Search

Copyright of Cappadocia Journal of History & Social Sciences is the property of CAHIJ and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Philip Sherrard and Theodosius Dobzhansky, both Eastern Orthodox intellectuals, would have agreed on little. While Sherrard rejected modern science, especially evolution, Dobzhansky was one of evolution's leading figures. But Sherrard saw climate change coming and warned of it, whereas Dobzhansky was perhaps too easy in his liberal progressivism. Despite their major differences, however, Dobzhansky and Sherrard both shared a hostility towards reductionism and a mechanistic view of the universe. In studying their ideas and incorporating ecology into the conversation, we can consider different ways to view evolution and climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the 19th and 20th centuries, especially in Europe and North America, meteorology evolved into modern science with a primary focus on enhancing navigational safety and agricultural productivity. This scientific advancement found its way into the publications of the Ottoman Navy, which aimed to educate sailors. These publications disseminated contemporary theoretical and practical information on weather monitoring, which complemented traditional observational methods of natural phenomena that seafarers had already used since ancient times. Simultaneously, ancient astrometeorological sources persisted into the 20th century. Although there are no tangible traces of their use by sailors, these traditions included meteorological predictions at sea, serving either symbolic or popular purposes. From the publications of the Ottoman Navy to astrometeorological sources, this paper aims to present a bibliographical survey of maritime weather monitoring with a particular emphasis on the intersection of modern scientific advancements and traditional knowledge in the field of maritime meteorology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Journal on Humanities & Social Sciences is the property of International Journal on Humanities & Social Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Much has been written over the years regarding the norms, values, and ideals of modern science—in a word, what is expected of science and scientists. Most frequently, however, attention has focused on the conduct expected of scientists (e.g., Merton’s norms) rather than on the specific content expected of their scientific contributions, and attention has also tended to focus on the current scene rather than on the events that produced it. So. a kind of two-fold gap exists in our understanding of our scientific heritage. Why is this important? Because it turns out that the two general ideals that have shaped the content of modern science right from the start seem to contradict each other. Nonetheless, they both have enjoyed weighty reasons offered in their defense and they both have exerted strong holds through the centuries on scientists and nonscientists alike, and still exert these holds. And the tradition has not offered any satisfying resolution. So, it is high time we deal with this situation. At least, that is what I attempt to do in this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What can we learn from a Marxist history and philosophy of science? There are at least three crucial lessons that scholars should seriously reassess. First, the idea that there is a constitutive relation between practice and theory in knowledge production. This was a central concern for many Marxist HPS scholars and led them to conceive "science" as a praxis and as a situated, and not exclusively intellectual, enterprise. Second, the idea that there is a thread connecting social relations, technologies, and scientific abstractions. Modes of thinking and understanding are related to particular social formations. And third, the idea that modern science is both a cause and product of capitalist modes of production, which expanded globally and generated all sorts of inequalities and polarizations. Altogether, these lessons put forward a coherent perspective addressing the socioeconomic nature of scientific knowledge, which is still relevant today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brecht's Life of Galileo provides elements for elaborating what I call "a theory of the encounter of practices". The concept of the encounter pushes back against teleological theories that predestine modern science to operate as an instrument of domination. I argue that Life of Galileo stages the missed encounters in modernity between science, politics, and art at the same time as it foregrounds the emancipatory power of science. I trace the encounter of practices from the play's opening scenes -- highlighting what I call Galileo's "double life". Then, I turn to the most important scene of the play, Scene 10, in which political and artistic practices repurpose Galileo's novel inventions for their emancipatory desires. In the virtual potentialities of this encounter, that is, despite the missed encounter between Galileo and "the people", Brecht's Life of Galileo continues to be fruitful for theorizing the emancipatory power of science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The final theory of the physical world, capable of harmonizing and connecting the existing basic theories, is seen as the ultimate achievement of the modern physical science. It is said to be the fulfilment of a long effort of describing the functioning of the physical universe and the coronation of the most successful intellectual endeavor undertook by the Western world. However, as put forward by illustrious physicists, such a theory would be the final blast to the previous rival theories based on non-metrical measurements. All former non-empirical, spiritualist theories, which managed to survive the triumphant march of the Western modern science, including astrology, would now be sentenced to extinction. And even philosophy would be turned as inconclusive and embarrassing for scientists, since they would no longer need philosophical suggestions on how to investigate the physical reality. In turn, expelling all the spiritual heritage from the modern world would mean heading towards the void, embracing the nonsense of an impersonal universe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Cultura Económica is the property of Pontificia Universidad Catolica Argentina and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The main purpose of this paper is to expose positive thinking from the Buddhist perspective & to enhance its universal utility to contemporary society. Positive thinking is not a modern concept though it is in the vogue today with its frequent application in varied human affairs, both wholesome and unwholesome. Buddha in His actions as well as in His teachings has clearly demonstrated positivity as a productive, proactive mental property. Positive thinking in the Buddhist perspective offers us an impression of an overlapping mixture of mental, behavioral, and spiritual (moral) qualities. This paper demonstrates & explores the actions concerned with the Buddhist positive mental framework upholding its present-day validity and in fact, how to enhance advance positive thinking as a way of resolving various human conflicts. The effort of this paper is to urge the reader to make an endeavor to gain happiness by avoiding negative thoughts and situations, by cultivating positive thinking in the human mind living in a harmonious environment, commensurate with the practicing of the Buddhist teaching which benefits not only securing it but also improving happiness both in the sense of the afterlife as well as in this world itself. In this way, the exploration of the Buddhist attitudes in this respect has been focused on at a fair length regarding the positive thinking as appeared in Buddhism by providing a considerable number of instances and evidence which seem to be a vacuum in most of the present-day reading material found in this field of study. This paper also deals with particular suttās in Sutta Piṭaka which can be applied to enhance the positive mental skills of the people in the current society. It moreover discusses the relationship between the human mind and positive thinking by interpreting Buddhist teachings in depth. The paper concludes by exposing the adoptable approach aiming at the enhancement of positive thinking as an essential prerequisite to being grasped and used to reach an individual’s mental happiness, social peace & harmony as well as explaining how to achieve the final goal of Buddhism the emancipation; Nibbāna by way of positive approach.

