Аннотация: This article subjects to analysis the question of whether it is legal to prescribe to sexual shame the status of the moral emotion. This question emerges due to the fact that moral within the framework of prevailing in the modern ethics theoretical paradigm, is being viewed as a combination of values and norms orienting each person to refuse to cause harm to others, help him, and care for him. Sexual shame is not directly connected with this normative content, thus its moral character becomes questioned. The author determines the two approaches that are used to eliminate such doubt. The first is aimed at proving the moral importance of sexual bans, in relation to which sexual shame is a sanction. The second – appeals to the meaning of sexual in order for a moral subject to form and preserve the ability to self-regulation. The subject of this research is the ethical concepts that unite the first and the second arguments; while the direct task consists in the assessment of their theoretical accomplishment. This is how the following historical-ethical sequence emerges: Vladimir Solovyev – Max Scheller – David Velleman. The methodological research is based upon the supposition that using the analysis of anthropological conditions and psychological mechanisms of moral experience, it is possible to attain a number of justified, although auxiliary, arguments in favor of expansion of the boundaries of the normative content of moral beyond the limits of requirements associated with the good of others.

Ключевые слова: M. Scheler, V. S. Solovyev, sexuality, shame, sanctions, emotions, morality, ethics, philosophy, D. Velleman

Библиография:
Zahavi D. Self and Other: Exploring Subjectivity, Empathy, and Shame. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. 295 p
Taylor C. Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989. 601 p.
Strawson P.F. Freedom and Resentment // Strawson P.F. Freedom and Resentment and Other Essays. New York: Routledge, 2008. P. 1—28.
Scheler M. Shame and Feeling of Modesty // Scheler M. Person and Self-Value. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1987. P. 1—85.
Haidt J. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York: Vintage Books, 2013. 528 p.
Emad P. Max Scheler’s Phenomenology of Shame // Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 1972. Vol. 32. №. 3. P. 361—370.
Deigh J. Shame and Self-Esteem: A Critique // Ethics. 1983. Vol. 93. №. 2. P. 225—245.
Deonna J.A., Rodogno R., Teroni F. In Defense of Shame: the Faces of an Emotion. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. 268 p.
Solov'ev V.S. Opravdanie dobra // Solov'ev V.S. Sochineniya v 2 t. T.1. M.: Mysl', 1988. S. 47—580.
Crisp R. Reasons and the Good. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. 178 p.
Dahm H. Vladimir Solovyev and Max Scheler: Attempt at a Comparative Interpretation: A Contribution to the History of Phenomenology. Dordrecht: D.Riedel Publishing Company, 1972. 326 p.
Solov'ev V.S. Mnimaya kritika // Voprosy filosofii i psikhologii. 1897. Kn. 4 (39). S. 645—694.
Apresyan R.G. Mozhno li dat' opredelenie morali? // Moral'. Raznoobrazie ponyatiy i smyslov: K 75-letiyu A.A. Guseynova. M.: Al'fa-M, 2014. S. 35—63.
Mill' Dzh.S. O svobode // O svobode: Antologiya zapadno-evropeyskoy klassicheskoy liberal'noy mysli. M.: Nauka, 1995. S. 288—392.
Blazhennyy Avgustin. O Grade Bozhiem. Knigi XIV-XXII // Blazhennyy Avgustin. Tvoreniya v 4 t. T.4. SPb.: Aleteyya; Kiev: UTsIMM-Press, 1998. 589 s.
Velleman D.J. The Genesis of Shame // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2001. Vol. 30. № 1. P. 27—52.

References (transliteration):
Zahavi D. Self and Other: Exploring Subjectivity, Empathy, and Shame. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. 295 p
Taylor C. Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989. 601 p.
Strawson P.F. Freedom and Resentment // Strawson P.F. Freedom and Resentment and Other Essays. New York: Routledge, 2008. P. 1—28.
Scheler M. Shame and Feeling of Modesty // Scheler M. Person and Self-Value. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1987. P. 1—85.
Haidt J. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York: Vintage Books, 2013. 528 p.
Emad P. Max Scheler’s Phenomenology of Shame // Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 1972. Vol. 32. №. 3. P. 361—370.
Deigh J. Shame and Self-Esteem: A Critique // Ethics. 1983. Vol. 93. №. 2. P. 225—245.
Deonna J.A., Rodogno R., Teroni F. In Defense of Shame: the Faces of an Emotion. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. 268 p.
Solov'ev V.S. Opravdanie dobra // Solov'ev V.S. Sochineniya v 2 t. T.1. M.: Mysl', 1988. S. 47—580.
Crisp R. Reasons and the Good. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. 178 p.
Dahm H. Vladimir Solovyev and Max Scheler: Attempt at a Comparative Interpretation: A Contribution to the History of Phenomenology. Dordrecht: D.Riedel Publishing Company, 1972. 326 p.
Solov'ev V.S. Mnimaya kritika // Voprosy filosofii i psikhologii. 1897. Kn. 4 (39). S. 645—694.
Apresyan R.G. Mozhno li dat' opredelenie morali? // Moral'. Raznoobrazie ponyatiy i smyslov: K 75-letiyu A.A. Guseynova. M.: Al'fa-M, 2014. S. 35—63.
Mill' Dzh.S. O svobode // O svobode: Antologiya zapadno-evropeyskoy klassicheskoy liberal'noy mysli. M.: Nauka, 1995. S. 288—392.
Blazhennyy Avgustin. O Grade Bozhiem. Knigi XIV-XXII // Blazhennyy Avgustin. Tvoreniya v 4 t. T.4. SPb.: Aleteyya; Kiev: UTsIMM-Press, 1998. 589 s.
Velleman D.J. The Genesis of Shame // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2001. Vol. 30. № 1. P. 27—52.

