Search

This paper deals with a critical stage in the dissolution of the Soviet Communist (Bolshevik) Party’s domination in the Communist commonwealth. The gradual emancipation of European Communist parties, starting with Yugoslavia (1948), through the developments that caused the Soviet interventions in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968), gave birth to independent strategies of political struggle, autonomous from Moscow’s ideological centre, which were implemented by the largest Communist parties in Western Europe. The attempts aimed at the syncretism of the communist platform, and ideas of political rights and adapting to the parliamentary regime resulted in the “Third Road” movement, which strove to unify the positive experiences of the two ideologically opposed sides of the Cold War international constellation. Although it was a belated and, eventually – purely ideological concept, the movement itself and the idea of Eurocommunism has remained as an important testimony of an attempt at finding new paths in the struggle for a more just society., U radu se analiziraju kritični momenti disolucije monolitnog istočnog bloka kojim je domini rala sovjetska komunistička (boljševička) partija. Evolutivna emancipacija evropskih komu nističkih partija počev od Jugoslavije (1948), preko sovjetskih intervencija u Mađarskoj (1956) i Čehoslovačkoj (1968), dovela je do konstituisanja samostalnih i u odnosu na Moskvu ne zavisnih strategija političke borbe, koje su primenjivale najveće komunističke partije u Za padnoj Evropi. Pokušaji sinkretizma komunističke platforme sa idejama poštovanja građan skih prava i adaptacije u parlamentarne režime zapadnih država, oblikovale su pokret “trećeg puta” koji je pokušao da objedini pozitivna iskustva obe ideološki suprotstavljene strane hladnoratovske međunarodne konstelacije. Iako zakasneo i politički nerealizovan, pokret i ideja evrokomunizma su ostali kao važno svedočanstvo o pokušaju pronalaska novih puteva u borbi za pravednije društvo.

Extreme situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic transparently show all the shortcomings of the Serbian system that should, in theory, provide support and protection to citizens in such circumstances. A particularly demanding task was to determine and measure the well-being of individuals during the pandemic, especially those from marginalized groups whose needs are not the priority to the system even under regular circumstances, those on the bottom of the social hierarchy who cannot influence the policies that shape their daily lives, or the decisions of authorities that further reproduce social inequalities. The paper examines institutional ethics of care during the pandemic in Serbia through the analysis of the adequacy of lockdown measures and their effects on the girls and women trafficking survivors. Analysis of the data collected in semi-structured interviews with girls and women showed that three central elements of the institutional (ethics of) care: the purpose of care, recognition of power relations, and the need for pluralistic tailoring of care to meet individuals’ needs, were not fulfilled during the pandemic and that the logic of institutional care has had a politicizing character in Serbia., Apstrakt Ekstremne situacije poput pandemije KOVID-19 transparentno pokazuju sve nedostatke si stema u Srbiji koji bi, teoretski, trebalo da pruži podršku i zaštitu građanima u ovakvim okol nostima. Posebno zahtevan zadatak bilo je utvrđivanje i merenje blagostanja individua tokom pandemije, posebno onih iz marginalizovanih grupa čije potrebe nisu prioritet sistema ni u redovnim okolnostima, onih na dnu društvene hijerarhije koji ne mogu da utiču na politike koje oblikuju njihov svakodnevni život ili odluke vlasti koje dalje reprodukuju društvene ne jednakosti. U radu se ispituje institucionalna etika brige tokom pandemije KOVID-19 u Srbiji kroz analizu adekvatnosti mera karantina i njihovih efekata na devojke i žene koje su preži vele trgovinu ljudima. Analiza podataka prikupljenih u polustruktuiranim intervjuima sa de vojkama i ženama pokazala je da tri centralna elementa institucionalne (etike) brige: svrha brige, prepoznavanje odnosa moći i potreba za pluralističkim osmišljavanjem politika brige kako bi se zadovoljile individualne potrebe, nisu bila zadovoljena tokom pandemije i da je logika institucionalne brige u Srbiji zapravo imala politizujući karakter.

This paper is a philosophical meta-discussion of the current culture in psychiatry and psychotherapy that focuses on trauma as the source and predominant determinant of a large number of psychiatric complaints. Such a culture leads to increasing, rather the decreasing, the destructive role of traumatization and victimization throughout the life experiences of those affected, and (as culture) is exemplified by increasing calls by influential psychiatrists to expand the interpretative role of trauma to virtually all our experiences of social inadequacy and personal hurt. We argue here, from a philosophical and psychiatric point of view, that the transactions, semantics and affects that psychiatry and psychotherapy are concerned with in cases of trauma and victimhood are negatively affected by the culture of using trauma as an alibi and a kind of universal explanation of psychological dysfunctionality and suffering. We also argue that, contrary to the current culture of a sort of idolatry of trauma, more consistent and philosophically informed approaches to psychiatric and psychotherapeutic intervention, based on a different interpretation of less-than-radically adverse life experiences, might in fact reduce both the clinical occurrence of traumatization and the actual adverse impact of self-perceived victimization and traumatization on the prospects for achieving the goal of ‘the good life’., Tekst je filozofska metadiskusija aktuelne kulture u psihijatriji i psihoterapiji koja se koncen triše na traumu kao izvor i preovlađujuću odrednicu velikog broja psihijatrijskih tegoba. Za hvaljujući pomenutoj kulturi, destruktivne uloge traumatizacije i viktimizacije se pojačavaju u svom uticaju na životna iskustva protagonista, ili žrtava tih iskustava, zavisno od toga kako se traumatizacija i viktimizacija posmatraju. Primeri ove vrste kulture uključuju sve češće po zive uticajnih psihijatara na širenje interpretativne uloge trauma kao delimičnog objašnjenja svih iskustava koja uključuju osećaj socijalne neadekvatnosti i lične povređenosti. U ovom tekstu, autori argumentišu da, sa filozofske i psihijatrijske tačke gledišta, transakcije, seman tika i afekti kojima se psihijatrija i psihoterapija bave u slučajevima trauma i viktimizacije, dobijaju dodatni destruktivni potencijal zahvaljujući upotrebi trauma kao univerzalnog alibija i objašnjenja za psihičku disfunkcionalnost i sa njom povezanu patnju. Nasuprot toj kulturi, autori sugerišu da bi, umesto idolatrije u vezi sa traumom, dosledniji i filozofski informisaniji pristupi psihijatrijskim i psihoterapetuskim intervencijama, koji bi počivali na drugačijim in terpretacijama onih negativnih životnih iskustava koja ne ugrožavaju psihičku egzistenciju radikalno ili ekstremno, mogli redukovati kliničku zastupljenost traumatizacije kao sindroma. Istovremeno, uzdržavanje od psihodijagnostičkog tretiranja traume kao univerzalnog alibija za disfunkcionalnost, smanjilo bi konkretne negativne efekte interpretacije sopstvenih isku stava kao viktimizacije i traumatizacije. Trauma kao alibi, u aktuelnoj kulturi, faktički onemo gućava efektivno ostvarivanja cilja „dobrog života“ kao filozofskog zadatka za svakog poje dinca, i kao nosećeg ideala u celokupnoj psihoterapiji, jer pruža normativni predložak za posmatranje i umerenih negativnih iskustava kao trauma, i za tretiranje nefunkcionalnosti kao faktički redovne, gotovo ne

Retrospection and transformation of the phenomena of criticism and crisis in social theory in recent decades have led to the weakening and even “illegitimate” renunciation of the said doublet. The paper presents an analysis of the renewal of discourse on criticism/crisis and its effects with special consideration of the possibilities of structural criticism. We included several authors of recent analyses as well as the viewpoints that have led to reconsideration of historical and analytical dynamics of two categories, structure and conjuncture, as a form of analysis of current structural processes in terms of structural analysis and criticism. The paper comprises three parts. The first part is a reflection on the reason criticism and crisis have been subjected to different processes of derogation despite their original connection. In the second part, we show the effects of different ways that crisis has manifested itself in capitalism and explain its dispersive and “non-punctual” modalities. The third part raises the question of chances of reuniting the crisis and “immanent criticism” based on structural criticism, and we further articulate its connections with immanent criticism. Structural criticism is viewed as a connection between immanent criticism and transcendent orientation that is focused on the reconnection between crisis and criticism, the elements related to capitalism., Preispitivanje i transformacija fenomena kritike i krize u društvenoj teoriji su poslednjih de cenija doveli do slabljenja pa i do delegitimacijskog osporavanja navedenog dubleta. U radu se razmatraju mogućnosti obnove diskursa o kritici/krizi s mogućim delatnim učincima, uz poseban osvrt na mogućnosti strukturalne kritike.Različiti autori recentnih analiza se uzima ju u obzir, te se razmatraju stanovišta koja vode do ponovnog razmatranja istorijskog i ana litičkog dinamizma kategorija strukture i konjunkture kao razrade aktuelnih strukturalnih procesa u terminima strukturalne analize i kritike. Rad se sastoji iz tri dela. U prvom delu razmatramo zbog čega su kritika i kriza koje su izvorno spojene podvrgnuti različitim proce sima derogiranja. U drugom delu pokazujemo efekte promene načina ispoljavanja krize u kapitalizmu, tačnije osvetljavamo njenu disperzivne i ne-punktualne modalitete. U trećem delu postavljamo pitanje o šansama ponovnog spajanja krize i kritike na osnovu navigacije strukturalne kritike, nadalje artikulišemo njene veze sa „imanentnom kritikom“. Strukturalna kritika se analizira kao spoj između imanentne kritike i transcendentnog usmerenja koji radi na reconnections between crisis and critique as the elements of relationship to capitalism.

Originating from the fields of philosophy and history, the term historicism is often used by architectural historians. Aiming to contribute to the theoretical framework for the analysis of architectural historicism, the paper first explores the meaning of the concept in its native field of philosophy of history. The paper is aligned with the recent scholarship which interprets historicism as a worldview and deduces three historicist principles – principles of holism, individuality, and development. This paper argues that an historicist outlook marked wider creative achievements of an epoch, and that architecture of the period approximately ranging from the 1750s to the 1950s did not evade its influence. Finally, the paper illustrates the three principles in the idea of building for the age which haunted architects of the Western civilisation for almost two centuries.

The paper examines the historical context of ethics of care in early Christian discourse. The historical context of the ethics of care enables us to comprehend the ways in which ethics of care was employed and disseminated as part of political ideology and public discourse, significantly influencing the social relations of the rapidly changing Roman world between the fourth and seventh centuries. The Byzantine Empire is a prime example of a political entity in which philanthropy was the driving force behind imperial politics and social relations. Emperor Justinian’s laws, which proclaimed social justice and protection for those in need, serve as a case study for an ethics of care. Also, the ethics of care is reconfigured within the context of Byzantine theology as a theology of care, in which the primary virtue of a true Christian is his fervent love for the community (agape). The ethics of care is then examined from the perspective of gender and the newly established cult of the Theotokos, which degendered the concept of maternal thinking and maternal care by making it a universal experience and the new moral code for all Christians., U radu se ispituje istorijski kontekst etike nege u ranohrišćanskom diskursu. Istorijski kon tekst etike brige nam omogućava da sagledamo načine na koje je etika brige bila korišćena i rasprostranjena kao deo političke ideologije i javnog diskursa čime je značajno uticala na društvene odnose u rimskom svetu koji se brzo menjao između četvrtog i sedmog veka. Vi zantijsko carstvo je vrhunski primer političkog entiteta u kojem je filantropija bila pokretačka snaga imperijalne politike i društvenih odnosa. Zakoni cara Justinijana, koji su proklamovali društvenu pravdu i zaštitu onih kojima je potrebna, služe kao studija slučaja za etiku brige. Takođe, etika brige je rekonfigurisana u kontekstu vizantijske teologije kao teologije brige u kojoj je primarna vrlina pravog hrišćanina njegova žarka ljubav prema zajednici (agape). Etika brige se zatim ispituje iz perspektive pola i novouspostavljenog kulta Bogorodice koji je lišio koncept majčinskog razmišljanja i majčinske brige rodnih dimenzija tako što ga je učinio uni verzalnim iskustvom i novim moralnim kodeksom za sve hrišćane.