Copyright of Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (FLSF) is the property of Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (FLSF) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

According to modern science and technology, all components of the world are subject to calculation and mastering for the sake of human utility. Reality in itself, investigated and used in this way, does not set any principled moral-normative limits to human intervention, it is not a field of appearance of the sacred or the divine, a revelation of a more profound, metaphysical, i.e., “ultimate” truth. Under these conditions, religious experiences require a sacrifice of the intellect, and remain difficult to communicate and share and, furthermore, only within the realm of personal interpersonal relationships. A resurgence of religion cannot be ruled out, but it would require the emergence of new prophets and saviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Fotocinema is the property of Revista Fotocinema and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Con toda probabilidad Juan Andrés es el autor del dieciocho español que, con mayor lucidez y perspicacia, se propuso hilvanar un proyecto cultural de carácter universal, al trazar un sentido completo y totalizador de las letras, las artes y la ciencia, en una aproximación multidisciplinaria que apoyaba en la concepción unitaria del saber. Las amplias páginas que el ilustre alicantino dedicó en sus Cartas familiares a los saberes científicos del gran ducado de Toscana, y a los lugares en lo que estos se organizan, promueven y difunden, son bien significativas de su concepción del progreso y de su innegable preocupación hacia el avance de las ciencias modernas. Al mismo tiempo, el texto revela el manifiesto interés que siempre exhibió hacia los modelos de promoción y mecenazgo —públicos y privados— más eficaces, orientados a fomentar y difundir los adelantamientos culturales y científicos, desde una posición ecléctica. Andrés establece una jerarquización de los lugares que promueven, organizan, custodian y difunden los saberes y sus avances (en especial museos, academias y bibliotecas), atendiendo a la posibilidad de que dichos espacios puedan articular un circuito de promoción científica y cultural más incisivo y eficiente, apoyados en la ejemplaridad que le proporcionan los modelos dignos de ser emulados por las élites ilustradas y la nobleza de España.

Today, academic research in the human and social sciences is dominated by analytical, objectivistic methods that push an aesthetic understanding and interpretation of the world beyond the ranks of science. This not only deprives the modern project of a humanistic kind of knowledge. The individualistic career model that is sanctified by the contemporary scientific ideal of detachment also thwarts the collective modern dream of progress. However, this article argues that aesthetic thinking and dreaming of a better future are substantial parts of the original modern project, as we see in the early modern thinking of Descartes and Bacon. This article wants to revalue aesthesis as an essential part of knowledge and pleas, in line with Nietzsche, for a sensibly audacious science.