Аннотация: The object of the research is the development history of the terms of European moral philosophy. The subject of the research is the transformation of ethical terms in the XVIIth century which started the process of formation of a modern definition of 'morals' and assimilation of traditional concepts and semantics of moral philosophy. In his research Sochilin examines theoretical, textological, historical-philosophical and institutional contexts of this process. He also describes the origin and historical dynamics of such terms as 'morals', 'ethics', 'moralitas', 'moralia', 'jus naturale', 'lex naturalis', 'honestum', 'honestas' and 'rectitudo'. The research methods include linguistic and general humanities methods such as analysis of the semantic extension of the aforesaid terms, their morphemic analysis and contextual analysis. The researcher relates these terminological transformations to conceptual changes in European moral philosophy. As a result of the research, the author clarifies etymology of the terms 'morals' and 'ethics' and compares them to their Latin and Greek originals. The author explicates similarities and differences in their origin, concludes that the term 'moralitas' has a crucial importance for the formation of today's definition of morals and describes the theoretical grounds thereto. He defines the two interdependent philosophical traditions the aforesaid process was part of (natural law tradition and Thomist tradition with primary Aristotelian ethic terminology) and outlines the scope of texts of the XVIIth century the process could be seen in. The author has also summarized historical dynamics and developed the five-level program for further research. 

Ключевые слова: Latin, ethics, morality, history of concepts, history of moral philosophy, Francisco Suarez, morals, Hugo Grotius, natural law, Samuel Pufendord

Библиография:
Goclenius R. Lexicon philosophicum. Francofurtus: Matthias Beckerus, 1613. 1143 p.
Aegidius de Coninck. De moralitate, natura et effectibus actuum supernaturalium in genere et fidei, spe, ac charitate, speciatim, libri quatuor. Lutetia Parisiorum: Edmundus Martinus, 1624. 597 p.
Cicero. De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum: Libri Quinque / D. Io. Nicolaus Madvigius recensuit et enarravit. Cambridge University Press, 2010. 869 p.
Tsitseron. O predelakh blaga i zla. Paradoksy stoikov / Per. s lat. N.A. Fedorova. M.: Rossiyskiy Gosudarstvennyy Gumanitarnyy universitet, 2000. 474 s.
Du Cange et al. Glossarium mediæ et infimæ latinitatis. 10 Voll. Vol. 5. Niort: L. Favre, 1885. 659 p.
Leibniz G. W. Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe / Ed. Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Series six, vol. 1. Darmstadt: Otto Reichl Verlag, 1930. 593 p.
Irwin T. The Development of Ethics. Volume 2: From Suarez to Rousseau. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 936 p.
Suarez F. A Treatise on Laws and God the Lawgiver // Selections from Three Works of Francisco Suárez, S.J / The translations, prepared by Gwladys L. Williams, Ammi Brown and John Waldron, with revisions by Henry Davis. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1944. P. 3–646.
Suarez F. De legibus, ac deo legislatore. Moguntia: Mylius Birckmannus, 1619. 725 p.
Grotsiy G. O prave voyny i mira / Per. s lat. A.L. Sakketti. M.: Ladomir, 1994. 868 s.
Aristotel'. Sobr. soch. v 4 t. T.4. M.: Mysl', 1983. 830 s.
Groot H. De iure belli ac pacis / Ed. B.J.A. de Kanter-van Hettinga Tromp. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1939. 1046 p.
Aristotelis Ethica Nicomachea / Ed. by Ingram Bywater. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 280 p.
Foma Akvinskiy. Summa teologii / Per. s lat. A. V. Appolonova. T. 3. M.: Signum Veritatis, 2008. 752 s.
Suarez F. De bonitate et malitia humanorum actuum // Suarez F. Tractatus quinque theologici ad primam secundae D. Thomae. Lugdunum: Iacobus Cardon, 1628. P. 199–327.
Deferrari R.J., Barry, Sister M. Inviolala and McGuiness I. A Lexicon of St. Thomas Aquinas, based on The Summa Theologica and Selected Passages of His Other Works. Catholic University of America Press, 1948. 1185 p.
Borovskoy Ya.M., Boldyrev A.V. Uchebnik latinskogo yazyka dlya gumanitarnykh fakul'tetov universitetov. M.: Vysshaya shkola, 1975. 479 s.
Glare P.G.W. Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968. 2126 p.
Klein E. Klein’s Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the English Language. Elsevier Publishing Company, 1971. 844 p.
Chernykh P.Ya. Istoriko-etimologicheskiy slovar' sovremennogo russkogo yazyka. V 2 tomakh. T.2. M.: Russkiy yazyk, 1999. 560 c.
Aristotle: Posterior Analytics. Topica. London: William Heinemann Ltd, 1960. 755 p.
Aristotel'. Sobr. soch. v 4 t. T.4. M.: Mysl', 1978. 687 s.
Slavyatinskaya M. N. Uchebnik drevnegrecheskogo yazyka. M.: Filomatis, 2003. 620 s.
Sobolevskiy S.I. Grammatika latinskogo yazyka. Teoreticheskaya chast': Morfologiya i sintaksis. SPb.: Universitetskaya kniga, 2009. 432c.
Oxford Dictionary of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 2110 p.
Vdovina G.V. «Moral'noe bytie» i lingvisticheskie znaki v postsrednevekovoy skholastike // Voprosy filosofii. № 12. 2008. C. 130–141.
Chernykh P.Ya. Istoriko-etimologicheskiy slovar' sovremennogo russkogo yazyka. V 2 tomakh. T.1. M.: Russkiy yazyk, 1999. 624 c.
Guseynov A.A. Etika // Etika: entsiklopedicheskiy slovar' / Pod redaktsiey R.G. Apresyana i A.A. Guseynova. M.: Gardariki, 2001. S. 573–581.
MacIntyre A. After Virtue: a Study in Moral Theory. 2nd ed. Notre Dame (Indiana): Notre Dame University Press, 1984. 286 p.
Apresyan R.G. Ot «druzhby» i «lyubvi» – k «morali»: ob odnom syuzhete v istorii idey // Eticheskaya mysl'. Vyp. 1 / Pod red. A.A. Guseynova. M.: IFRAN, 2000. S. 182–194.
Artem'eva O.V. Formirovanie eticheskogo yazyka (na materiale novoevropeyskoy etiki) // Filosofskiy zhurnal. № 2 (5). M.: IF RAN, 2010. S. 111–121.
Korzo M. A. Pedagogicheskaya sistema iezuitov // Istoriya obrazovaniya i pedagogicheskoy mysli v epokhu Drevnosti, Srednevekov'ya i Vozrozhdeniya / Pod red. T.N.Matulisa. M.: Izd-vo Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov, 2004. S. 469–532.
Hochstrasser T. J. Natural Law Theories in the Early Enlightenment: Contexts and Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 246 p.
Pufendorfus S. Specimen controversarium circa jus naturale ipsi nuper motarum. Osnabrugus: Johann Georgius Schwanderus, 1678. 270 p.
Schneewind J. B. The Invention of Autonomy: A History of Modern Moral Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. 652 p.
Darwall S. Grotius and the Creation of Modern Moral Philosophy // Darwall S. Honor, History, and Relationship: Essays in Second-Personal Ethics II. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. P. 156–188

