What Is a Logical Concept of Life? Reply to Critics

I am very grateful to Karen Koch and Sebastian Rand for their generous and thoughtful engagement with some of the core arguments of my book. Whereas Koch raises a number of questions concerning the purposiveness theme and Hegel's relation to Kant, Rand's questions revolve around the interpretation of Hegel's Science of Logic, asking after the status of the a priori, singularity, and death in relation to the logical concept of life. Their critical questions provide an opportunity for me to both clarify and defend one of the central claims of my book, namely, that there is a distinctly logical concept of life at work in Hegel's philosophy that is key for understanding his philosophical method. In the book, I argue that this concept, operative in Hegel's writings from the Differenzschrift through the Phenomenology to his Science of Logic, is primarily inherited from Kant, specifically from problems surrounding the concept of inner purposiveness developed in the Critique of Judgement. I will begin by replying to Koch, followed by a response to Rand.

Tinjauan Yuridis Peninjauan Kembali yang Diajukan oleh Jaksa Penuntut Umum Terhadap Putusan Lepas dari Segala Tuntutan Hukum

ABSTRAK Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui secara yuridis terhadap kedudukan Jaksa Penuntut Umum dalam mengajukan upaya hukum Peninjauan Kembali kepada Mahkamah Agung. Peninjauan Kembali berdasarkan Pasal 263 ayat (1) hanya dapat dilakukam oleh terpidana atau ahli waris terpidana, namun pada kenyataannya Jaksa Penuntut Umum pernah mengajukan permintaan Peninjauan Kembali dan diterima oleh Mahkamah Agung. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian normatif yaitu pendekatan yang menggunakan konsep logis positivis yang menyatakan bahwa hukum adalah identik dengan norma-norma tertulis yang dibuat dan diundang oleh lembaga-lembaga atau pejabat yang berwenang. Hasil penelitian diketahui bahwa terdapat kekosongan norma hukum mengenai kedudukan Jaksa Penuntut Umum dalam mengajukan permintaan Peninjauan Kembali dan menyarankan dibentuknya aturan khusus mengenai kedudukan Jaksa Penuntut Umum dalam mengajukan peninjauan kembali. Kesimpulan yaitu Sesuai dengan Pasal 263 ayat (1) KUHAP Jaksa Penuntut Umum tidak berhak mengajukan peninjauan kembali, karena yang berhak mengajukan peninjauan kembali hanya terpidana dan ahli warisnya dan peninjauan kembali tidak bisa dilakukan terhadap putusan bebas atau putusan lepas dari segala tuntutan hukum dan diperlukan aturan khusus mengenai peninjauan kembali yang diajukan oleh Jaksa Penuntut Umum, sehingga terwujudnya keadilan, kepastian hukum, dan kemanfaatan hukum. ABSTRACT This study aims to find out juridically about the position of the public prosecutor in filing legal remedies for judicial review to the Supreme Court. A review based on Article 263 paragraph (1) can only be carried out by the convict or the convict's heirs, but in reality the Public Prosecutor has submitted a request for reconsideration and was accepted by the Supreme Court. The method used in this research is normative research, which is an approach that uses a positivist logical concept which states that law is identical to written norms made and invited by authorized institutions or officials. The results of the study show that there is a vacuum in legal norms regarding the position of the Public Prosecutor in submitting a request for reconsideration and suggesting the formation of special rules regarding the position of the Public Prosecutor in filing a review. The conclusion is that in accordance with Article 263 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Public Prosecutor has no right to file a review, because only the convict and his heirs are entitled to apply for a review and the review cannot be carried out against an acquittal or a decision to be released from all lawsuits and regulations are required. specifically regarding the review submitted by the Public Prosecutor, so that justice, legal certainty and legal benefits can be realized.

Alexander von Humboldt’s Cosmos: Image? Concept? Conception!

The key term for the scientific discourse of Alexander von Humboldt is “Kosmos”. The paper interprets the term in connection with an idea, which is widespread in modern Russian philosophy, that conception as a special epistemic object is an alternative to the logical concept. This study substantiates the statement according to which Alexander von Humboldt in his widely known work Cosmos: A Sketch of a Physical Description of the Universe combines scientific and aesthetic perception of reality. The author makes an assumption that the term “Kosmos” encodes an epistemic object that combines the properties of concept and image and is a conception. For its investigation, the author discusses a few interpretations of the conception as a phenomenon: 1) the equivocalist interpretation, which sees conception as an ambiguous semantic formation, combining transcendent and immanent meanings; 2) the imaginistic interpretation, which considers conception as a semantic entity that has not evolved to an abstract concept; 3) the emotive interpretation, which interprets conception as an emotional semantic entity; this entity is object of thinking and object of emotional experience; 4) the linguo-philosophical interpretation, which considers conception as an element of the conceptual framework of language and thinking. The paper demonstrates that each of indicated interpretations of the conception corresponds to the sense of Humboldt’s term “Kosmos”.

Lingwistyczna teoria mowy. Preliminaria

The monograph presents a unique philosophical – logical concept of a natural language by an eminent philosopher and linguist Andrzej Bogusławski. The author offers a preliminary stratification of language responses with particular reference to base responses.