The deprivation of knowledge from the bond of true belief will destroy and ruin human life and nature. This has been demonstrated in the Western scientifi c and technological civilisations that dominate the world today. Western scientifi c civilisation today is the product of scientists who have no real faith in the Creator of the universe. Nevertheless, there are efforts among Western scientists who have awareness in this modern era, who began to take steps to restore the agenda of Science and Technology within the framework of religious beliefs. This literature-based study discovers many negative effects resulting from the absence of true theology in understanding Science and Technology, which is based on a secular understanding. Apart from that, this article also reveals the nature and appearance of Science and Technology that are fi rmly embroidered with natural theology leading to universal well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extended AbstractThis study compares the views of Walter Stace and Molla Sadra on the meaningfulness of life. Stace believes that the beginning of the problem of the meaning of life occurred when the scholars of the 17th century onward turned away from something called ultimate causes. The destruction of the world’s purposefulness and the telescoping of its phenomena after Galileo is a key event in the history and culture of the West to end the supremacy of religion in Western culture. The removal of the final cause in the history of Western thought has caused changes in scientific and philosophical debates, and this issue, in turn, caused a change in the attitude of man to the discussion of God as a creator and eternal power. As a result, the main issue of man, that is, the discussion about the meaning of life changed accordingly. This has become the main reason for the marginalization of God's divinity and the replacement of human powers, the final result of which has been the dominance of nihilistic approaches. After that, the conquest of secularization and anti-religion challenged the issue of the meaning of life of the new man, and after that, man sees God not as the source of meaning, but as an obstacle to the way of life.Therefore, he relies on his awareness and will and thinks of himself as the creator of the meaning of life. For this reason, the discussion of discovering and searching for the meaning of life has been changed in the past and replaced by meaning-creating approaches and talk of falsifying meaning. The issue of whether man is the builder and creator of the meaning of his life or acquires it from an external factor has become a big challenge for modern mankind. The modern man, due to various reasons such as scientific and philosophical advances, the weakness of religious authorities (Jewish and Christian) in responding to his intellectual and practical needs, the inappropriate behavior of the church towards people of thought and the growing growth of capitalism and consumerism, has suffered a crisis of servitude and unbridled freedom. Absurdity and meaninglessness followed by sadness, anxiety, and despair in individual life, on the one hand, and insecurity and injustice in social and global life, on the other hand, have been the inevitable consequences of self-centered servitude and libertarianism. In the meantime, what is neglected is the essential and natural structure of humans. The new man denied his nature (Fetrat) in order to achieve the freedom of self-foundation in thought and action by turning his back on his tradition.Molla Sadra, an accomplished philosopher and the founder of the philosophical system of transcendental wisdom, believes that life in itself does not have intrinsic value, and worldly life is merely a place to reach human perfection and happiness, which is nearness and annihilation in God. As a result, it has no intrinsic usefulness except in terms of the position of being connected and close to God, through which the possibility of transformation and evolution becomes possible. In his opinion, the meaning of life is completely tied to its purpose, and this purpose is objective and real and not fake or subjective at all. Proximity and annihilation in the name of God are considered the ultimate goal in evolutionary and revolutionary processes by passing through the four journeys from man to God.In his opinion, life has a deep interior in addition to its outer shell, which is considered the goal and perfection of human life based on its philosophical rules and foundations such as essential movement, rational and rational unity, and the reference and return of the universe to the essence of the true meaning of life in the three concepts of purpose, value, and function, and to achieve celibacy in its various types without limits. From his point of view, life and living have degrees of Tashkik. In this regard, Molla Sadra speaks of a good life with the words of revelation and finds it in an existential relationship with human knowledge in such a way that the more certainty and development of man is, the more his life will be. According to its strength and stability, it becomes more meaningful. In his opinion, man is the highest of creations, and his creation is not empty and aimless, and human nature (Fetrat) is deeply and intrinsically tied to God-seeking, and materialism and skepticism have no way in his philosophical system. Empirical science is also a product of man's distance from his original nature, lack of capacity, and stopping at the lowest levels of human reason.

Engineering science in the China of 1901-40 had unique characteristics that disrupt the idea of a universal approach to its history.1 The following case study describes the ideas and trials of introducing bamboo into the seemingly globalised technology of reinforced concrete—an innovation developed across the borders of mechanical, naval, civil, and aeronautical engineering. The article showcases a way of knowing and working by twentieth century engineers that has not been fully acknowledged, and is not only a phenomenon of China. While bamboo was a complicated and somewhat marginal object for engineering, it did make the European concrete technology more viable in the construction sites of China, and stimulate engineers’ experimental and resourceful spirit in mobilising both craft and scientific knowledge. It also opened up a challenge to engineering science of the time.