The Anthropocene refers to the geological era in which man – anthropos – has become a geophysical force transforming the biosphere. This period is marked by a lack of compassion and understanding of our environments – a total detachment from our biospheric reality. If care is everything we do to repair and maintain this world, what does this process entail in the Anthropocene? This paper addresses the importance of taking care seriously. We look at care in the Anthropocene and its interconnections with the notions of vulnerability and compassion from both a philosophical and anthropological perspective., Antropocen se odnosi na geološku eru u kojoj je čovek – antropos – postao geofizička sila koja transformiše biosferu. Ovaj period je obeležen nedostatkom saosećanja i razumevanja našeg okruženja – potpuna odvojenost od naše biosferske stvarnosti. Ako je briga sve što činimo da popravljamo i održavamo ovaj svet, šta ovaj proces podrazumeva u antropocenu? Ovaj rad govori o važnosti ozbiljnog promatranja pojma brige. Brigu u antropocenu i njenu povezanost sa pojmovima ranjivosti i saosećanja posmatramo i iz filozofske i iz antropološke perspektive.

Retrospection and transformation of the phenomena of criticism and crisis in social theory in recent decades have led to the weakening and even “illegitimate” renunciation of the said doublet. The paper presents an analysis of the renewal of discourse on criticism/crisis and its effects with special consideration of the possibilities of structural criticism. We included several authors of recent analyses as well as the viewpoints that have led to reconsideration of historical and analytical dynamics of two categories, structure and conjuncture, as a form of analysis of current structural processes in terms of structural analysis and criticism. The paper comprises three parts. The first part is a reflection on the reason criticism and crisis have been subjected to different processes of derogation despite their original connection. In the second part, we show the effects of different ways that crisis has manifested itself in capitalism and explain its dispersive and “non-punctual” modalities. The third part raises the question of chances of reuniting the crisis and “immanent criticism” based on structural criticism, and we further articulate its connections with immanent criticism. Structural criticism is viewed as a connection between immanent criticism and transcendent orientation that is focused on the reconnection between crisis and criticism, the elements related to capitalism., Preispitivanje i transformacija fenomena kritike i krize u društvenoj teoriji su poslednjih de cenija doveli do slabljenja pa i do delegitimacijskog osporavanja navedenog dubleta. U radu se razmatraju mogućnosti obnove diskursa o kritici/krizi s mogućim delatnim učincima, uz poseban osvrt na mogućnosti strukturalne kritike.Različiti autori recentnih analiza se uzima ju u obzir, te se razmatraju stanovišta koja vode do ponovnog razmatranja istorijskog i ana litičkog dinamizma kategorija strukture i konjunkture kao razrade aktuelnih strukturalnih procesa u terminima strukturalne analize i kritike. Rad se sastoji iz tri dela. U prvom delu razmatramo zbog čega su kritika i kriza koje su izvorno spojene podvrgnuti različitim proce sima derogiranja. U drugom delu pokazujemo efekte promene načina ispoljavanja krize u kapitalizmu, tačnije osvetljavamo njenu disperzivne i ne-punktualne modalitete. U trećem delu postavljamo pitanje o šansama ponovnog spajanja krize i kritike na osnovu navigacije strukturalne kritike, nadalje artikulišemo njene veze sa „imanentnom kritikom“. Strukturalna kritika se analizira kao spoj između imanentne kritike i transcendentnog usmerenja koji radi na reconnections between crisis and critique as the elements of relationship to capitalism.

Extreme situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic transparently show all the shortcomings of the Serbian system that should, in theory, provide support and protection to citizens in such circumstances. A particularly demanding task was to determine and measure the well-being of individuals during the pandemic, especially those from marginalized groups whose needs are not the priority to the system even under regular circumstances, those on the bottom of the social hierarchy who cannot influence the policies that shape their daily lives, or the decisions of authorities that further reproduce social inequalities. The paper examines institutional ethics of care during the pandemic in Serbia through the analysis of the adequacy of lockdown measures and their effects on the girls and women trafficking survivors. Analysis of the data collected in semi-structured interviews with girls and women showed that three central elements of the institutional (ethics of) care: the purpose of care, recognition of power relations, and the need for pluralistic tailoring of care to meet individuals’ needs, were not fulfilled during the pandemic and that the logic of institutional care has had a politicizing character in Serbia., Apstrakt Ekstremne situacije poput pandemije KOVID-19 transparentno pokazuju sve nedostatke si stema u Srbiji koji bi, teoretski, trebalo da pruži podršku i zaštitu građanima u ovakvim okol nostima. Posebno zahtevan zadatak bilo je utvrđivanje i merenje blagostanja individua tokom pandemije, posebno onih iz marginalizovanih grupa čije potrebe nisu prioritet sistema ni u redovnim okolnostima, onih na dnu društvene hijerarhije koji ne mogu da utiču na politike koje oblikuju njihov svakodnevni život ili odluke vlasti koje dalje reprodukuju društvene ne jednakosti. U radu se ispituje institucionalna etika brige tokom pandemije KOVID-19 u Srbiji kroz analizu adekvatnosti mera karantina i njihovih efekata na devojke i žene koje su preži vele trgovinu ljudima. Analiza podataka prikupljenih u polustruktuiranim intervjuima sa de vojkama i ženama pokazala je da tri centralna elementa institucionalne (etike) brige: svrha brige, prepoznavanje odnosa moći i potreba za pluralističkim osmišljavanjem politika brige kako bi se zadovoljile individualne potrebe, nisu bila zadovoljena tokom pandemije i da je logika institucionalne brige u Srbiji zapravo imala politizujući karakter.

This paper is a philosophical meta-discussion of the current culture in psychiatry and psychotherapy that focuses on trauma as the source and predominant determinant of a large number of psychiatric complaints. Such a culture leads to increasing, rather the decreasing, the destructive role of traumatization and victimization throughout the life experiences of those affected, and (as culture) is exemplified by increasing calls by influential psychiatrists to expand the interpretative role of trauma to virtually all our experiences of social inadequacy and personal hurt. We argue here, from a philosophical and psychiatric point of view, that the transactions, semantics and affects that psychiatry and psychotherapy are concerned with in cases of trauma and victimhood are negatively affected by the culture of using trauma as an alibi and a kind of universal explanation of psychological dysfunctionality and suffering. We also argue that, contrary to the current culture of a sort of idolatry of trauma, more consistent and philosophically informed approaches to psychiatric and psychotherapeutic intervention, based on a different interpretation of less-than-radically adverse life experiences, might in fact reduce both the clinical occurrence of traumatization and the actual adverse impact of self-perceived victimization and traumatization on the prospects for achieving the goal of ‘the good life’., Tekst je filozofska metadiskusija aktuelne kulture u psihijatriji i psihoterapiji koja se koncen triše na traumu kao izvor i preovlađujuću odrednicu velikog broja psihijatrijskih tegoba. Za hvaljujući pomenutoj kulturi, destruktivne uloge traumatizacije i viktimizacije se pojačavaju u svom uticaju na životna iskustva protagonista, ili žrtava tih iskustava, zavisno od toga kako se traumatizacija i viktimizacija posmatraju. Primeri ove vrste kulture uključuju sve češće po zive uticajnih psihijatara na širenje interpretativne uloge trauma kao delimičnog objašnjenja svih iskustava koja uključuju osećaj socijalne neadekvatnosti i lične povređenosti. U ovom tekstu, autori argumentišu da, sa filozofske i psihijatrijske tačke gledišta, transakcije, seman tika i afekti kojima se psihijatrija i psihoterapija bave u slučajevima trauma i viktimizacije, dobijaju dodatni destruktivni potencijal zahvaljujući upotrebi trauma kao univerzalnog alibija i objašnjenja za psihičku disfunkcionalnost i sa njom povezanu patnju. Nasuprot toj kulturi, autori sugerišu da bi, umesto idolatrije u vezi sa traumom, dosledniji i filozofski informisaniji pristupi psihijatrijskim i psihoterapetuskim intervencijama, koji bi počivali na drugačijim in terpretacijama onih negativnih životnih iskustava koja ne ugrožavaju psihičku egzistenciju radikalno ili ekstremno, mogli redukovati kliničku zastupljenost traumatizacije kao sindroma. Istovremeno, uzdržavanje od psihodijagnostičkog tretiranja traume kao univerzalnog alibija za disfunkcionalnost, smanjilo bi konkretne negativne efekte interpretacije sopstvenih isku stava kao viktimizacije i traumatizacije. Trauma kao alibi, u aktuelnoj kulturi, faktički onemo gućava efektivno ostvarivanja cilja „dobrog života“ kao filozofskog zadatka za svakog poje dinca, i kao nosećeg ideala u celokupnoj psihoterapiji, jer pruža normativni predložak za posmatranje i umerenih negativnih iskustava kao trauma, i za tretiranje nefunkcionalnosti kao faktički redovne, gotovo ne

This paper deals with a critical stage in the dissolution of the Soviet Communist (Bolshevik) Party’s domination in the Communist commonwealth. The gradual emancipation of European Communist parties, starting with Yugoslavia (1948), through the developments that caused the Soviet interventions in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968), gave birth to independent strategies of political struggle, autonomous from Moscow’s ideological centre, which were implemented by the largest Communist parties in Western Europe. The attempts aimed at the syncretism of the communist platform, and ideas of political rights and adapting to the parliamentary regime resulted in the “Third Road” movement, which strove to unify the positive experiences of the two ideologically opposed sides of the Cold War international constellation. Although it was a belated and, eventually – purely ideological concept, the movement itself and the idea of Eurocommunism has remained as an important testimony of an attempt at finding new paths in the struggle for a more just society., U radu se analiziraju kritični momenti disolucije monolitnog istočnog bloka kojim je domini rala sovjetska komunistička (boljševička) partija. Evolutivna emancipacija evropskih komu nističkih partija počev od Jugoslavije (1948), preko sovjetskih intervencija u Mađarskoj (1956) i Čehoslovačkoj (1968), dovela je do konstituisanja samostalnih i u odnosu na Moskvu ne zavisnih strategija političke borbe, koje su primenjivale najveće komunističke partije u Za padnoj Evropi. Pokušaji sinkretizma komunističke platforme sa idejama poštovanja građan skih prava i adaptacije u parlamentarne režime zapadnih država, oblikovale su pokret “trećeg puta” koji je pokušao da objedini pozitivna iskustva obe ideološki suprotstavljene strane hladnoratovske međunarodne konstelacije. Iako zakasneo i politički nerealizovan, pokret i ideja evrokomunizma su ostali kao važno svedočanstvo o pokušaju pronalaska novih puteva u borbi za pravednije društvo.

The Anthropocene refers to the geological era in which man – anthropos – has become a geophysical force transforming the biosphere. This period is marked by a lack of compassion and understanding of our environments – a total detachment from our biospheric reality. If care is everything we do to repair and maintain this world, what does this process entail in the Anthropocene? This paper addresses the importance of taking care seriously. We look at care in the Anthropocene and its interconnections with the notions of vulnerability and compassion from both a philosophical and anthropological perspective., Antropocen se odnosi na geološku eru u kojoj je čovek – antropos – postao geofizička sila koja transformiše biosferu. Ovaj period je obeležen nedostatkom saosećanja i razumevanja našeg okruženja – potpuna odvojenost od naše biosferske stvarnosti. Ako je briga sve što činimo da popravljamo i održavamo ovaj svet, šta ovaj proces podrazumeva u antropocenu? Ovaj rad govori o važnosti ozbiljnog promatranja pojma brige. Brigu u antropocenu i njenu povezanost sa pojmovima ranjivosti i saosećanja posmatramo i iz filozofske i iz antropološke perspektive.