Dialogics of idea form-creation as a means of thinking

Theoretical problems mostly arise in a situation of collision of mutually unacceptable provisions of a separate theory, which are in a state of active confrontation. Possible ways or methods of solving these problems are usually indicated by ideas – a kind of psychological tools of thinking, the structure and functional purpose of which allow reflecting the object of comprehension in many ways and holistically, thus preventing the prospect of its extreme manifestations as mutually contradictory concepts of one-sided theoretical ideas-approaches. The peculiarity of the idea form-creation process is determined by the fact that thinking, stimulating the functional purpose of the idea, uses while its development improved rules of concepts derivation and changed principles of proving their truth, which are different from those that caused the theoretical problem occurrence. The improvement of these rules and the change of principles is carried out by taking into account the function of the operational component of thinking as a such, which leaves behind its categorical component only the function of the source of links to be reorganized. Mental operations that carry out this reorganization are triadic inferences, the use of which through thinking as psychological tools is possible by providing the content of the conceivable form of dialogics, i.e. a kind of dialogue logic of two logics, which meets the requirements of dialogical essence of thinking and principles of dialectics. Dialogics considers formally mutually contradictory understanding positions of one and the same object of comprehension, organizing them as a positively significant form of a theoretical problem statement. To solve it successfully, dialogics uses the idea as a mental tool, which is given the form of a dialectical-logical concept that can reflect the essence of a particular theoretical problem, manifested in the form of dialectical unity of formally opposite theoretical positions. Most importantly, the idea as a mental tool of reflecting the essence of the problem raises the theoretical comprehension of the investigated object over the functional degree of finding its place in a particular concept or paradigmatic model and opens the prospect of its objectification at the metaparadigmatic level in an exhaustive category-methodological completeness.

Hegel's Concept of Life

This book defends a new interpretation of Hegel’s idealism as oriented by a philosophical and logical concept of life, focusing on Hegel’s Science of Logic. Beginning with the influence of Kant’s Critique of Judgment, Karen Ng argues that Hegel’s key philosophical contributions concerning self-consciousness, freedom, and logic all develop around the idea of internal purposiveness, which Hegel views as “Kant’s great service to philosophy.” Ng charts the development of the purposiveness theme in Kant and argues that its key innovation is the claim that the purposiveness of nature enables the operation of the power of judgment. Situating Hegel among contemporaries such as Fichte and Schelling, she further argues that this innovation is key for understanding Hegel’s philosophical method in the Differenzschrift (1801) and Phenomenology of Spirit (1807), in which the theory of self-consciousness plays a central role. In her new interpretation of Hegel’s Logic, Ng argues that the Subjective Logic can be understood as Hegel’s critique of judgment, where he defends the view that life opens up the possibility of intelligibility as such. She argues that Hegel’s theory of judgment is modeled on reflective, teleological judgments, in which something’s species or kind provides the objective context for predication. The Subjective Logic culminates in the argument that life is a primitive or original activity of judgment, the necessary presupposition for the actualization of self-conscious cognition. Ng demonstrates that absolute method is best interpreted as the ongoing dialectic between life and self-conscious cognition, providing a new way for understanding Hegel’s philosophical system.

Ontology and Logic of Processes

Among the two (substantial and procedural) rival views on the outside world, preference was historically given to the substantial point of view. The success of Aristotle’s logic was due to the simple substantial ontology built by him. In that logic, the subject is characterized by an instant set of properties. The change of objects leads to the change of properties. The reduction of processes to substances causes a number of problems. The construction of procedural logic should be started with the construction of the most abstract procedural ontology. The main difference of processes from substances is their extension. Each item, as a process, can be considered as a bundle of parallel processes. The relation the individual S has the property P is the main relation in the substantial ontology. In the procedural ontology, one of the main ones is the relation process R is a sub-process of the process Q. This relation is sufficient for the interpretation of the main syllogistic constants. As a result, we get Łukasiewicz syllogistic for reasoning about parallel processes. The extension of the processes allows us to talk about their parts. The second main relation of procedural ontology is the relation process P consists of two successive processes Q and R. If the processes Q and R are successive, it is natural to make use of the relation earlier-later. In procedural ontology, time does not emerge through external postulation but exists within it. In the ontology of processes, one can naturally define the concept of causality, which becomes a logical concept. However, the success of the procedural view of the outside world is only possible if the new ways of reasoning prove to be a more effective tool for intellectual cognitive activity than the existing ones.

THEORETICAL ESSENCE AND PRACTICE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SYSTEM APPROACH IN FORMATION OF PROFESSIONAL RELIABILITY OF FUTURE OFFICERS IN THE ARMED FORCES OF UKRAINE

The methodology of systematic approach of guaranteeing the quality of training for military specialists in higher military educational institutions is disclosed in the article. It was determined that the process of education and upbringing takes place under conditions of change of pedagogical goals in any pedagogical system. This process is accompanied by the emergence of new tasks in the field of education and education as society develops. There is a constant updating of scientific information, in the conditions of improvement of existing ones and creation of new methods of teaching and upbringing. There is a constant update of the student and teacher contingent throughout the learning and upbringing process. The systematic approach as a methodological basis for the development of quality assurance systems for the training of military specialists in higher military educational institutions is revealed. It is found that the systematic approach does not exist in the form of a clear methodology with a defined logical concept. This system, formed from a set of logical techniques, methodological rules and principles of theoretical research, thus performs a heuristic function in the general system of scientific knowledge. The functioning of the system is the process of professional training of future military specialists in higher military educational establishments. An important result of the functioning of the system is the high level of readiness of future military specialists for practical activity. This can be achieved by ordering the system based on certain principles. These principles include: the principle of objectivity, completeness, specific-historical (genetic) approach, systematic, contradictory pedagogical experience.