Kudret konusu, İslâm kelâmında kader tartışmalarının temelini oluşturan insan fiilleri bağlamında ele alınmış ve tarihsel süreçte birçok yönüyle tartışılmıştır. Bu bağlamda kudretin mahalli de üzerinde durulan önemli konuların başında yer alır. Kudretin mahallinin olup olmadığı, varsa, neresi olduğu ile ilgili tartışmalarda Mu‘tezile, Eş‘arîlik ve Mâtürîdîlik ekolleri farklı görüşler ortaya koymuşlardır. Mu‘tezile âlimlerinin, kudretin mahalli olduğu ve bu mahallin beden olduğu hususunda ittifak ettikleri görülür. Ancak kudretin mahallinin bedendeki yeri ve cinsi konusunda farklı yaklaşımlar sergilerler. Bazı âlimler, organlarda bulunan kudretin aynı cins olduğunu savunurken bazıları da bu kudretin farklı cins olduğunu düşünmüşlerdir. Eş‘arîlik ve Mâtürîdîlik ekolleri ise kudretin mahallinin olmadığını kabul etmiş ve kudretin fiile etki edeceği esnada Allah tarafından yaratıldığını vurgular. Kelâm ekollerinin bu görüşleri günümüz anatomi biliminden elde edilen bulgular çerçevesinde ele alındığında; Mu‘tezile’nin kudretin mahallinin beden olduğu ve tek bir yerden organları etkileyerek fiili meydana getirdiği görüşünün günümüz bilimiyle paralellik arz ettiği görülür. Çünkü kelâm âlimlerinin kudret olarak tanımladıkları mâna, günümüz anatomi bilimi çerçevesinde ele alındığında, kasları harekete geçiren elektriksel aktivite (uyartı) olarak kabul edilmiştir. Bilimsel olarak hareketin meydana gelmesi için ilk önce beyinde oluşan ve motor sinirler aracılığıyla kaslara iletilen elektriksel aktivitenin olması gerekir. Şayet beyindeki elektriksel aktivite olmazsa insanın hareket sistemini oluşturan, kaslar ve enerji aktif olmayacak böylece hareket gerçekleşmeyecektir. Mu’tezile âlimlerinden bazılarının kudretin organlarda olduğuna yönelik düşüncelerinin de bilimsel bir karşılık bulmadığı söylenebilir. Kudretin aynı cins mi yoksa farklı cins mi olduğu konusunda yapılan tartışmalarda ise aynı cins olduğunu savunan âlimlerin görüşlerinin isabetli olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Çünkü kudret olarak kabul ettiğimiz elektriksel aktivite, beyindeki oluşum sürecinden sonra organlara yayılır. Dolayısıyla organları harekete geçiren kudretin aynı cins olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Ancak Mu’tezilî âlimlerin kudretin mahallinde sürekli bulunduğuna dair ortaya koymuş oldukları görüşün günümüz bilimsel verileriyle uyumluluk arz etmediği görülmüştür. Eş‘arîlik ve Mâtürîdîlik ekollerinin kudretin sürekli mahalli olmadığına dair ortaya koymuş oldukları görüşlerinin günümüzde beyin aktiviteleri üzerinde yapılan deneylerle uyumlu olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Çünkü insan edimi oluşacağı esnada bu edimi meydana getiren elektriksel aktivitenin fiilden önce ve insanın iradesi dışında beyinde ortaya çıktığı, yapılan bazı deneysel çalışmalarla belirlenmiştir. Eş‘arî ve Mâtürîdî tartışma âlimlerinin kudretin sürekli olarak bedende bulunmadığı ve her defasında Allah tarafından yaratıldığı görüşü elektriksel aktivite olarak tanımladığımız kudretin yaratılışı ile uyumluluk arz ettiği söylenebilir.