Originating from the fields of philosophy and history, the term historicism is often used by architectural historians. Aiming to contribute to the theoretical framework for the analysis of architectural historicism, the paper first explores the meaning of the concept in its native field of philosophy of history. The paper is aligned with the recent scholarship which interprets historicism as a worldview and deduces three historicist principles – principles of holism, individuality, and development. This paper argues that an historicist outlook marked wider creative achievements of an epoch, and that architecture of the period approximately ranging from the 1750s to the 1950s did not evade its influence. Finally, the paper illustrates the three principles in the idea of building for the age which haunted architects of the Western civilisation for almost two centuries.

The Anthropocene refers to the geological era in which man – anthropos – has become a geophysical force transforming the biosphere. This period is marked by a lack of compassion and understanding of our environments – a total detachment from our biospheric reality. If care is everything we do to repair and maintain this world, what does this process entail in the Anthropocene? This paper addresses the importance of taking care seriously. We look at care in the Anthropocene and its interconnections with the notions of vulnerability and compassion from both a philosophical and anthropological perspective., Antropocen se odnosi na geološku eru u kojoj je čovek – antropos – postao geofizička sila koja transformiše biosferu. Ovaj period je obeležen nedostatkom saosećanja i razumevanja našeg okruženja – potpuna odvojenost od naše biosferske stvarnosti. Ako je briga sve što činimo da popravljamo i održavamo ovaj svet, šta ovaj proces podrazumeva u antropocenu? Ovaj rad govori o važnosti ozbiljnog promatranja pojma brige. Brigu u antropocenu i njenu povezanost sa pojmovima ranjivosti i saosećanja posmatramo i iz filozofske i iz antropološke perspektive.

Extreme situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic transparently show all the shortcomings of the Serbian system that should, in theory, provide support and protection to citizens in such circumstances. A particularly demanding task was to determine and measure the well-being of individuals during the pandemic, especially those from marginalized groups whose needs are not the priority to the system even under regular circumstances, those on the bottom of the social hierarchy who cannot influence the policies that shape their daily lives, or the decisions of authorities that further reproduce social inequalities. The paper examines institutional ethics of care during the pandemic in Serbia through the analysis of the adequacy of lockdown measures and their effects on the girls and women trafficking survivors. Analysis of the data collected in semi-structured interviews with girls and women showed that three central elements of the institutional (ethics of) care: the purpose of care, recognition of power relations, and the need for pluralistic tailoring of care to meet individuals’ needs, were not fulfilled during the pandemic and that the logic of institutional care has had a politicizing character in Serbia., Apstrakt Ekstremne situacije poput pandemije KOVID-19 transparentno pokazuju sve nedostatke si stema u Srbiji koji bi, teoretski, trebalo da pruži podršku i zaštitu građanima u ovakvim okol nostima. Posebno zahtevan zadatak bilo je utvrđivanje i merenje blagostanja individua tokom pandemije, posebno onih iz marginalizovanih grupa čije potrebe nisu prioritet sistema ni u redovnim okolnostima, onih na dnu društvene hijerarhije koji ne mogu da utiču na politike koje oblikuju njihov svakodnevni život ili odluke vlasti koje dalje reprodukuju društvene ne jednakosti. U radu se ispituje institucionalna etika brige tokom pandemije KOVID-19 u Srbiji kroz analizu adekvatnosti mera karantina i njihovih efekata na devojke i žene koje su preži vele trgovinu ljudima. Analiza podataka prikupljenih u polustruktuiranim intervjuima sa de vojkama i ženama pokazala je da tri centralna elementa institucionalne (etike) brige: svrha brige, prepoznavanje odnosa moći i potreba za pluralističkim osmišljavanjem politika brige kako bi se zadovoljile individualne potrebe, nisu bila zadovoljena tokom pandemije i da je logika institucionalne brige u Srbiji zapravo imala politizujući karakter.

This paper is a philosophical meta-discussion of the current culture in psychiatry and psychotherapy that focuses on trauma as the source and predominant determinant of a large number of psychiatric complaints. Such a culture leads to increasing, rather the decreasing, the destructive role of traumatization and victimization throughout the life experiences of those affected, and (as culture) is exemplified by increasing calls by influential psychiatrists to expand the interpretative role of trauma to virtually all our experiences of social inadequacy and personal hurt. We argue here, from a philosophical and psychiatric point of view, that the transactions, semantics and affects that psychiatry and psychotherapy are concerned with in cases of trauma and victimhood are negatively affected by the culture of using trauma as an alibi and a kind of universal explanation of psychological dysfunctionality and suffering. We also argue that, contrary to the current culture of a sort of idolatry of trauma, more consistent and philosophically informed approaches to psychiatric and psychotherapeutic intervention, based on a different interpretation of less-than-radically adverse life experiences, might in fact reduce both the clinical occurrence of traumatization and the actual adverse impact of self-perceived victimization and traumatization on the prospects for achieving the goal of ‘the good life’., Tekst je filozofska metadiskusija aktuelne kulture u psihijatriji i psihoterapiji koja se koncen triše na traumu kao izvor i preovlađujuću odrednicu velikog broja psihijatrijskih tegoba. Za hvaljujući pomenutoj kulturi, destruktivne uloge traumatizacije i viktimizacije se pojačavaju u svom uticaju na životna iskustva protagonista, ili žrtava tih iskustava, zavisno od toga kako se traumatizacija i viktimizacija posmatraju. Primeri ove vrste kulture uključuju sve češće po zive uticajnih psihijatara na širenje interpretativne uloge trauma kao delimičnog objašnjenja svih iskustava koja uključuju osećaj socijalne neadekvatnosti i lične povređenosti. U ovom tekstu, autori argumentišu da, sa filozofske i psihijatrijske tačke gledišta, transakcije, seman tika i afekti kojima se psihijatrija i psihoterapija bave u slučajevima trauma i viktimizacije, dobijaju dodatni destruktivni potencijal zahvaljujući upotrebi trauma kao univerzalnog alibija i objašnjenja za psihičku disfunkcionalnost i sa njom povezanu patnju. Nasuprot toj kulturi, autori sugerišu da bi, umesto idolatrije u vezi sa traumom, dosledniji i filozofski informisaniji pristupi psihijatrijskim i psihoterapetuskim intervencijama, koji bi počivali na drugačijim in terpretacijama onih negativnih životnih iskustava koja ne ugrožavaju psihičku egzistenciju radikalno ili ekstremno, mogli redukovati kliničku zastupljenost traumatizacije kao sindroma. Istovremeno, uzdržavanje od psihodijagnostičkog tretiranja traume kao univerzalnog alibija za disfunkcionalnost, smanjilo bi konkretne negativne efekte interpretacije sopstvenih isku stava kao viktimizacije i traumatizacije. Trauma kao alibi, u aktuelnoj kulturi, faktički onemo gućava efektivno ostvarivanja cilja „dobrog života“ kao filozofskog zadatka za svakog poje dinca, i kao nosećeg ideala u celokupnoj psihoterapiji, jer pruža normativni predložak za posmatranje i umerenih negativnih iskustava kao trauma, i za tretiranje nefunkcionalnosti kao faktički redovne, gotovo ne

Originating from the fields of philosophy and history, the term historicism is often used by architectural historians. Aiming to contribute to the theoretical framework for the analysis of architectural historicism, the paper first explores the meaning of the concept in its native field of philosophy of history. The paper is aligned with the recent scholarship which interprets historicism as a worldview and deduces three historicist principles – principles of holism, individuality, and development. This paper argues that an historicist outlook marked wider creative achievements of an epoch, and that architecture of the period approximately ranging from the 1750s to the 1950s did not evade its influence. Finally, the paper illustrates the three principles in the idea of building for the age which haunted architects of the Western civilisation for almost two centuries.

This paper deals with a critical stage in the dissolution of the Soviet Communist (Bolshevik) Party’s domination in the Communist commonwealth. The gradual emancipation of European Communist parties, starting with Yugoslavia (1948), through the developments that caused the Soviet interventions in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968), gave birth to independent strategies of political struggle, autonomous from Moscow’s ideological centre, which were implemented by the largest Communist parties in Western Europe. The attempts aimed at the syncretism of the communist platform, and ideas of political rights and adapting to the parliamentary regime resulted in the “Third Road” movement, which strove to unify the positive experiences of the two ideologically opposed sides of the Cold War international constellation. Although it was a belated and, eventually – purely ideological concept, the movement itself and the idea of Eurocommunism has remained as an important testimony of an attempt at finding new paths in the struggle for a more just society., U radu se analiziraju kritični momenti disolucije monolitnog istočnog bloka kojim je domini rala sovjetska komunistička (boljševička) partija. Evolutivna emancipacija evropskih komu nističkih partija počev od Jugoslavije (1948), preko sovjetskih intervencija u Mađarskoj (1956) i Čehoslovačkoj (1968), dovela je do konstituisanja samostalnih i u odnosu na Moskvu ne zavisnih strategija političke borbe, koje su primenjivale najveće komunističke partije u Za padnoj Evropi. Pokušaji sinkretizma komunističke platforme sa idejama poštovanja građan skih prava i adaptacije u parlamentarne režime zapadnih država, oblikovale su pokret “trećeg puta” koji je pokušao da objedini pozitivna iskustva obe ideološki suprotstavljene strane hladnoratovske međunarodne konstelacije. Iako zakasneo i politički nerealizovan, pokret i ideja evrokomunizma su ostali kao važno svedočanstvo o pokušaju pronalaska novih puteva u borbi za pravednije društvo.

Retrospection and transformation of the phenomena of criticism and crisis in social theory in recent decades have led to the weakening and even “illegitimate” renunciation of the said doublet. The paper presents an analysis of the renewal of discourse on criticism/crisis and its effects with special consideration of the possibilities of structural criticism. We included several authors of recent analyses as well as the viewpoints that have led to reconsideration of historical and analytical dynamics of two categories, structure and conjuncture, as a form of analysis of current structural processes in terms of structural analysis and criticism. The paper comprises three parts. The first part is a reflection on the reason criticism and crisis have been subjected to different processes of derogation despite their original connection. In the second part, we show the effects of different ways that crisis has manifested itself in capitalism and explain its dispersive and “non-punctual” modalities. The third part raises the question of chances of reuniting the crisis and “immanent criticism” based on structural criticism, and we further articulate its connections with immanent criticism. Structural criticism is viewed as a connection between immanent criticism and transcendent orientation that is focused on the reconnection between crisis and criticism, the elements related to capitalism., Preispitivanje i transformacija fenomena kritike i krize u društvenoj teoriji su poslednjih de cenija doveli do slabljenja pa i do delegitimacijskog osporavanja navedenog dubleta. U radu se razmatraju mogućnosti obnove diskursa o kritici/krizi s mogućim delatnim učincima, uz poseban osvrt na mogućnosti strukturalne kritike.Različiti autori recentnih analiza se uzima ju u obzir, te se razmatraju stanovišta koja vode do ponovnog razmatranja istorijskog i ana litičkog dinamizma kategorija strukture i konjunkture kao razrade aktuelnih strukturalnih procesa u terminima strukturalne analize i kritike. Rad se sastoji iz tri dela. U prvom delu razmatramo zbog čega su kritika i kriza koje su izvorno spojene podvrgnuti različitim proce sima derogiranja. U drugom delu pokazujemo efekte promene načina ispoljavanja krize u kapitalizmu, tačnije osvetljavamo njenu disperzivne i ne-punktualne modalitete. U trećem delu postavljamo pitanje o šansama ponovnog spajanja krize i kritike na osnovu navigacije strukturalne kritike, nadalje artikulišemo njene veze sa „imanentnom kritikom“. Strukturalna kritika se analizira kao spoj između imanentne kritike i transcendentnog usmerenja koji radi na reconnections between crisis and critique as the elements of relationship to capitalism.