References (transliteration):
Goclenius R. Lexicon philosophicum. Francofurtus: Matthias Beckerus, 1613. 1143 p.
Aegidius de Coninck. De moralitate, natura et effectibus actuum supernaturalium in genere et fidei, spe, ac charitate, speciatim, libri quatuor. Lutetia Parisiorum: Edmundus Martinus, 1624. 597 p.
Cicero. De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum: Libri Quinque / D. Io. Nicolaus Madvigius recensuit et enarravit. Cambridge University Press, 2010. 869 p.
Tsitseron. O predelakh blaga i zla. Paradoksy stoikov / Per. s lat. N.A. Fedorova. M.: Rossiyskiy Gosudarstvennyy Gumanitarnyy universitet, 2000. 474 s.
Du Cange et al. Glossarium mediæ et infimæ latinitatis. 10 Voll. Vol. 5. Niort: L. Favre, 1885. 659 p.
Leibniz G. W. Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe / Ed. Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Series six, vol. 1. Darmstadt: Otto Reichl Verlag, 1930. 593 p.
Irwin T. The Development of Ethics. Volume 2: From Suarez to Rousseau. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 936 p.
Suarez F. A Treatise on Laws and God the Lawgiver // Selections from Three Works of Francisco Suárez, S.J / The translations, prepared by Gwladys L. Williams, Ammi Brown and John Waldron, with revisions by Henry Davis. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1944. P. 3–646.
Suarez F. De legibus, ac deo legislatore. Moguntia: Mylius Birckmannus, 1619. 725 p.
Grotsiy G. O prave voyny i mira / Per. s lat. A.L. Sakketti. M.: Ladomir, 1994. 868 s.
Aristotel'. Sobr. soch. v 4 t. T.4. M.: Mysl', 1983. 830 s.
Groot H. De iure belli ac pacis / Ed. B.J.A. de Kanter-van Hettinga Tromp. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1939. 1046 p.
Aristotelis Ethica Nicomachea / Ed. by Ingram Bywater. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 280 p.
Foma Akvinskiy. Summa teologii / Per. s lat. A. V. Appolonova. T. 3. M.: Signum Veritatis, 2008. 752 s.
Suarez F. De bonitate et malitia humanorum actuum // Suarez F. Tractatus quinque theologici ad primam secundae D. Thomae. Lugdunum: Iacobus Cardon, 1628. P. 199–327.
Deferrari R.J., Barry, Sister M. Inviolala and McGuiness I. A Lexicon of St. Thomas Aquinas, based on The Summa Theologica and Selected Passages of His Other Works. Catholic University of America Press, 1948. 1185 p.
Borovskoy Ya.M., Boldyrev A.V. Uchebnik latinskogo yazyka dlya gumanitarnykh fakul'tetov universitetov. M.: Vysshaya shkola, 1975. 479 s.
Glare P.G.W. Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968. 2126 p.
Klein E. Klein’s Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the English Language. Elsevier Publishing Company, 1971. 844 p.
Chernykh P.Ya. Istoriko-etimologicheskiy slovar' sovremennogo russkogo yazyka. V 2 tomakh. T.2. M.: Russkiy yazyk, 1999. 560 c.
Aristotle: Posterior Analytics. Topica. London: William Heinemann Ltd, 1960. 755 p.
Aristotel'. Sobr. soch. v 4 t. T.4. M.: Mysl', 1978. 687 s.
Slavyatinskaya M. N. Uchebnik drevnegrecheskogo yazyka. M.: Filomatis, 2003. 620 s.
Sobolevskiy S.I. Grammatika latinskogo yazyka. Teoreticheskaya chast': Morfologiya i sintaksis. SPb.: Universitetskaya kniga, 2009. 432c.
Oxford Dictionary of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 2110 p.
Vdovina G.V. «Moral'noe bytie» i lingvisticheskie znaki v postsrednevekovoy skholastike // Voprosy filosofii. № 12. 2008. C. 130–141.
Chernykh P.Ya. Istoriko-etimologicheskiy slovar' sovremennogo russkogo yazyka. V 2 tomakh. T.1. M.: Russkiy yazyk, 1999. 624 c.
Guseynov A.A. Etika // Etika: entsiklopedicheskiy slovar' / Pod redaktsiey R.G. Apresyana i A.A. Guseynova. M.: Gardariki, 2001. S. 573–581.
MacIntyre A. After Virtue: a Study in Moral Theory. 2nd ed. Notre Dame (Indiana): Notre Dame University Press, 1984. 286 p.
Apresyan R.G. Ot «druzhby» i «lyubvi» – k «morali»: ob odnom syuzhete v istorii idey // Eticheskaya mysl'. Vyp. 1 / Pod red. A.A. Guseynova. M.: IFRAN, 2000. S. 182–194.
Artem'eva O.V. Formirovanie eticheskogo yazyka (na materiale novoevropeyskoy etiki) // Filosofskiy zhurnal. № 2 (5). M.: IF RAN, 2010. S. 111–121.
Korzo M. A. Pedagogicheskaya sistema iezuitov // Istoriya obrazovaniya i pedagogicheskoy mysli v epokhu Drevnosti, Srednevekov'ya i Vozrozhdeniya / Pod red. T.N.Matulisa. M.: Izd-vo Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov, 2004. S. 469–532.
Hochstrasser T. J. Natural Law Theories in the Early Enlightenment: Contexts and Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 246 p.
Pufendorfus S. Specimen controversarium circa jus naturale ipsi nuper motarum. Osnabrugus: Johann Georgius Schwanderus, 1678. 270 p.
Schneewind J. B. The Invention of Autonomy: A History of Modern Moral Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. 652 p.
Darwall S. Grotius and the Creation of Modern Moral Philosophy // Darwall S. Honor, History, and Relationship: Essays in Second-Personal Ethics II. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. P. 156–188