In the early 1930s, when the project of scientific modernization was in full swing in Chinese Buddhist circles, Dharma Master Taixu wrote a series of essays on “Realism” (Xianshi zhuyi 現實主義, 1928–1931). These represent one of the profoundest series of writings documenting his understanding of the link between science and Buddhist epistemology/ontology, and consequently also on the role of his notion of scientific Buddhism for modern times. Aside from his meditations on the relationship between science and Buddhism, in this important series of essays Taixu also provided his more or less critical accounts on modern philosophical currents in contemporary China, including Russell’s “New Realism” and materialism. This paper aims to provide a concise reading of the above-mentioned writings by Taixu, in order to cast some new light on the understanding of Western modern philosophy in Chinese Buddhist modernism of the Republican Era, on the one hand, and to highlight the main theoretical features of Taixu’s notion of scientific Buddhism, on the other. Aside from that, I also aim to present some new insights into the otherwise overlooked aspects of the broader intellectual sphere of Chinese Buddhism of the Republican Era. As regards the broader historical and intellectual context of Taixu’s writings, the analysis provided in this article will be regarded within the framework constructed in my forthcoming article on Taixu’s philosophy in the journal Buddhist Studies Review.

The conventional portrait of Thomas Hobbes that emerged in twentieth century histories of philosophy is that of the quintessential mechanical philosopher, who openly broke with philosophical tradition (together with René Descartes). Hobbes's scholars depicted a more correct and detailed panorama, by analyzing Hobbes's debt towards Aristotelian and Renaissance traditions, as well as the problematic nature of the epistemological status that Hobbes attributes to natural philosophy. However, Hobbes's connection to modern Galilean science remains problematic. How and in what way did Hobbes take inspiration from Galileo? In this article, I analyze Hobbes's natural philosophy by addressing three topics: (1) his connection with some aspects of seventeenth-century Aristotelianism; (2) differences and analogies between Hobbes's and Galileo's epistemological approaches; and (3) the Galilean foundation of Hobbes's philosophy. Through this analysis I want to show in which sense Hobbes can be properly defined a "Galilean philosopher". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This introduction to the issue of Interdisciplinary Science Reviews outlines the rules of the game on which all contributors agreed. Thirteen scholars have responded to a root essay written by Reviel Netz, under the title 'The Place of Archimedes in World History.' The introduction outlines the main lines of the arguments they put forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (FLSF) is the property of Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (FLSF) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The modern times we live in are characterized by the confluence of multiple crises cultural, ecological and political-- which break the relationship between nature and culture, between individual and community, and extinguish the real and potential spaces for deliberation, participation and emancipation of people. The aim of this essay is to analyze how these crises are expressed in our academic endeavors and to propose, through collective reflection, emancipatory practices in the three main activities in Argentinian academia: scientific publications, university lecturing, and science communication. Emancipation is a way of becoming aware of the power of the oppressive mechanisms and recognizing the forms of domination to which we are exposed. Emancipatory practices comprise the transfer of the ideals of solidarity, justice, and democratic participation in decision-making and self-determination of the political and economic aspects of everyday life. We used a database derived from an anonymous and online survey answered by 684 people from the agricultural, biological, and environmental science disciplines of Argentina during 2018-2019. We analyzed the comments, which were free-form and optional, with the qualitative program MAXQDA. The 195 comments received were related to feelings of frustration, anguish, and hopelessness associated with the labor environment and academic career activities. We linked these comments with the time it takes to publish manuscripts and the academic multitasking required by the system; cooperation among colleagues could alleviate these feelings. Throughout this essay, we discuss and reflect on these feelings in order to propose, through five concrete experiences, examples of emancipatory practices that can be replicated and adapted to our workspaces. These proposals are only a first step in rethinking our tasks and decisions as researchers and promoting ways of knowing and practicing ecology in a more creative, reflective, and inclusive ways to contribute to our emancipation and also to a more just world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ars & Humanitas is the property of Ars & Humanitas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The purpose of the research is to study the influence of methodological pluralism as a meta-approach on the formation of modern historical science; to examine the role that diverse approaches played in the scientific study of the past; to demonstrate the importance of a multi-vector view of history as an integral part of the study of the past. The relevance of the research: these are interdisciplinary interactions between both socio-humanitarian and natural sciences. The consequence of this is the emergence of the phenomenon of methodological pluralism as the basis of modern historical science. Conclusions: in the process of research we discovered that diverse methodological approaches influence the historical science, which ultimately leads to the emergence of the new directions in historical knowledge. Research methods: analytical and synthetic, inductive and deductive, comparative approach. The novelty of the article lies in the analysis of the potential of methodological pluralism in the discourse of post-classical historical science. The productivity of using modern interdisciplinary approaches in the study of processes that have taken place in the past is substantiated.