This paper extends Alan John Simmons’s conceptual distinction between Lockean (or consent) and Kantian (or justificatory) conceptions of legitimacy that he applied to the question of the legitimacy of states, to the issue of legitimacy of public decisions. I criticise the consent conception of legitimacy defended by Simmons, and I defend the Rawlsian version of the justificatory conception of legitimacy from his objection. The approach of this paper is distinctive because the two conceptions are assessed by investigating, using the method of reflective equilibrium, their respective prescriptions concerning the treatment of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) and epidemiologic measures. I argue that the method of reflective equilibrium does not support the consent conception. Considering the issues of treatment of APD and of epidemiologic measures, I argue that the consent conception of legitimacy is not well-equipped for the evaluation of norms that are not strictly self-regarding. This causes a deficit of prescriptions for relevant social responses. Further, by considering the case of responses to epidemics, I argue that such a conception can avoid harmful consequences only by recurring to additional, and independent, premises. This does not cause incoherence but reduces the coherence of a normative system. Finally, the consent conception is not equipped to support social cooperation in an optimal way, which has proved to be necessary in critical conditions, like a pandemic. On the other hand, I argue that the method of reflective equilibrium supports the Rawlsian version of justificatory conception of legitimacy, because of its advantages in handling the indicated issues. In addition, I maintain that this justificatory conception is respectful of freedom and equality of agents as moral self-legislators, and, thus, it is not vulnerable to Simmons’s main criticism., Ovaj rad proširuje konceptualnu distinkciju Alana Džona Simonsa između lokovske koncep cije legitimiteta (koja se zasniva na pristanku) i kantovske koncepcije legitimiteta (koja se za sniva na opravdanju) koju je primenio na pitanje legitimnosti država, odnosno na pitanje le gitimnosti javnih odluka. U radu kritikujem koncepciju legitimiteta zasnovanog na pristanku koju Simons zastupa, te branim rolsovsku verziju koncepcije legitimiteta zasnovane na oprav danju od prigovora. Ovaj rad je karakterističan po tome što se ove dve koncepcije legitimi teta procenjuju kroz istraživanje, primenom metode refleksivne ravnoteže, njihovih odgova rajućih propisa koji se tiču lečenja antisocijalnog poremećaja ličnosti (ASPD) i epidemioloških mera. Tvrdim da metod refleksivne ravnoteže ne podržava koncepciju legitimnosti zasnovane na pristanku. Izumajući u obzir problem lečenja ASPD-a i problem epidemioloških mera, tvr dim da koncepcija zasnovana na pristanku nije dobro opremljena za procenu normi koje se ne tiču striktno govoreći nas samih. Ovo prouzrokuje nedovoljan odgovor za relevantne društvene probleme. Dalje, razmatrajući slučaj odgovora na epidemije, pokazujem da ova koncepcija legitimnosti može da izbegne štetne posledice samo pozivanjem na dodatne i nezavisne premise. Iako neuzrokuje nekoherentnost, ovo umanjuje koherentnost normativ nog sistema. Konačno, koncepcija legitimnosti zasnovana na pristanku nije dobro opremljena da podrži društvenu saradnju na optimalan način, što se pokazalo neophodnim u kritičnim uslovima poput pandemije. S druge strane, tvrdim da metod refleksivne ravnoteže podržava Rolsovu verziju koncepcije legitimiteta zasnove na opravdanju zbog svojih prednosti u rešavanju navedenih problema. Pored toga, pokazujem dal koncepcijaegitimiteta zsnovana na opravdanju poštuje slobodu i jednakost delatnika kao moralnih samozakonodavaca, te da nije podložna Simonsovim glavnim kritikama.

This paper extends Alan John Simmons’s conceptual distinction between Lockean (or consent) and Kantian (or justificatory) conceptions of legitimacy that he applied to the question of the legitimacy of states, to the issue of legitimacy of public decisions. I criticise the consent conception of legitimacy defended by Simmons, and I defend the Rawlsian version of the justificatory conception of legitimacy from his objection. The approach of this paper is distinctive because the two conceptions are assessed by investigating, using the method of reflective equilibrium, their respective prescriptions concerning the treatment of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) and epidemiologic measures. I argue that the method of reflective equilibrium does not support the consent conception. Considering the issues of treatment of APD and of epidemiologic measures, I argue that the consent conception of legitimacy is not well-equipped for the evaluation of norms that are not strictly self-regarding. This causes a deficit of prescriptions for relevant social responses. Further, by considering the case of responses to epidemics, I argue that such a conception can avoid harmful consequences only by recurring to additional, and independent, premises. This does not cause incoherence but reduces the coherence of a normative system. Finally, the consent conception is not equipped to support social cooperation in an optimal way, which has proved to be necessary in critical conditions, like a pandemic. On the other hand, I argue that the method of reflective equilibrium supports the Rawlsian version of justificatory conception of legitimacy, because of its advantages in handling the indicated issues. In addition, I maintain that this justificatory conception is respectful of freedom and equality of agents as moral self-legislators, and, thus, it is not vulnerable to Simmons’s main criticism., Ovaj rad proširuje konceptualnu distinkciju Alana Džona Simonsa između lokovske koncep cije legitimiteta (koja se zasniva na pristanku) i kantovske koncepcije legitimiteta (koja se za sniva na opravdanju) koju je primenio na pitanje legitimnosti država, odnosno na pitanje le gitimnosti javnih odluka. U radu kritikujem koncepciju legitimiteta zasnovanog na pristanku koju Simons zastupa, te branim rolsovsku verziju koncepcije legitimiteta zasnovane na oprav danju od prigovora. Ovaj rad je karakterističan po tome što se ove dve koncepcije legitimi teta procenjuju kroz istraživanje, primenom metode refleksivne ravnoteže, njihovih odgova rajućih propisa koji se tiču lečenja antisocijalnog poremećaja ličnosti (ASPD) i epidemioloških mera. Tvrdim da metod refleksivne ravnoteže ne podržava koncepciju legitimnosti zasnovane na pristanku. Izumajući u obzir problem lečenja ASPD-a i problem epidemioloških mera, tvr dim da koncepcija zasnovana na pristanku nije dobro opremljena za procenu normi koje se ne tiču striktno govoreći nas samih. Ovo prouzrokuje nedovoljan odgovor za relevantne društvene probleme. Dalje, razmatrajući slučaj odgovora na epidemije, pokazujem da ova koncepcija legitimnosti može da izbegne štetne posledice samo pozivanjem na dodatne i nezavisne premise. Iako neuzrokuje nekoherentnost, ovo umanjuje koherentnost normativ nog sistema. Konačno, koncepcija legitimnosti zasnovana na pristanku nije dobro opremljena da podrži društvenu saradnju na optimalan način, što se pokazalo neophodnim u kritičnim uslovima poput pandemije. S druge strane, tvrdim da metod refleksivne ravnoteže podržava Rolsovu verziju koncepcije legitimiteta zasnove na opravdanju zbog svojih prednosti u rešavanju navedenih problema. Pored toga, pokazujem dal koncepcijaegitimiteta zsnovana na opravdanju poštuje slobodu i jednakost delatnika kao moralnih samozakonodavaca, te da nije podložna Simonsovim glavnim kritikama.

Until a decade ago, a comprehensive contestation of the so-called “transitional” paradigm was largely missing in the post-socialist era. This reality changed in the last ten years, especially in the region of former Yugoslavia. Some social movements in this region have started questioning the very essence of the economic and social misconceptions of the post[1]socialist condition. This paper first provides an elaboration of the very conceptual edifice of the ruling paradigm (hence the object of the critique of the three social movements in question), as well as a theoretical and methodological framework. It goes on to map out the epistemic discursive content of the respective social movements in Belgrade, Zagreb and Sarajevo, thereby assessing the conceptual content of their critique of the post-socialist transitional paradigm. Finally, given the similarities between Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, the paper seeks to explain variations in the critique by how the structural and contextual features impact the perspective from which it is constructed., Do pre desetak godina, sveobuhvatna kritika takozvane ‘tranzitološke paradigme’ je u dobroj meri izostajala u eri post-socijalizma. Ovakva realnost promenjena je u poslednjoj deceniji, a posebno u bivšoj Jugoslaviji. Pojedini društveni pokreti su u ovoj regiji počeli da propituju suštinu ekonomskih i društvenih protivrečnosti post-socijalističkog stanja. Ovaj članak po-činjem elaboracijom konceptualne konstrukcije vladajuće paradigme kao objekta kritike tri društvena pokreta kojima se bavim – a onda i elaboracijom teorijskog i metodološkog okvira. Potom nastavljam sa mapiranjem epistemološkog diskursa tri pokreta u Beogradu, Zagrebu i Sarajevu – i time ispitujem konceptualni sadržaj njihove kritike post-socijalističke paradi-gme. Konačno, uzevši u obzir sličnosti između Srbije, Hrvatske i Bosne i Hercegovine, ovaj članak teži da objasni varijacije u prirodi kritike – imajući u vidu način na koji su strukturne i kontekstualne karakteristike ove tri zemlje uticale na perspektivu iz koje su kritike bile konstruisane.

Until a decade ago, a comprehensive contestation of the so-called “transitional” paradigm was largely missing in the post-socialist era. This reality changed in the last ten years, especially in the region of former Yugoslavia. Some social movements in this region have started questioning the very essence of the economic and social misconceptions of the post[1]socialist condition. This paper first provides an elaboration of the very conceptual edifice of the ruling paradigm (hence the object of the critique of the three social movements in question), as well as a theoretical and methodological framework. It goes on to map out the epistemic discursive content of the respective social movements in Belgrade, Zagreb and Sarajevo, thereby assessing the conceptual content of their critique of the post-socialist transitional paradigm. Finally, given the similarities between Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, the paper seeks to explain variations in the critique by how the structural and contextual features impact the perspective from which it is constructed., Do pre desetak godina, sveobuhvatna kritika takozvane ‘tranzitološke paradigme’ je u dobroj meri izostajala u eri post-socijalizma. Ovakva realnost promenjena je u poslednjoj deceniji, a posebno u bivšoj Jugoslaviji. Pojedini društveni pokreti su u ovoj regiji počeli da propituju suštinu ekonomskih i društvenih protivrečnosti post-socijalističkog stanja. Ovaj članak po-činjem elaboracijom konceptualne konstrukcije vladajuće paradigme kao objekta kritike tri društvena pokreta kojima se bavim – a onda i elaboracijom teorijskog i metodološkog okvira. Potom nastavljam sa mapiranjem epistemološkog diskursa tri pokreta u Beogradu, Zagrebu i Sarajevu – i time ispitujem konceptualni sadržaj njihove kritike post-socijalističke paradi-gme. Konačno, uzevši u obzir sličnosti između Srbije, Hrvatske i Bosne i Hercegovine, ovaj članak teži da objasni varijacije u prirodi kritike – imajući u vidu način na koji su strukturne i kontekstualne karakteristike ove tri zemlje uticale na perspektivu iz koje su kritike bile konstruisane.