Аннотация: The subject of the research is the concept of faith of Lev Shestov and Lev Tolstoy. The object of the research is Lev Tolstoy's religious and moral teaching and Lev Shestov's philosophy. Special attention is paid to the relationship between faith and reason, faith and morals and the difference in the philosophers' views on human's attitude to the absolute beginning of the world. The purpose of the research is to show general 'ethical' orientation of Shestov's and Tolstoy's philosophies and to analyze their subjective attitude to the world that was based on different grounds. The research methodology involves integrated analysis of sources on the research subject. The researcher has also used the method of comparative analysis. The main conclusions of the research are the following: while Shestov viewed faith and reason as mutually exclusive, Tolstoy saw faith as the proof of reason and reason as the 'way' to faith. Shestov also opposed faith to morals while Tolstoy considered fath to be an essential prerequisite for moral behavior. Nevertheless, both Shestov's and Tolstoy's philosophies in fact have the general ethical intention: Shestov views the idea of faith as the reliance of morals not as a result of the 'possible' and the 'must' restrictions but as a result of nondetermined decisions of an absolute subject. Tolstoy related the idea of morals to the highest 'Self' that was viewed as the ideal and attitude to which was created within the space of moral perfection. 

Ключевые слова: faith, morals, reason, subject, world in general, ethics, responsibility, God, good, evil