One of the topics of modern theology in the field of theological studies is to explain the relationship between science and religion from the perspective of thinkers and researchers. Researchers in this field have different perspectives to express the relationship between science and religion in a way that includes conflict, differentiation, interaction and adaptation. The relationship between science and religion can be examined from different angles, so what is more important It examines the "relationship between religion and science" from an epistemological perspective. In this study, exploring epistemological factors means the tools and cognitive resources of the products of science and religion. This research, which is descriptive-analytical and library method, has analyzed the data after collecting documents. Discussion about the sources and tools of cognition in the two fields of science and religion, shows that based on the different epistemological foundations that we see in these two approaches, both in the definition of tools and sources of cognition and in the amount of knowledge and realism of sources there is a difference. While the scientific approach is based on the denial of abstract beings. Therefore, on the subject of the relationship between science and religion, it is appropriate to extend the discussion of the analysis of tools and resources to the discussion of "epistemological foundations" While analyzing the ontological foundations of both, the fate of many scientific controversies will be clarified in more depth. In that case, the commonalities and differences between science and religion become clear.

Copyright of Journal of Strategic & Social Research is the property of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Social Science Institute and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The study addresses the problems of modern Russian science and the role and place of young scientists in it. The data characterizing the current state of science and young scientific personnel are presented. The life strategies formed among young researchers are examined. The causes of “migration waves” are investigated. The prospects of the transformation of the Moscow agglomeration into an effective center of advanced development are assessed. The article provides practical recommendations for resolving the situation currently observed in Russian science.

This paper analyzes the correlations between Horkheimer and Adorno’s essay, “The concept of Enlightenment”, and Heidegger’s thinking. Without overlooking the differences that exist between the hermeneutical horizons in which these authors operate, the paper focuses on the points of convergence of their respective positions with regard to the interpretation of essential aspects of twentieth-century reality and its storied past. These include the shaping of modern science, its key role in the ontological constitution of reality as a calculable and producible entity, and the forms of domination that it generates through technique. Finally, it is suggested that this convergence is due to the common influence of Marx’s work. This is evident in the case of Horkheimer and Adorno’s work, but is also recognizable in Heidegger’s legacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Anales del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofía is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The issue of power has been addressed as part of human actions, which form the basis of the discussions of destiny in Islamic theology. Various schools of kalām have extensively discussed the issue of power throughout history. The locus of power is also one of the critical concerns that have been emphasized within these discussions. The schools of the Mu'tazila, al-Ashʿarī and al-Māturīdī have put forward different perspectives on whether the locus of power exists or not and where it exists if it does so. Mutazilites are known to be in agreement with the view that te human body is the substrate of power. On the other hand, However, they hold different views, not only on the exact locus of power in the body but also on its type. While some argue that the locus of power in the body is the organs, others claim that it is not the organs. The schools of al-Ashʿarī and al-Māturīdī accept that there is no locus for power and emphasize that power is created by Allah the moment it would initiate action. When these views of the kalām schools are considered within the framework of the data from the modern science of anatomy, it is seen that what modern science has to say on this issue concurs well with the Mu'tazilite view that the locus of power is the body and that it creates the action by managing the organs from a single center. This is because, when considered from the lens of anatomy, what is meant by the schools of kalām with "power" is electrical activity (stimulus) that activates the muscles. Therefore, scientifically considered, for any movement to occur, an electrical activity must first begin in the brain and be transmitted to the muscles via motor nerves. If there were no electrical activity in the brain, the muscles and energy that make up the human movement system would not be active, so movement would hardly take locus. Therefore, the claim made some of the Mu'tazili scholars that the power is in the organs is scientifically not valid. As for the debates on whether the power in different organs is the same or different in terms of its type, the views of the scholars who argue that they are the same genus are apparently correct. This is because the electrical activity, which we accept as power, spreads to the organs after it is formed in the brain. This implies that the power which activates the organs is of the same type. However, it can be said that Mu'tazila's idea of the constant presence of power in its locus conflicts with modern scientific data. The views of al-Ash'arite and al-Maturidite schools that power is free from being in a constant location are compatible with the findings of recent experiments on brain activities. That is, some experimental studies have indicated that the electrical activity that creates an act occurs in the brain before the act itself and outside the will of the human. In brief, the view of Ash'arite and Maturidite scholars that power is not constantly present in the body and that it is created by Allah each time it is needed is compatible with the creation of power, which we define as electrical activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]