In Capitalism, Alienation and Critique, part of the development of Asger Sørensen’s overall argument is a disagreement with Georges Bataille. The crux of the argument is that Bataille’s thinking – especially his conception of subjectivity – is ‘apolitical’. The aim of this paper is to investigate the force of this claim. What does it mean for a position – albeit a philosophical one – to be ‘apolitical’?, U Kapitalizmu, otuđenju i kritici, deo razvoja celokupne argumentacije Asgera Serensena pred stavlja neslaganje sa Žoržom Batajem. Srž argumenta je da je Batajevo mišljenje – a naročito njegovo shvatanje subjektivnosti – ’apolitično’. Cilj ovog rada je da ispita snagu ovog argu menta. Šta znači kada kažemo da je neka pozicija – čak i filozofska – ’apolitična’?

In Capitalism, Alienation and Critique, part of the development of Asger Sørensen’s overall argument is a disagreement with Georges Bataille. The crux of the argument is that Bataille’s thinking – especially his conception of subjectivity – is ‘apolitical’. The aim of this paper is to investigate the force of this claim. What does it mean for a position – albeit a philosophical one – to be ‘apolitical’?, U Kapitalizmu, otuđenju i kritici, deo razvoja celokupne argumentacije Asgera Serensena pred stavlja neslaganje sa Žoržom Batajem. Srž argumenta je da je Batajevo mišljenje – a naročito njegovo shvatanje subjektivnosti – ’apolitično’. Cilj ovog rada je da ispita snagu ovog argu menta. Šta znači kada kažemo da je neka pozicija – čak i filozofska – ’apolitična’?

Predmet kritčkog osvrta su knjige Riječ je o slici Jagora Bučana i Slika i reč Estetčkog društva Srbije, iz čijih naslova je već očito da dele istu temu. U radu je ukazano na sličnost između njih sa dve tačke gledišta: uočeno je ono što je prisutno u obe, ali i ono što je u njima odsutno, a čini se značajnim za razumevanje teorijskih problema kojima se bave., The article provides a critical review of the books Riječ je o slici by Jagor Bučan and Slika i reč by the Serbian Society for Aesthetics. From the titles it is already evident that they share the same topic. The paper points out the similarities between the two texts on both what is present and what is absent in them, which also seems important for understanding the theoretical problems they deal with.

Predmet kritčkog osvrta su knjige Riječ je o slici Jagora Bučana i Slika i reč Estetčkog društva Srbije, iz čijih naslova je već očito da dele istu temu. U radu je ukazano na sličnost između njih sa dve tačke gledišta: uočeno je ono što je prisutno u obe, ali i ono što je u njima odsutno, a čini se značajnim za razumevanje teorijskih problema kojima se bave., The article provides a critical review of the books Riječ je o slici by Jagor Bučan and Slika i reč by the Serbian Society for Aesthetics. From the titles it is already evident that they share the same topic. The paper points out the similarities between the two texts on both what is present and what is absent in them, which also seems important for understanding the theoretical problems they deal with.

The paper focuses on violence, claiming that it is not action, but silence and inaction that become “murderous”, given that we are forced into a permanent and impossible process of choosing between responsibility for the other and the possibility of responding to a call for help. Still, this position is not final and the author offers certain alternative strategies, such as rebellion, goodness, critique and shame., Predavanje se fokusira na nasilje i tvrdi da nije delovanje već ćutnja i nečinjenje ono što po staje ,smrtonosnoʻ, s obzirom na to da smo prisiljeni na trajni i nemogući proces odlučivanja između odgovornosti za drugoga i mogućnosti odgovaranja na bilo koji poziv u pomoć. Ipak, takva vrsta prihvatanja nije konačna i autor nudi određene alternativne strategije: pobunu, dobrotu, kritiku i sram.

The paper focuses on violence, claiming that it is not action, but silence and inaction that become “murderous”, given that we are forced into a permanent and impossible process of choosing between responsibility for the other and the possibility of responding to a call for help. Still, this position is not final and the author offers certain alternative strategies, such as rebellion, goodness, critique and shame., Predavanje se fokusira na nasilje i tvrdi da nije delovanje već ćutnja i nečinjenje ono što po staje ,smrtonosnoʻ, s obzirom na to da smo prisiljeni na trajni i nemogući proces odlučivanja između odgovornosti za drugoga i mogućnosti odgovaranja na bilo koji poziv u pomoć. Ipak, takva vrsta prihvatanja nije konačna i autor nudi određene alternativne strategije: pobunu, dobrotu, kritiku i sram.

Focusing on three historical examples of a different understanding of Christian identity, the paper seeks to address the role of contemporary concepts of sex and gender in the creation of Christian identity. In the first case study, focused on the literary representations of the Christian martyrdom from the second and third centuries, special emphasis is placed on the demand for the ‘manly’ or ‘masculine’ way of witnessing faith. The second historical example relates to the creation of a wider ascetic movement in the fourth-century Asia Minor, and its specific focus is on Macrina the Younger. In her Vita, Gregory of Nyssa distinguishes between Macrina’s gender identity based on her virginity on the one hand, and her social role as a widow, and ‘mother’ and ‘father’ of her monastic community on the other. Finally, the focus is shifted towards Dionysius the Areopagite and Maximus the Confessor, whose teachings about ecstasy, as a way to transcend oneself in the movement towards the loved one, provide the basis for establishing a theology of marriage and creating a Christian identity based not on sexual or gender roles, but on the uniqueness of human nature., Rad ima za cilj da pruži kratak pregled hrišćanskih pogleda na polni i rodni identitet, kako u ranohrišćanskom, tako i u patrističkom periodu. Fokusirajući se na tri istorijska primera ra-zličitog shvatanja hrišćanskog identiteta, rad nastoji da pokaže koju su ulogu igrali savremeni pojmovi pola i roda u stvaranju hrišćanskog identiteta u prvim vekovima hrišćanstva. U prvoj studiji slučaja, koja se odnosi na literarne prikaze mučeništva hrišćana u 2. i 3. veku, pozna-tijim kao martiriološka književnost, poseban akcenat se stavlja na zahtev za „muževnim“ sve-dočenjem vere. Drugi istorijski primer se odnosi na 4. vek i stvaranje šireg asketskog pokreta u Maloj Aziju, i posebno se fokusira na ulogu sv. Makrine Mlađe i način formiranja njenog rodnog identiteta kako na osnovu devstvenosti, tako i na osnovu njene uloge udovice, od-nosno majke i oca svojoj monaškoj obitelji. Na kraju, fokus se pomera prema Dionisiju Are-opagitu i sv. Maksimu Ispovedniku, čija učenje o ekstazi, kao izlasku iz sebe prema voljenom biću, daju osnova za uspostavljanje jedne teologije braka i stvaranju hrišćanskog identiteta ne na polnim ili rodnim ulogama, već na jedinstvenosti ljudske prirode.

Focusing on three historical examples of a different understanding of Christian identity, the paper seeks to address the role of contemporary concepts of sex and gender in the creation of Christian identity. In the first case study, focused on the literary representations of the Christian martyrdom from the second and third centuries, special emphasis is placed on the demand for the ‘manly’ or ‘masculine’ way of witnessing faith. The second historical example relates to the creation of a wider ascetic movement in the fourth-century Asia Minor, and its specific focus is on Macrina the Younger. In her Vita, Gregory of Nyssa distinguishes between Macrina’s gender identity based on her virginity on the one hand, and her social role as a widow, and ‘mother’ and ‘father’ of her monastic community on the other. Finally, the focus is shifted towards Dionysius the Areopagite and Maximus the Confessor, whose teachings about ecstasy, as a way to transcend oneself in the movement towards the loved one, provide the basis for establishing a theology of marriage and creating a Christian identity based not on sexual or gender roles, but on the uniqueness of human nature., Rad ima za cilj da pruži kratak pregled hrišćanskih pogleda na polni i rodni identitet, kako u ranohrišćanskom, tako i u patrističkom periodu. Fokusirajući se na tri istorijska primera ra-zličitog shvatanja hrišćanskog identiteta, rad nastoji da pokaže koju su ulogu igrali savremeni pojmovi pola i roda u stvaranju hrišćanskog identiteta u prvim vekovima hrišćanstva. U prvoj studiji slučaja, koja se odnosi na literarne prikaze mučeništva hrišćana u 2. i 3. veku, pozna-tijim kao martiriološka književnost, poseban akcenat se stavlja na zahtev za „muževnim“ sve-dočenjem vere. Drugi istorijski primer se odnosi na 4. vek i stvaranje šireg asketskog pokreta u Maloj Aziju, i posebno se fokusira na ulogu sv. Makrine Mlađe i način formiranja njenog rodnog identiteta kako na osnovu devstvenosti, tako i na osnovu njene uloge udovice, od-nosno majke i oca svojoj monaškoj obitelji. Na kraju, fokus se pomera prema Dionisiju Are-opagitu i sv. Maksimu Ispovedniku, čija učenje o ekstazi, kao izlasku iz sebe prema voljenom biću, daju osnova za uspostavljanje jedne teologije braka i stvaranju hrišćanskog identiteta ne na polnim ili rodnim ulogama, već na jedinstvenosti ljudske prirode.

This paper offers an alternative theoretical consideration of ethnic identification in psychology. Mainstream social psychological theories are largely positivist and individualistic. New possibilities of theoretical understanding open up as the relational and symbolic nature of ethnicity enters psychological inquiry. This paper takes culture and self as two conceptual domains of social identification, following a meta-theoretical position of cultural psychology. The central focus is the cultural development of the person in social context of a given culture, specifically their ethnic identification, to which end, it looks at several processual aspects. First, ethnic culture is approached as a guiding principle and practice in everyday understanding and experience of one’s own ethnicity. Second, ethnic identification is considered a social and personal act of meaning making, which happens in a given social context, through practical activity and the discursive positioning of a person. Third, since rather than considered a conscious aspect of belonging, ethnicity is assumed and taken for granted, ruptures are considered as destabilizing events that create an opportunity for ethnic meaning reinterpretation and developmental transition. In the meaning making process, symbolic resources are conceived of as primary self-configuring tools, which are also culture[1]configuring. Ethnic meaning making is theorized as a central social[1]psychological process through which ethnic culture and a person as an ethnic subject emerge in historical perspective. Finally, the uniqueness of a singular person in the shared ethnic culture is conceptualized based on symbolic distancing from the immediate social context, through the model of knitting personal and socio-historical semiotic threads., Ovaj rad nudi alternativno teorijsko razmatranje etničke identifikacije u psihologiji. Glavne socijalno-psihološke teorije već su razmatrane kao pozitivističke i individualističke. Nove mogućnosti teorijskog razumevanja otvaraju se kada se u psihološko izučavanje uvedu relaciona i simbolička priroda etniciteta. Ovaj rad uzima kulturu i sopstvo kao dva konceptualna domena socijalne identifikacije, koji slede iz meta-teorijske pozicije kulturne psihologije. Glavni fokus rada je kulturni razvoj osobe u socijalnom kontekstu date kulture, specifično njene etničke identifikacije, u cilju čega posmatra nekoliko procesualnih aspekata. Prvo, etničkoj kulturi se pristupa kao vodećem principu i praksi u svakodnevnom razumevanju i iskustvu sopstvenog etniciteta. Drugo, etnička identifikacije se smatra socijalnim i ličnim aktom kreiranja značenja, koji se dešava u datom socijalnom kontekstu, kroz praktičnu aktivnost i diskurzivno pozicioniranje osobe. Treće, s obzirom da se etnicitet ne razmatra kao svesni aspekt pripadnosti, već se podrazumeva i uzima zdravo za gotovo, rupture se razmatraju kao destabilizujući događaji koji stvaraju prilike za reinterpretaciju etničkih značenja i razvojne promene. U procesu kreiranja značenja, simbolički resursi se smatraju primarnim samo-konstruišućim oruđima, koji su istovremeno konstruišući za kulturu. Kreiranje etničkih značenja se teoretizuje kao centralni socijalno-psihološki proces kroz koji etnička kultura i osoba kao etnički subjekat nastaju u istorijskoj perspektivi. Na kraju, jedinstvenost singularne osobe u zajedničkoj etničkoj kulturi konceptualizuje se na osnovu simboličkog distanciranja od neposrednog socijalnog konteksta kroz model pletenja ličnih i socio-istorijskih semiotičkih niti.