Библиография:
Tolstoy L.N. O zhizni. Aforizmy i izbrannye mysli L.N. Tolstogo, sobrannye L.P. Nikiforovym. Ispoved'. / L.N. Tolstoy. M.: AST: Astrel', 2011. 380 s.
Guseynov A. A. Razumnaya vera L.N. Tolstogo // Sravnitel'naya filosofiya. Znanie i vera v kontekste dialoga kul'tur. M.: «Vostochnaya literatura» RAN, 2008. S. 288–304.
Tolstoy L.N. Krug chteniya // Lib.ru/Klassika. [Elektronnyy resurs]. Rezhim dostupa: http://az.lib.ru/t/tolstoj_lew_nikolaewich/text_1390.shtml
Tolstoy L.N. Chto takoe religiya i v chem sushchnost' ee? // Lib.ru/Klassika. [Elektronnyy resurs]. Rezhim dostupa: http://az.lib.ru/t/tolstoj_lew_nikolaewich/text_0760-1.shtml
Tolstoy L.N. V chem moya vera? // Tolstovskiy listok. Tolstoy i o Tolstom. Vypusk sed'moy. SPb.: Fond «Za vyzhivanie i razvitie chelovechestva», 1996. 237 s.
Shestov L. Afiny i Ierusalim // Sochineniya v 2-kh tomakh. Tom 1. M., Nauka.1993. 413 s.
Shestov L. Derznoveniya i pokornosti // Soch. v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 151–253.
Shestov L. Nikolay Berdyaev (Gnozis i ekzistentsial'naya filosofiya) // Biblioteka Vekhi. [Elektronnyy resurs]. Rezhim dostupa: http://www.vehi.net/shestov/berdyaev.html
Shestov L. Dobro v uchenii gr. Tolstogo i F. Nitshe (filosofiya i propoved') // Shestov L. Apofeoz bespochvennosti. M.: AST, 2000. S. 207–308.
Bibikhin V.V. Dnevniki L'va Tolstogo. SPb: Ivana Limbakha, 2012.-480 s.
Shestov L. Gefsimanskaya noch' (Filosofiya Paskalya) // Soch. v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 278–325.
Berdyaev N.A. Lev Shestov i Kirkegor // Biblioteka Vekhi. [Elektronnyy resurs]. Rezhim dostupa: http://www.vehi.net/berdyaev/shestov2.html
Evlampiev I.I. Absolyut kak tsarstvo Absurda: L. Shestov // Evlampiev I.I. Istoriya russkoy metafiziki v XIX–XX vv. Russkaya filosofiya v poiskakh Absolyuta. SPb.: Aleteyya, 2000. S. 259–297.
Guseynov A.A. Filosofiya kak eticheskiy proekt // Voprosy filosofii, 2014. №5. S. 16–27.
Ismailov N.O. Politicheskaya filosofiya Makiavelli v svete kontseptsii spravedlivosti // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2014. - 4. - C. 378 - 384. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2014.4.12014.
Mekhed G.N. Moral' kak absolyutnyy predel razuma v etike I. Kanta // Filosofskaya mysl'. - 2014. - 5. - C. 17 - 44. DOI: 10.7256/2409-8728.2014.5.12351. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_12351.html

References (transliteration):
Tolstoy L.N. O zhizni. Aforizmy i izbrannye mysli L.N. Tolstogo, sobrannye L.P. Nikiforovym. Ispoved'. / L.N. Tolstoy. M.: AST: Astrel', 2011. 380 s.
Guseynov A. A. Razumnaya vera L.N. Tolstogo // Sravnitel'naya filosofiya. Znanie i vera v kontekste dialoga kul'tur. M.: «Vostochnaya literatura» RAN, 2008. S. 288–304.
Tolstoy L.N. Krug chteniya // Lib.ru/Klassika. [Elektronnyy resurs]. Rezhim dostupa: http://az.lib.ru/t/tolstoj_lew_nikolaewich/text_1390.shtml
Tolstoy L.N. Chto takoe religiya i v chem sushchnost' ee? // Lib.ru/Klassika. [Elektronnyy resurs]. Rezhim dostupa: http://az.lib.ru/t/tolstoj_lew_nikolaewich/text_0760-1.shtml
Tolstoy L.N. V chem moya vera? // Tolstovskiy listok. Tolstoy i o Tolstom. Vypusk sed'moy. SPb.: Fond «Za vyzhivanie i razvitie chelovechestva», 1996. 237 s.
Shestov L. Afiny i Ierusalim // Sochineniya v 2-kh tomakh. Tom 1. M., Nauka.1993. 413 s.
Shestov L. Derznoveniya i pokornosti // Soch. v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 151–253.
Shestov L. Nikolay Berdyaev (Gnozis i ekzistentsial'naya filosofiya) // Biblioteka Vekhi. [Elektronnyy resurs]. Rezhim dostupa: http://www.vehi.net/shestov/berdyaev.html
Shestov L. Dobro v uchenii gr. Tolstogo i F. Nitshe (filosofiya i propoved') // Shestov L. Apofeoz bespochvennosti. M.: AST, 2000. S. 207–308.
Bibikhin V.V. Dnevniki L'va Tolstogo. SPb: Ivana Limbakha, 2012.-480 s.
Shestov L. Gefsimanskaya noch' (Filosofiya Paskalya) // Soch. v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 278–325.
Berdyaev N.A. Lev Shestov i Kirkegor // Biblioteka Vekhi. [Elektronnyy resurs]. Rezhim dostupa: http://www.vehi.net/berdyaev/shestov2.html
Evlampiev I.I. Absolyut kak tsarstvo Absurda: L. Shestov // Evlampiev I.I. Istoriya russkoy metafiziki v XIX–XX vv. Russkaya filosofiya v poiskakh Absolyuta. SPb.: Aleteyya, 2000. S. 259–297.
Guseynov A.A. Filosofiya kak eticheskiy proekt // Voprosy filosofii, 2014. №5. S. 16–27.
Ismailov N.O. Politicheskaya filosofiya Makiavelli v svete kontseptsii spravedlivosti // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2014. - 4. - C. 378 - 384. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2014.4.12014.
Mekhed G.N. Moral' kak absolyutnyy predel razuma v etike I. Kanta // Filosofskaya mysl'. - 2014. - 5. - C. 17 - 44. DOI: 10.7256/2409-8728.2014.5.12351. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_12351.html

