních systémů Hanse-Jörga Rheinbergera a epistemologických strojů Dona Ihde, This article outlines the gradually changing attitude towards instruments and materials in the philosophy and historiography of science and confronts contemporary revaluations of the material culture of science with Hans-Jörg Rheinberger’s concept of an experimental system and Don Ihde’s notion of an epistemology engine, and Tomáš Dvořák.