This paper offers an alternative theoretical consideration of ethnic identification in psychology. Mainstream social psychological theories are largely positivist and individualistic. New possibilities of theoretical understanding open up as the relational and symbolic nature of ethnicity enters psychological inquiry. This paper takes culture and self as two conceptual domains of social identification, following a meta-theoretical position of cultural psychology. The central focus is the cultural development of the person in social context of a given culture, specifically their ethnic identification, to which end, it looks at several processual aspects. First, ethnic culture is approached as a guiding principle and practice in everyday understanding and experience of one’s own ethnicity. Second, ethnic identification is considered a social and personal act of meaning making, which happens in a given social context, through practical activity and the discursive positioning of a person. Third, since rather than considered a conscious aspect of belonging, ethnicity is assumed and taken for granted, ruptures are considered as destabilizing events that create an opportunity for ethnic meaning reinterpretation and developmental transition. In the meaning making process, symbolic resources are conceived of as primary self-configuring tools, which are also culture[1]configuring. Ethnic meaning making is theorized as a central social[1]psychological process through which ethnic culture and a person as an ethnic subject emerge in historical perspective. Finally, the uniqueness of a singular person in the shared ethnic culture is conceptualized based on symbolic distancing from the immediate social context, through the model of knitting personal and socio-historical semiotic threads., Ovaj rad nudi alternativno teorijsko razmatranje etničke identifikacije u psihologiji. Glavne socijalno-psihološke teorije već su razmatrane kao pozitivističke i individualističke. Nove mogućnosti teorijskog razumevanja otvaraju se kada se u psihološko izučavanje uvedu relaciona i simbolička priroda etniciteta. Ovaj rad uzima kulturu i sopstvo kao dva konceptualna domena socijalne identifikacije, koji slede iz meta-teorijske pozicije kulturne psihologije. Glavni fokus rada je kulturni razvoj osobe u socijalnom kontekstu date kulture, specifično njene etničke identifikacije, u cilju čega posmatra nekoliko procesualnih aspekata. Prvo, etničkoj kulturi se pristupa kao vodećem principu i praksi u svakodnevnom razumevanju i iskustvu sopstvenog etniciteta. Drugo, etnička identifikacije se smatra socijalnim i ličnim aktom kreiranja značenja, koji se dešava u datom socijalnom kontekstu, kroz praktičnu aktivnost i diskurzivno pozicioniranje osobe. Treće, s obzirom da se etnicitet ne razmatra kao svesni aspekt pripadnosti, već se podrazumeva i uzima zdravo za gotovo, rupture se razmatraju kao destabilizujući događaji koji stvaraju prilike za reinterpretaciju etničkih značenja i razvojne promene. U procesu kreiranja značenja, simbolički resursi se smatraju primarnim samo-konstruišućim oruđima, koji su istovremeno konstruišući za kulturu. Kreiranje etničkih značenja se teoretizuje kao centralni socijalno-psihološki proces kroz koji etnička kultura i osoba kao etnički subjekat nastaju u istorijskoj perspektivi. Na kraju, jedinstvenost singularne osobe u zajedničkoj etničkoj kulturi konceptualizuje se na osnovu simboličkog distanciranja od neposrednog socijalnog konteksta kroz model pletenja ličnih i socio-istorijskih semiotičkih niti.

The paper presents the philosophy of the French philosopher Michel Serres, with an accent on his working method and unusual methodology. Starting from the thesis that the empiricist trait of Serres’ philosophy remains underexposed if one simply receives his work as that of a structuralist epistemologist, Serres’ monograph The Five Senses (1985) is then discussed in more detail. Here we see both a radical empiricism all his own and a closeness to phenomenology. Nevertheless, perception and language are not opposed to each other in Serres. Rather, his radical thinking of a world-relatedness of the bodily senses and an equally consistent understanding of a sensuality of language – and also of philosophical prose – are closely intertwined., Rad nam predstavlja filozofiju francuskog filozofa Mišela Sera, sa akcentom na njegov radni metod, te krajnje neuobičajenu metodologiju. Polazeći od teze da empirijska crta Serove fi-lozofije ostaje nedovoljno eksponirana ukoliko se njegova dela naprosto recipiraju kao dela epistemologa strukturaliste, prelazi se na detaljniju analizu Serove monografije The Five Sen-se (1985). Tu vidimo i radikalni empirizam, sam za sebe, ali i bliskost sa fenomenologijom. Pa ipak, percepcija i jezik, kod Sera nisu suprotstavljeni. Umesto toga, njegovo radikalna misao o povezanosti telesnih čula sa svetom i podjednako dosledno razumevanje osećajnosti jezi-ka – a takođe i filozofske proze – duboko su isprepleteni.

The paper presents the philosophy of the French philosopher Michel Serres, with an accent on his working method and unusual methodology. Starting from the thesis that the empiricist trait of Serres’ philosophy remains underexposed if one simply receives his work as that of a structuralist epistemologist, Serres’ monograph The Five Senses (1985) is then discussed in more detail. Here we see both a radical empiricism all his own and a closeness to phenomenology. Nevertheless, perception and language are not opposed to each other in Serres. Rather, his radical thinking of a world-relatedness of the bodily senses and an equally consistent understanding of a sensuality of language – and also of philosophical prose – are closely intertwined., Rad nam predstavlja filozofiju francuskog filozofa Mišela Sera, sa akcentom na njegov radni metod, te krajnje neuobičajenu metodologiju. Polazeći od teze da empirijska crta Serove fi-lozofije ostaje nedovoljno eksponirana ukoliko se njegova dela naprosto recipiraju kao dela epistemologa strukturaliste, prelazi se na detaljniju analizu Serove monografije The Five Sen-se (1985). Tu vidimo i radikalni empirizam, sam za sebe, ali i bliskost sa fenomenologijom. Pa ipak, percepcija i jezik, kod Sera nisu suprotstavljeni. Umesto toga, njegovo radikalna misao o povezanosti telesnih čula sa svetom i podjednako dosledno razumevanje osećajnosti jezi-ka – a takođe i filozofske proze – duboko su isprepleteni.

The responsibility for the COVID-19 pandemic was first ascribed to persons associated with the Huanan Seafood Market. However, many scientists suggest that this pandemic is actually a consequence of human intrusion into nature. This opens up a whole new perspective for an examination of direct and indirect, individual and collective responsibility concerning this particular pandemic, but also zoonotic pandemics as such. In this context, one of the key issues are the consequences of factory-farming of animals, which contributes to circumstances in which zoonotic pandemics emerge. Moreover, it is part of a larger economic system, global capitalism, whose logic implies certain coercion toward its participants to keep it essentially unchanged and therefore to make sure that livestock health remains “the weakest link in our global health chain” (FAO). However, even though the precise answer to the issue of moral responsibility for zoonotic pandemics outbreaks in general and the COVID-19 pandemic in particular cannot be given, it is possible to list certain indicators and make a framework helpful in ascribing moral responsibility to certain persons. The paper intends to do so by examining the notion of responsibility and by applying it to the issues mentioned. The results of this analysis show that it is misleading to place moral blame on people involved in actions that directly caused the animal-to-human transmission of a certain virus or on humanity as a whole., Odgovornost za pandemiju COVID-19 prvo je bila pripisana osobama vezanima uz tržnicu morske hrane Huanan. Međutim, mnogi naučnici sugerišu da je ova pandemija rezultat čo vekovih upada u netaknutu prirodu. Ovo otvara čitavu novu perspektivu za sagledavanje izravne i posredne te individualne i kolektivne odgovornosti za ovu pandemiju, no i za zoo notske pandemije uopšte. U ovom kontekstu, među ključne probleme spadaju posledice in dustrijskog uzgoja životinja, koji uveliko pridonosi okolnostima u kojima zoonotske pande mije izbijaju. Štaviše, on je dio šireg konteksta globalnog kapitalizma, ekonomskog sistema čija logika implicira izvesnu prisilu nametnutu onima koji u njoj participiraju, naime, da ovu vrstu uzgoja ostave bitno nepromenjenu, pa da tako osiguraju da zdravlje stoke ostane „naj slabija karika u našem globalnom zdravstvenom lancu“ (FAO). Međutim, premda precizan odgovor na pitanje moralne odgovornosti za izbijanje pandemija, posebno one aktuelne, ne može biti dan, moguće je navesti izvesne indikatore i izgraditi okvir koji bi mogli pomoći u zadatku pripisivanja moralne odgovornosti određenim osobama. Ovaj rad to namerava izvesti sagledavanjem samog pojma odgovornosti i primenom te refleksije na spomenute probleme. Rezultati ove analize pokazuju varljivost pripisivanja moralne krivice ljudima uključenima u aktivnosti koje su izravno uzrokovale prenos izvesnog virusa sa životinje na čoveka, kao i čovečanstvu u celini za stvaranje uslova za prenos.

The responsibility for the COVID-19 pandemic was first ascribed to persons associated with the Huanan Seafood Market. However, many scientists suggest that this pandemic is actually a consequence of human intrusion into nature. This opens up a whole new perspective for an examination of direct and indirect, individual and collective responsibility concerning this particular pandemic, but also zoonotic pandemics as such. In this context, one of the key issues are the consequences of factory-farming of animals, which contributes to circumstances in which zoonotic pandemics emerge. Moreover, it is part of a larger economic system, global capitalism, whose logic implies certain coercion toward its participants to keep it essentially unchanged and therefore to make sure that livestock health remains “the weakest link in our global health chain” (FAO). However, even though the precise answer to the issue of moral responsibility for zoonotic pandemics outbreaks in general and the COVID-19 pandemic in particular cannot be given, it is possible to list certain indicators and make a framework helpful in ascribing moral responsibility to certain persons. The paper intends to do so by examining the notion of responsibility and by applying it to the issues mentioned. The results of this analysis show that it is misleading to place moral blame on people involved in actions that directly caused the animal-to-human transmission of a certain virus or on humanity as a whole., Odgovornost za pandemiju COVID-19 prvo je bila pripisana osobama vezanima uz tržnicu morske hrane Huanan. Međutim, mnogi naučnici sugerišu da je ova pandemija rezultat čo vekovih upada u netaknutu prirodu. Ovo otvara čitavu novu perspektivu za sagledavanje izravne i posredne te individualne i kolektivne odgovornosti za ovu pandemiju, no i za zoo notske pandemije uopšte. U ovom kontekstu, među ključne probleme spadaju posledice in dustrijskog uzgoja životinja, koji uveliko pridonosi okolnostima u kojima zoonotske pande mije izbijaju. Štaviše, on je dio šireg konteksta globalnog kapitalizma, ekonomskog sistema čija logika implicira izvesnu prisilu nametnutu onima koji u njoj participiraju, naime, da ovu vrstu uzgoja ostave bitno nepromenjenu, pa da tako osiguraju da zdravlje stoke ostane „naj slabija karika u našem globalnom zdravstvenom lancu“ (FAO). Međutim, premda precizan odgovor na pitanje moralne odgovornosti za izbijanje pandemija, posebno one aktuelne, ne može biti dan, moguće je navesti izvesne indikatore i izgraditi okvir koji bi mogli pomoći u zadatku pripisivanja moralne odgovornosti određenim osobama. Ovaj rad to namerava izvesti sagledavanjem samog pojma odgovornosti i primenom te refleksije na spomenute probleme. Rezultati ove analize pokazuju varljivost pripisivanja moralne krivice ljudima uključenima u aktivnosti koje su izravno uzrokovale prenos izvesnog virusa sa životinje na čoveka, kao i čovečanstvu u celini za stvaranje uslova za prenos.