Аннотация: The article is devoted to the detection of distinction of philosophical concepts of Nietzsche and Shestov. Nietzsche's and Shestov's philosophies are compared through the prism of ideas of philosophy of Nietzsche: will to power and nihilism. These ideas are fixed in the form of polar concepts, i.e. the concepts that present the two opposite points of view. So, the main thesis of Shestov's philosophy about the faith that cancels the evil previously committed seems comparable to the negative sense of these polar concepts. In the final part of the article Nietzsche's philosophy in general is comprehended through Shestov's ideas. The author sees the key to understnading the philosophy of both philosophers in thei concept of will. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the conflict between will and the past which is differently resolved by Nietzsche and Shestov. Ethics of generosity of Nietzsche and ethics of boldness of Shestov – this is how the author offers to characterize the two philosophical projects on overcoming of the powerlessness of will in relation to the necessary past. The main method of research used by the author is the comparative analysis. The author compares Nietzsche's and Shestov's philosophy involving interpretations of their ideas by Vladimir Bibikhin, Hannah Arendt and Gilles Deleuze. The novelty of the research consists in the original analysis of distinction of the two ways of thinking as they ae presented in Nietzsche's and Shestov's concepts. The distinction between reasoning and will based on Hannah Arendt's ideas correlates with the opposite understanding of the subject by Nitsshche  and Shestov. In Nietzsche's philosophy the will acts as a nigilistic concept in essence, i.e. denying self-sufficiency of life and the world in general. Overcoming nihilism of will and its powerlessness to change the past Nietzsche refuses from will in favor of a complete contemplation/acceptance of identity of and the world. Shestov's philosophy, on the contrary, presents the apology of will that through faith finds the power over the past and the world in general. The obvious antagonism shown during comparison of the two philosophers helps to better highlight the thought of each philosopher.

Ключевые слова: ethics of generosity, ressentiment, good morals, reason, faith, will to power, nihilism, will, ethics of boldness, subject

Библиография:
Delez Zh. Nitsshe i filosofiya / Per. s nem. O. Khomy pod red. Skuratova. M.: "Ad Marginem", 2003. 382 s.
Nitsshe Fridrikh. Tak govoril Zaratustra // Nitsshche F. Soch.: V 13 t. T. 4 / Red. E.V. Oznobkin. M.: Kul'turnaya revolyutsiya, 2005. 432 s.
Aristotel'. Etika / Aristotel'; per. N.V Braginskoy, T.A. Miller; M.: AST: Astrel', 2011. 492 s.
Shestov L. Gefsimanskaya noch' (Filosofiya Paskalya) // Soch. v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 278–325.
Shestov L. Derznoveniya i pokornosti // Soch. v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 151–253.
Nitsshe Fridrikh. Volya k vlasti. Opyt pereotsenki vsekh tsennostey / Per. s nem. E.Gertsyk i dr. M.: Kul'turnaya Revolyutsiya, 2005. 880 s.
Shestov L. Afiny i Ierusalim. M.: AST: AST MOSKVA: KhRANITEL', 2007. 413 s.
Evlampiev I.I. Absolyut kak tsarstvo Absurda: L. Shestov // Evlampiev I.I. Istoriya russkoy metafiziki v XIX–XX vv. Russkaya filosofiya v poiskakh Absolyuta. SPb.: Aleteyya, 2000. S. 259–297.
Arendt Khanna. Zhizn' uma / Per. s angl. A.V. Govorunova. SPb.: Nauka, 2013. 517 s.
Bibikhin V.V. Istoriya sovremennoy filosofii. SPb.: Vladimir Dal', 2014. 398 s.
Guseynov A.A. Filosofiya kak eticheskiy proekt // Voprosy filosofii. 2014. №5. S. 16–27.
Nitsshe Fridrikh. Ecce Homo. Antikhrist / Per. s nem. Yu. Antonovskogo, V. Flerovoy. Spb.: Azbuka, Azbuka-Attikus, 2011. 224 s.
D.A. Ol'shanskiy Naslazhdenie u Zhaka Lakana: razrushenie granits diskursa pri psikhoze // Psikhologiya i Psikhotekhnika. - 2010. - 2. - C. 29 - 32.
Gurevich P.S. Pol' Riker o dukhovnom mire cheloveka // Psikhologiya i Psikhotekhnika. - 2014. - 2. - C. 127 - 130. DOI: 10.7256/2070-8955.2014.2.11135.

