English Title: "Geographical Uncertainties: Four Theses on Russia, Europe and Asia"
Traditionally accepted explanations of the question of whether Russia belongs to Europe or Asia include: Russia is a European country; Russia is different from Asia; Russia is a Eurasian country. Each of these views contains some truth, but all of then need to be further refined. The following theses will contribute to further understanding of the Russia’s belonging to Europe or Asia: 1) Russia is not only a European country, but is also a European empire. 2) Radical advocates of Eurasian doctrine do not oppose European nature of Russia, but speak against the view that Russia is an empire. 3) The advocates of Eurasian doctrine claim thatRussia is a part of Eurasia and not Asia. Advocates of Eurasian doctrine see Eurasia as a civilization completely different from either Europe or Asia. 4) The advocates of Eurasian doctrine view Russia — Eurasia as a potential colony, and Russia's mission is to be an anti-colonial leader.
Hannah Arendt (1906−1975) framstår som en av det förra seklets mest egensinniga och inspirerande tänkare. Till hennes mer betydande bidrag till den politiska teorin hör hennes analys av totalitarismens ursprung och hennes kritik av en intellektuell tradition som varit ointresserad av att på allvar reflektera över politiska händelser och de-ras ofta oförutsedda filosofiska och mänskliga betydelse. Om det finns en övergripande problematik som utmärker hennes tänkande handlar den om att återvinna och ge utrymme åt en erfarenhet av politik som hotar att uppslukas av den moderna statens ekonomiska och sociala orga-nisering av samhället. Ett annat återkommande tema är den spänningsfyllda relationen mellan politik och filosofi, mellan handlande och tänkande. De bidrag som samlats i den här boken kretsar på olika sätt kring Arendts syn på tänkandet, handlandet och det politiska. Hennes politiska ideal fungerar som en tanke-väckande motbild till dagens utslätade politiska debatt. Och det är kanske just därför som det är så stimulerande att läsa denna fria tänkare; Selbstdenker som det heter på tyska. Som läsare bjuds man in till att själv tänka vidare utifrån det Arendt tänkt.
By what criteria can an empathetic interpreter justify the inference from the fact that, when simulating another person, he himself forms such-and-such intentions to act in the imagined situation, to the supposed fact that the person simulated formed or will form the same intentions? It is suggested that the interpreter determines this by normatively assessing the reasons for and against the action, simply following his own subjective or perspective-dependent criteria for what is reasonable to believe, desire, and do in the given situation. If the interpreter finds the other's action to be well-motivated, this is indication that the interpreter shares the perspective of the other, and hence that the explanation is valid. In Hans-Georg Gadamer's words: understanding is, primarily, agreement. A possible objection is that this turns interpretation into something purely subjective and relative. It is argued that the relativity involved is harmless and does not imply relativism in any important sense
Recent theories of critical thinking have stressed the importance of taking into consideration in critical enquiry the perspectives, or presuppositions, of both the speaker whose statements are under scrutiny and the critic himself. The purpose of the paper is to explore this idea from an epistemological (rather than a pedagogical or psychological) point of view. The problem is first placed within the general context of critical thinking theory. Three types of perspective-dependence are then described, and the consequences of each for the possibility of critical discussion discussed. It is concluded that although it is essential in critical discussion to take the other’s perspective into consideration, perspective-dependence does not exclude the possibility of criticism
With his theory of sympathy in the Treatise of Human Nature, Hume has been interpreted as anticipating later hermeneutic theories of understanding. It is argued in the present article that Hume has good reasons to consider a hermeneutic theory of empathetic understanding, that such a theory avoids a serious difficulty in Hume's "official," positivist theory of sympathy, that it is compatible with the complex and subtle form of positivism, or naturalism, developed in Book 1 of the Treatise, and that his analysis of sympathy provides valuable methodological rules for empathetic interpreters. Against the interpretation of James Farr in "Hume, Hermeneutics, and History," it is maintained that Hume's theory does not support a hermeneutics of non-empathetic Verstehen
The relationship between energy systems, on the one hand, and narratives and practices of identity building at different scales, on the other, has received little attention in the mainstream human geography and social science literature. There is still a paucity of integrated theoretical insights into the manner in which energy formations are implicated in the rise of particular cultural self-determinations, even though various strands of work on energy and identity are frequently present throughout the wideand rather disparatecorpus of social science energy research. Therefore, this article explores the manner in which the exploitation and management of energy resources is woven into discourses and debates about national identity, international relations, a nation's path of future development, and its significance on the global arena using the case of Russia. We investigate some of the policies, narratives, and discourses that accompany the attempt to represent this country as a global oenergy superpowero in relation to the resurrection of its domestic economy and material prosperity, on the one hand, and the restoration of its global status as a derzhava (or oGreat Powero), on the other. Using ideas initially developed within the field of critical discourse analysis, we pay special attention to the national identity-building role played by geographical imaginations about the country's past and present energy exports to neighboring states. We argue that they have created a hydrocarbon landscape in which the discursive and material have become mutually entangled to create an infrastructurally grounded vision of national identity.