This paper presents three interconnected examinations of Asger Sørensen’s arguments in Capitalism, Alienation and Critique, which thematize Sørensen’s overarching understanding of the relationship between theory and practice: his general methodological perspective on critical theory, its distinctive epistemology and its anchoring in the empirical world. The paper authors each try to push Sørensen on these crucial points by considering how Sørensen’s variant of critical theory actually operates, scrutinizing in more detail the particular relationship between the ‘experience of injustice’, which for Sørensen constitutes the empirical foothold for critical theory, and the theoretical diagnosis of social reality which the critical theorist should formulate against the backdrop of this experience., Ovaj rad predstavlja tri povezana ispitivanja argumentacije Asgera Serensena u Kapitalizmu, otuđenju i kritici, koja tematizuju Serensenovo generalno razumevanje odnosa teorije i prak se, drugim rečima njegovu metodološku perspektivu u pogledu kritičke teorije, njene speci fične epistemologije i njene ukorenjenosti u empirijskom svetu. Marjan Ivković, Srđan Pro danović i Milan Urošević nastoje da problematizuju Serensenovo stanovište razmatrajući način na koji Serensenova kritička teorija zapravo funkcioniše, analizirajući detaljnije odnos između ,iskustva nepravdeʻ, koje za Serensena predstavlja empirijsko uporište kritičke teo rije, i teorijske dijagnoze društvene stvarnosti koju kritički teoretičar formuliše na temelju tog iskustva

This paper presents three interconnected examinations of Asger Sørensen’s arguments in Capitalism, Alienation and Critique, which thematize Sørensen’s overarching understanding of the relationship between theory and practice: his general methodological perspective on critical theory, its distinctive epistemology and its anchoring in the empirical world. The paper authors each try to push Sørensen on these crucial points by considering how Sørensen’s variant of critical theory actually operates, scrutinizing in more detail the particular relationship between the ‘experience of injustice’, which for Sørensen constitutes the empirical foothold for critical theory, and the theoretical diagnosis of social reality which the critical theorist should formulate against the backdrop of this experience., Ovaj rad predstavlja tri povezana ispitivanja argumentacije Asgera Serensena u Kapitalizmu, otuđenju i kritici, koja tematizuju Serensenovo generalno razumevanje odnosa teorije i prak se, drugim rečima njegovu metodološku perspektivu u pogledu kritičke teorije, njene speci fične epistemologije i njene ukorenjenosti u empirijskom svetu. Marjan Ivković, Srđan Pro danović i Milan Urošević nastoje da problematizuju Serensenovo stanovište razmatrajući način na koji Serensenova kritička teorija zapravo funkcioniše, analizirajući detaljnije odnos između ,iskustva nepravdeʻ, koje za Serensena predstavlja empirijsko uporište kritičke teo rije, i teorijske dijagnoze društvene stvarnosti koju kritički teoretičar formuliše na temelju tog iskustva

This paper looks at Thomas Szanto’s theory of hatred that suggests that hatred has an indeterminate affective focus and that it derives its intensity from the commitment to the attitude itself. Contrary to Szanto’s theses, this paper claims that the hated properties are not necessarily fuzzy. On the contrary, in many cases we can clearly reconstruct the quasi-rational genesis of hatred, by relying on the deep structures behind the social dynamics (as demonstrated by the example of anti-Semitism). Furthermore, the paper states that even though in certain cases hatred is a truly empty of content, these cases are marginal in comparison to other, more important forms of hatred., Članak se fokusira na teoriju mržnje kod Tomasa Santa koja sugeriuše da mržnja nema jasan afektivni fokus, te da njen intentizet proističe iz zalaganja za sam intencionalni stav mržnje. Za razliku od Santove teze, članak trvrdi da omražena svojstva nisu nužno nejasna. Naprotiv, u mnogim slučajevim se precizno može rekonstruisati kvazi-racionalna geneza mržnje, oslanjajući se na duboke strukture iza društvene dinamike (kao što pokazuje primer antisemitizma). Nadalje, članak konstatuje da iako je istina da je u izvesnim slučjavima mržnja bez sadržaja, ovi slučajevi su marginalni u odnosu na druge, značajnije forme mržnje

This paper looks at Thomas Szanto’s theory of hatred that suggests that hatred has an indeterminate affective focus and that it derives its intensity from the commitment to the attitude itself. Contrary to Szanto’s theses, this paper claims that the hated properties are not necessarily fuzzy. On the contrary, in many cases we can clearly reconstruct the quasi-rational genesis of hatred, by relying on the deep structures behind the social dynamics (as demonstrated by the example of anti-Semitism). Furthermore, the paper states that even though in certain cases hatred is a truly empty of content, these cases are marginal in comparison to other, more important forms of hatred., Članak se fokusira na teoriju mržnje kod Tomasa Santa koja sugeriuše da mržnja nema jasan afektivni fokus, te da njen intentizet proističe iz zalaganja za sam intencionalni stav mržnje. Za razliku od Santove teze, članak trvrdi da omražena svojstva nisu nužno nejasna. Naprotiv, u mnogim slučajevim se precizno može rekonstruisati kvazi-racionalna geneza mržnje, oslanjajući se na duboke strukture iza društvene dinamike (kao što pokazuje primer antisemitizma). Nadalje, članak konstatuje da iako je istina da je u izvesnim slučjavima mržnja bez sadržaja, ovi slučajevi su marginalni u odnosu na druge, značajnije forme mržnje

Ibn Khaldun and Ernest Gellner have both developed comprehensive yet very different theories of social cohesion. Whereas Ibn Khaldun traces the development of intense group solidarity to the ascetic lifestyles of nomadic warriors, for Gellner social cohesion is a product of different material conditions. In contrast to Ibn Khaldun’s theory, where all social ties are generated through similar social processes, in Gellner’s model the patterns of collective solidarity change through time, that is, different societies produce different forms of social cohesion. While Ibn Khaldun argues that asbiyyah is the backbone of group unity in all social orders, Gellner insists that modern societies are underpinned by very different type of collective solidarity than their premodern counterparts. In this paper I offer a critique of Ibn Khaldun’s and Gellner’s theories of social cohesion and develop an alternative explanation, which situates the social dynamics of group solidarity in the organisational and ideological legacies of warfare., Ibn Haldun i Ernest Gelner razvili su sveobuhvatne, ali vrlo različite teorije socijalne kohezije. Dok je Ibn Haldun razvoj intenzivne grupne solidarnosti pronašao u asketskom načinu života nomadskih ratnika, za Gelnera socijalna kohezija predstavlja proizvod različitih materijalnih uslova. Za razliku od teorije Ibn Halduna gde se sve društvene veze generišu kroz slične društvene procese, u Gelnerovom modelu obrasci kolektivne solidarnosti menjaju se tokom vremena pri čemu različita društva stvaraju različite oblike socijalne kohezije. Dok Ibn Haldun tvrdi da je asbija kičma jedinstva grupa u svim društvenim poretcima, Gelner insistira na tome da su moderna društva oblikovana sasvim drugačijom vrstom kolektivne solidarnosti u odnosu na tradicionalne poretke. U ovom radu nudim kritiku Ibn Haldunove i Gelnerove teorije socijalne kohezije i razvijam alternativno objašnjenje koje postavlja socijalnu dinamiku grupne solidarnosti u organizaciono i ideološko nasleđe ratovanja.

Ibn Khaldun and Ernest Gellner have both developed comprehensive yet very different theories of social cohesion. Whereas Ibn Khaldun traces the development of intense group solidarity to the ascetic lifestyles of nomadic warriors, for Gellner social cohesion is a product of different material conditions. In contrast to Ibn Khaldun’s theory, where all social ties are generated through similar social processes, in Gellner’s model the patterns of collective solidarity change through time, that is, different societies produce different forms of social cohesion. While Ibn Khaldun argues that asbiyyah is the backbone of group unity in all social orders, Gellner insists that modern societies are underpinned by very different type of collective solidarity than their premodern counterparts. In this paper I offer a critique of Ibn Khaldun’s and Gellner’s theories of social cohesion and develop an alternative explanation, which situates the social dynamics of group solidarity in the organisational and ideological legacies of warfare., Ibn Haldun i Ernest Gelner razvili su sveobuhvatne, ali vrlo različite teorije socijalne kohezije. Dok je Ibn Haldun razvoj intenzivne grupne solidarnosti pronašao u asketskom načinu života nomadskih ratnika, za Gelnera socijalna kohezija predstavlja proizvod različitih materijalnih uslova. Za razliku od teorije Ibn Halduna gde se sve društvene veze generišu kroz slične društvene procese, u Gelnerovom modelu obrasci kolektivne solidarnosti menjaju se tokom vremena pri čemu različita društva stvaraju različite oblike socijalne kohezije. Dok Ibn Haldun tvrdi da je asbija kičma jedinstva grupa u svim društvenim poretcima, Gelner insistira na tome da su moderna društva oblikovana sasvim drugačijom vrstom kolektivne solidarnosti u odnosu na tradicionalne poretke. U ovom radu nudim kritiku Ibn Haldunove i Gelnerove teorije socijalne kohezije i razvijam alternativno objašnjenje koje postavlja socijalnu dinamiku grupne solidarnosti u organizaciono i ideološko nasleđe ratovanja.

The author finds the possibility of overcoming the current liberal-capitalist system in a different conception of time, which requires a different attitude towards both the past and the future. The paper begins with an analysis of the Benjamin’s critique of Marx, followed by analysis of Derrida’s critique of Benjamin and finally Derrida’s critique of Marx. Benjamin points out the problem of teleological understanding of time, the understanding that the meaning of events comes only from the future, which is present in Marx, and which prevents us from escaping the “circle” of violence. Although he relies on Benjamin’s conception of time, the author seeks to transcend the understanding of law as something separate from justice, and law as violence. Therefore, the paper turns to Derrida and his understanding of the law, eventually providing new possibilities for understanding and constituting the left, social theory, but also critical thinking today., Mogućnost prevazilaženja liberalno kapitalističkog Sistema današnjice autor nalazi u druga čijem promišljanju vremena, koje zahteva drugačiji odnos kako spram istorije, tako i buduć nosti. Rad počinje analizom Benjaminove kritike Marksa, koju zatim slede analize Deridine kritike Benjamina i na kraju Deridine kritike Marksa. Benjamin će ukazati na problem teleo loškog razumevanja vremena, shvatanje da smisao događaja dolazi tek iz budućnosti, koje je prisutno kod Marksa, a koje ne dopušta da se izađe iz „začaranog kruga“ nasilja. Premda se oslanja na Benjaminovo poimanje vremena, autor nastoji da prevaziđe razumevanje zakona kao nečega što je odvojeno od pravde, zakona kao nasilja. Stoga se rad okreće Deridi i nje govom shvatanju zakona, pružajući nam na kraju nove mogućnosti mišljenja i konstituisanja levice, socijalne teorije, ali i kritičkog mišljenja danas.