References (transliteration):
Delez Zh. Nitsshe i filosofiya / Per. s nem. O. Khomy pod red. Skuratova. M.: "Ad Marginem", 2003. 382 s.
Nitsshe Fridrikh. Tak govoril Zaratustra // Nitsshche F. Soch.: V 13 t. T. 4 / Red. E.V. Oznobkin. M.: Kul'turnaya revolyutsiya, 2005. 432 s.
Aristotel'. Etika / Aristotel'; per. N.V Braginskoy, T.A. Miller; M.: AST: Astrel', 2011. 492 s.
Shestov L. Gefsimanskaya noch' (Filosofiya Paskalya) // Soch. v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 278–325.
Shestov L. Derznoveniya i pokornosti // Soch. v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 151–253.
Nitsshe Fridrikh. Volya k vlasti. Opyt pereotsenki vsekh tsennostey / Per. s nem. E.Gertsyk i dr. M.: Kul'turnaya Revolyutsiya, 2005. 880 s.
Shestov L. Afiny i Ierusalim. M.: AST: AST MOSKVA: KhRANITEL', 2007. 413 s.
Evlampiev I.I. Absolyut kak tsarstvo Absurda: L. Shestov // Evlampiev I.I. Istoriya russkoy metafiziki v XIX–XX vv. Russkaya filosofiya v poiskakh Absolyuta. SPb.: Aleteyya, 2000. S. 259–297.
Arendt Khanna. Zhizn' uma / Per. s angl. A.V. Govorunova. SPb.: Nauka, 2013. 517 s.
Bibikhin V.V. Istoriya sovremennoy filosofii. SPb.: Vladimir Dal', 2014. 398 s.
Guseynov A.A. Filosofiya kak eticheskiy proekt // Voprosy filosofii. 2014. №5. S. 16–27.
Nitsshe Fridrikh. Ecce Homo. Antikhrist / Per. s nem. Yu. Antonovskogo, V. Flerovoy. Spb.: Azbuka, Azbuka-Attikus, 2011. 224 s.
D.A. Ol'shanskiy Naslazhdenie u Zhaka Lakana: razrushenie granits diskursa pri psikhoze // Psikhologiya i Psikhotekhnika. - 2010. - 2. - C. 29 - 32.
Gurevich P.S. Pol' Riker o dukhovnom mire cheloveka // Psikhologiya i Psikhotekhnika. - 2014. - 2. - C. 127 - 130. DOI: 10.7256/2070-8955.2014.2.11135.

Аннотация: The present article is devoted to an important method of Immanuel Kant’s critical philosophy – transcendental deduction. The author of the article focuses on how this method is used in Kant’s main woks on practical philosophy such as ‘Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals’ and ‘Critique of Practical Reason’. The purpose of the article is to clarify whether Kant’s practical philosophy describes the transcendental deduction of the groundwork of practical reason just like the transcendental deduction of pure reason categories is presented in ‘Critique of Practical Reason’. To solve the aforesaid problem, the author of the article provides a brief description of the deduction of reason categories. After that the author reconstructs the logic of reasoning in the main works of Kant on practical philosophy based on the supposition that the structure of the deduction of Kant’s practical philosophy must be similar to the structure of deduction in speculative philosophy. The author shows that Kant’s practical philosophy presents a successful deduction of the main grounds of partial reason. It is concluded that despite a common opinion in the studies of Kant, his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and Critique of Practical Reason present the same project of deduction. The author of the present article reconstructs metaphysical and transcendental deduction in Kant’s practical philosophy. The author eliminates the visibility of the vicious circle connected with Kant’s statement that freedom and unconditional partial law are mutually interdependent. It is concluded that the logic of deduction in practical philosophy makes us to significantly extend the term ‘experience’ in Kant’s philosophy.

Ключевые слова: practical philosophy, freedom, transcendental deduction, metaphysical deduction, practical reason, moral law, categorical imperative, experience, will, free will.

Библиография:
A.N. Zelinskaya Svoboda kak ekzistentsial'naya problema // Psikhologiya i Psikhotekhnika.-2011.-10.-C. 7-15.
R.S. Granin Ekzistentsial'naya eskhatologiya Nikolaya Berdyaeva // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2012.-11.-C. 63-71.
Cohen H. Ethik des reinen Willens. – Berlin: Bruno Cassirer, 1904.
Förster E. Preface to Kant’s Transcendental Deductions. ed. E. Förster. Stanford Univer-sity Press. 1989.
Allison H. E. Kant's theory of freedom (Cambridge University Press, 1990)
Beck L. W. A Commentary on Kants Critique of Practical Reason (Chicago, 1960)
Allison H. E. Justification and Freedom in the Critique of Practical Reason // Kant’s Transcendental Deductions. ed. E. Förster. Stanford University Press. 1989.
M.: Choro, 1994. – 630 s. 4. Kant I. Predpolagaemoe nachalo chelovecheskoy istorii // Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 8. M.: Choro, 1994. – 718 s.
M.: Choro, 1994. – 741 s. 3. Kant I. Osnovopolozheniya metafiziki nravov / Per. L. D. B. // Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T.
Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma / Per. N. O. Losskogo // Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T.
Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma / Per. N. M. Sokolova // Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 4. M.: Choro, 1994. – 630 s.
Zholkov S.Yu.. Matematicheskie antinomii Kanta – ne antinomii. // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2013.-№ 10.-C. 1368-1378. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.10.7064.
O.A. Koval'. Sogito Dekarta i transtsendental'naya sub'ektivnost' Gusserlya. // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2012.-№ 12.-C. 94-103.
I.V. Deklerk. Metafizicheskie kontseptsii sotsial'no-kommunikativnoy obshchnosti. // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2011.-№ 6.-C. 48-54.
G.N. Mekhed. Problema teoditsei v etike I. Kanta i F.M. Dostoevskogo. // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2013.-№ 7.-C. 967-973. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.7.7762.
N. Fisher. O budushchem metafiziki i voprosa o Boge soglasno Immanuilu Kantu (s ekskursami v kritiku metafiziki Martina Khaydeggera) (prodolzhenie) (perevod I.V. Kirsberga). // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2013.-№ 7.-C. 951-966. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.7.7585.