The author finds the possibility of overcoming the current liberal-capitalist system in a different conception of time, which requires a different attitude towards both the past and the future. The paper begins with an analysis of the Benjamin’s critique of Marx, followed by analysis of Derrida’s critique of Benjamin and finally Derrida’s critique of Marx. Benjamin points out the problem of teleological understanding of time, the understanding that the meaning of events comes only from the future, which is present in Marx, and which prevents us from escaping the “circle” of violence. Although he relies on Benjamin’s conception of time, the author seeks to transcend the understanding of law as something separate from justice, and law as violence. Therefore, the paper turns to Derrida and his understanding of the law, eventually providing new possibilities for understanding and constituting the left, social theory, but also critical thinking today., Mogućnost prevazilaženja liberalno kapitalističkog Sistema današnjice autor nalazi u druga čijem promišljanju vremena, koje zahteva drugačiji odnos kako spram istorije, tako i buduć nosti. Rad počinje analizom Benjaminove kritike Marksa, koju zatim slede analize Deridine kritike Benjamina i na kraju Deridine kritike Marksa. Benjamin će ukazati na problem teleo loškog razumevanja vremena, shvatanje da smisao događaja dolazi tek iz budućnosti, koje je prisutno kod Marksa, a koje ne dopušta da se izađe iz „začaranog kruga“ nasilja. Premda se oslanja na Benjaminovo poimanje vremena, autor nastoji da prevaziđe razumevanje zakona kao nečega što je odvojeno od pravde, zakona kao nasilja. Stoga se rad okreće Deridi i nje govom shvatanju zakona, pružajući nam na kraju nove mogućnosti mišljenja i konstituisanja levice, socijalne teorije, ali i kritičkog mišljenja danas.

Maximus the Confessor’s Ambiguum 41 contains some rather atypical observations concerning the distinction of sexes in the human person. There is a certain ambiguity as to whether the distinction of the sexes was intended by God and is ‘by nature’ (as found in Genesis and asserted by most Church Fathers) or a product of the Fall. Namely, Christ is described three times as “shaking out of nature the distinctive characteristics of male and female”, “driving out of nature the difference and division of male and female” and “removing the difference between male and female”. Different readings of those passages engender important implications that can be drawn out from the Confessor’s thought, both eschatological implications and otherwise. The subject has been picked up by Cameron Partridge, Doru Costache and Karolina Kochanczyk–Boninska, among others, but is by no means settled, as they draw quite different conclusions. The noteworthy and far-reaching implications of Maximus’ theological stance and problems are not the object of this paper. In a 2017 paper I attempted to demonstrate what Maximus exactly says in these peculiar and oft-commented passages through a close reading, in order to avoid a two-edged Maximian misunderstanding: to either draw overly radical implications from those passages, projecting decidedly non-Maximian visions on the historical Maximus, or none at all, as if those passages represented standard Patristic positions. Here, I am revisiting this argument, given that the interest in what the Confessor has to say on the subject seems to be increasing., Neodoumica (Ambiguum) 41 Maksima Ispovednika sadrži neka prilično netipična zapažanja u vezi sa razlikom među polovima u ljudskoj ličnosti: postoji određena dvosmislenost u po-gledu toga da li je razlika među polovima Božija namera, to jest da li je ona „po prirodi“ (kao što je to starozavetna knjiga Postanja i većina crkvenih otaca tvrdi) ili je ona proizvod pada, pošto je Hristos tri puta opisan kako „izbacuju iz prirode osobenosti muškog i ženskog pola“, „istiskuje iz prirode razliku i podelu na muško i žensko“ i „uklanja razlike između muškog i ženskog“. Različita čitanja tih odlomaka rađaju važne implikacije koje se mogu izvući iz Ispo-vednikove misli, kako eshatološke tako i druge. Bavljenje ovom temom su, između ostalih, odabrali Kameron Partridž, Doru Kostake i Karolina Kočanžik – Boninska, ali ni na koji način ona nije rešena, jer su formulisani sasvim drugačiji zaključci. Značajne i dalekosežne implika-cije Maksimovog teološkog stava, kao i njegovi problemi, nisu predmet ovog rada. U radu iz 2017. godine pokušao sam detaljno da demonstriram šta Maksim tačno kaže u ovim neo-bičnim i često komentarisanim odlomcima, kako bi se izbegao dvosmerni maksimovski nes-porazum – koji bi iz tih odlomaka povukao previše radikalne implikacije, projektujući defini-tivno ne-maksimovske vizije na istorijskog Maksima ili pak projektući gotovo nikakve vizije, uzimajući te odlomke kao standardna patristička stanovišta. Ovde, ponovo preispitujem ovaj argument, s obzirom na to da se čini da interes za ono što Ispovednik kaže na tu temu ne splašnjava, već raste.

Maximus the Confessor’s Ambiguum 41 contains some rather atypical observations concerning the distinction of sexes in the human person. There is a certain ambiguity as to whether the distinction of the sexes was intended by God and is ‘by nature’ (as found in Genesis and asserted by most Church Fathers) or a product of the Fall. Namely, Christ is described three times as “shaking out of nature the distinctive characteristics of male and female”, “driving out of nature the difference and division of male and female” and “removing the difference between male and female”. Different readings of those passages engender important implications that can be drawn out from the Confessor’s thought, both eschatological implications and otherwise. The subject has been picked up by Cameron Partridge, Doru Costache and Karolina Kochanczyk–Boninska, among others, but is by no means settled, as they draw quite different conclusions. The noteworthy and far-reaching implications of Maximus’ theological stance and problems are not the object of this paper. In a 2017 paper I attempted to demonstrate what Maximus exactly says in these peculiar and oft-commented passages through a close reading, in order to avoid a two-edged Maximian misunderstanding: to either draw overly radical implications from those passages, projecting decidedly non-Maximian visions on the historical Maximus, or none at all, as if those passages represented standard Patristic positions. Here, I am revisiting this argument, given that the interest in what the Confessor has to say on the subject seems to be increasing., Neodoumica (Ambiguum) 41 Maksima Ispovednika sadrži neka prilično netipična zapažanja u vezi sa razlikom među polovima u ljudskoj ličnosti: postoji određena dvosmislenost u po-gledu toga da li je razlika među polovima Božija namera, to jest da li je ona „po prirodi“ (kao što je to starozavetna knjiga Postanja i većina crkvenih otaca tvrdi) ili je ona proizvod pada, pošto je Hristos tri puta opisan kako „izbacuju iz prirode osobenosti muškog i ženskog pola“, „istiskuje iz prirode razliku i podelu na muško i žensko“ i „uklanja razlike između muškog i ženskog“. Različita čitanja tih odlomaka rađaju važne implikacije koje se mogu izvući iz Ispo-vednikove misli, kako eshatološke tako i druge. Bavljenje ovom temom su, između ostalih, odabrali Kameron Partridž, Doru Kostake i Karolina Kočanžik – Boninska, ali ni na koji način ona nije rešena, jer su formulisani sasvim drugačiji zaključci. Značajne i dalekosežne implika-cije Maksimovog teološkog stava, kao i njegovi problemi, nisu predmet ovog rada. U radu iz 2017. godine pokušao sam detaljno da demonstriram šta Maksim tačno kaže u ovim neo-bičnim i često komentarisanim odlomcima, kako bi se izbegao dvosmerni maksimovski nes-porazum – koji bi iz tih odlomaka povukao previše radikalne implikacije, projektujući defini-tivno ne-maksimovske vizije na istorijskog Maksima ili pak projektući gotovo nikakve vizije, uzimajući te odlomke kao standardna patristička stanovišta. Ovde, ponovo preispitujem ovaj argument, s obzirom na to da se čini da interes za ono što Ispovednik kaže na tu temu ne splašnjava, već raste.

In this paper I analyze Cécile Laborde’s conception of justificatory secularism. Laborde points out that in her formulation and defense of the conception of justificatory secularism, she follows Rawls’ conception of political liberalism to a certain extent. For that reason, I first provide a sketch of Rawls’ conception of political liberalism. Then I focus on justificatory secularism, trying to show to what extent it displays similarities with the conception of political liberalism, but also how it differs. I am interested in whether justificatory secularism represents a better alternative to the conception of political liberalism or whether these two conceptions should be considered complementary., U ovom radu analiziraćemo stanovište sekularizma opravdanja koje je nedavno formulisala Sesil Labord. Labord jasno ističe da prilikom formulisanja i odbrane koncepcije sekularizma opravdanja u određenoj meri sledi Rolsovo shvatanje političkog liberalizma. Zbog toga ćemo u ovom radu najpre ponuditi skicu Rolsove koncepcije političkog liberalizma. Potom ćemo analizirati stanovište sekularizma opravdanja i nastojaćemo pritom da ukažemo u kojoj meri ono ima sličnosti sa koncepcijom političkog liberalizma, ali i u kojoj meri se od nje razlikuje. Tako da će nas prvenstveno interesovati da li koncepcija sekularizma opravdanja predstavlja bolju alternativu u odnosu na koncepciju političkog liberalizma ili na te dve koncepcije treba gledati kao na komplementarne

In this paper I analyze Cécile Laborde’s conception of justificatory secularism. Laborde points out that in her formulation and defense of the conception of justificatory secularism, she follows Rawls’ conception of political liberalism to a certain extent. For that reason, I first provide a sketch of Rawls’ conception of political liberalism. Then I focus on justificatory secularism, trying to show to what extent it displays similarities with the conception of political liberalism, but also how it differs. I am interested in whether justificatory secularism represents a better alternative to the conception of political liberalism or whether these two conceptions should be considered complementary., U ovom radu analiziraćemo stanovište sekularizma opravdanja koje je nedavno formulisala Sesil Labord. Labord jasno ističe da prilikom formulisanja i odbrane koncepcije sekularizma opravdanja u određenoj meri sledi Rolsovo shvatanje političkog liberalizma. Zbog toga ćemo u ovom radu najpre ponuditi skicu Rolsove koncepcije političkog liberalizma. Potom ćemo analizirati stanovište sekularizma opravdanja i nastojaćemo pritom da ukažemo u kojoj meri ono ima sličnosti sa koncepcijom političkog liberalizma, ali i u kojoj meri se od nje razlikuje. Tako da će nas prvenstveno interesovati da li koncepcija sekularizma opravdanja predstavlja bolju alternativu u odnosu na koncepciju političkog liberalizma ili na te dve koncepcije treba gledati kao na komplementarne

This paper analyzes the notion of recollection in Hans Georg Gadamer and Paul Ricoeur’s thought, in the context of time distance as “obstacles” towards understanding the past. Particular attention is paid to the understanding the phenomenon of “Death” as a time gap between the past and the present. In connection with this problem, we find efforts of philosophical hermeneutics on the one hand and historicism on the other. Differences between historicism and hermeneutics can be outlined in relation to the role that memory plays in the process of understanding in Gadamer and Ricoeur. What does Death mean in terms of understanding for history, and what for hermeneutics? How can we understand temporal distance? Is it possible and necessary to overcome it? What is the role of recollection and how does it participate in understanding? – these are some of the main issues that will be addressed in the text. Finally, the task of the text is to offer the meaning and significance of the hermeneutics of recollection in relation to the mentioned questions, through the interaction of the thoughts of the two authors., Tekst analizira pojam sećanja kod Hansa Georga Gadamera i Pola Rikera u kontekstu vre menske distance kao „prepreke“ razumevanja prošlosti. Naročita pažnja usmerena je na ra zumevanje fenomena „smrti“ kao vremenskog ponora između prošlosti i sadašnjosti. U vezi sa tim stoje i nastojanja filozofske hermeneutike sa jedne strane i istoricizma sa druge. U odnosu na ulogu koju sećanje igra u procesu razumevanju kod Gadamera i Rikera, daće se ocrtati razlike između istoricizma i hermeneuitke. Šta smrt predstavlja u pogledu razumevanja za istoriju a šta za hermeneutiku? Kako razumeti vremensku distancu? Da li je moguće i da li je neophodno prevazići je? Koja je uloga sećanja i kako ono učestvuje u razumevanju? – neka su od glavnih pitanja koja će biti adresirana u tekstu. Na kraju, zadatak teksta je da kroz interakciju misli dvojice autora, ponudi značenje i značaj hermeneutike sećanja u pogledu na navedena pitanja.