References (transliteration):
A.N. Zelinskaya Svoboda kak ekzistentsial'naya problema // Psikhologiya i Psikhotekhnika.-2011.-10.-C. 7-15.
R.S. Granin Ekzistentsial'naya eskhatologiya Nikolaya Berdyaeva // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2012.-11.-C. 63-71.
Cohen H. Ethik des reinen Willens. – Berlin: Bruno Cassirer, 1904.
Förster E. Preface to Kant’s Transcendental Deductions. ed. E. Förster. Stanford Univer-sity Press. 1989.
Allison H. E. Kant's theory of freedom (Cambridge University Press, 1990)
Beck L. W. A Commentary on Kants Critique of Practical Reason (Chicago, 1960)
Allison H. E. Justification and Freedom in the Critique of Practical Reason // Kant’s Transcendental Deductions. ed. E. Förster. Stanford University Press. 1989.
M.: Choro, 1994. – 630 s. 4. Kant I. Predpolagaemoe nachalo chelovecheskoy istorii // Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 8. M.: Choro, 1994. – 718 s.
M.: Choro, 1994. – 741 s. 3. Kant I. Osnovopolozheniya metafiziki nravov / Per. L. D. B. // Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T.
Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma / Per. N. O. Losskogo // Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T.
Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma / Per. N. M. Sokolova // Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 4. M.: Choro, 1994. – 630 s.
Zholkov S.Yu.. Matematicheskie antinomii Kanta – ne antinomii. // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2013.-№ 10.-C. 1368-1378. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.10.7064.
O.A. Koval'. Sogito Dekarta i transtsendental'naya sub'ektivnost' Gusserlya. // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2012.-№ 12.-C. 94-103.
I.V. Deklerk. Metafizicheskie kontseptsii sotsial'no-kommunikativnoy obshchnosti. // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2011.-№ 6.-C. 48-54.
G.N. Mekhed. Problema teoditsei v etike I. Kanta i F.M. Dostoevskogo. // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2013.-№ 7.-C. 967-973. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.7.7762.
N. Fisher. O budushchem metafiziki i voprosa o Boge soglasno Immanuilu Kantu (s ekskursami v kritiku metafiziki Martina Khaydeggera) (prodolzhenie) (perevod I.V. Kirsberga). // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2013.-№ 7.-C. 951-966. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.7.7585.

Аннотация: The article is devoted to the main ideas of the ethics of non-violence offered by a famous modern philosopher Abdusalam Huseynov. Ethics of non-violence are being viewed in terms of the issue of social justice. The author of the present article views the terms ‘violence’ and ‘non-violence’ in comparison with the term ‘justice’. Ethics of nonviolence are viewed as an attempt to implement the principles of justice in the life of the modern society. Definition of justice as it usually appears in the ethics of non-violence is also analyzed. According to the author, ethics of non-violence are the reflection of modern realities. Therefore the author tries to underline the main ideas of ethics of non-violence that can be used when implementing the principles of justice in the modern society. The author studies ethics of non-violence in terms of the problems of social justice and from the point of view of the unity of all spheres of social life as well as interconnection and interdependence of social needs, interests and values. Abdusalam Huseynov’s ethics of non-violence are quite an interesting and original concept that reflects views and desires of particular social layers and groups. Non-violence is seen as a post-violence stage in the fight for social justice. According to the author, it is necessary to carry out a better research and analysis of the main provisions of ethics of non-violence with reference to today’s and future social realities.

Ключевые слова: justice, freedom, equality, violence, non-violence, morals, ethics, good, evil.

Контактная информация: Ismailov Nurmagomed Omarovich, 352901, Russia, Krasnodar Region, Armavir, ul. R. Luksemburg 159.

Библиография:
Guseynov A. A. Moral'naya demagogiya kak forma apologii nasiliya // Voprosy filosofii. – 1995,-№ 5. – S. 5 – 12.
Guseynov A. A. Ponyatiya nasiliya i nenasiliya // Voprosy filosofii. – 1994.-№ 6.-S. 35 – 41.
Guseynov A. A. Svoboda i spravedlivost': tochki sopryazheniya // Vedomosti NIIPE. Vyp. 28: Svoboda i/ili spravedlivost' / Red. V. I. Bakshtanovskiy, N. N. Karnaukhov. Tyumen': NIIPE, 2006.-S. 17 – 32.
Guseynov A. A. Chto takoe etika nenasiliya? // Svoboda sovesti v Rossii: istoricheskiy i sovremennyy aspekty. Sbornik dokladov.-M. 2006.
Guseynov A. A. Etika nenasiliya – velenie vremeni. Doklad na Vtoroy Rossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii "Religiya v izmenyayushcheysya Rossii". Perm'. 11-12 maya 2004 god. «Religiya i SMI» (www.religare.ru).
Guseynov A. A., Apresyan R. G. Etika. – M.: Gardarika, 1998.-472 s.
Ismailov N. O. K voprosu o sootnoshenii spravedlivosti i nravstvennosti // Gumanitarnye i sotsial'no-ekonomicheskie nauki.-Rostov-na-Donu, 2010, № 1.-S. 25 – 29.
Ismailov N. O. Spravedlivost' kak mera ravenstva // Sotsiologiya vlasti. M., 2009, № 8.-S. 95-103.
Ismailov N. O. Spravedlivost' kak mera svobody // Sotsiologiya vlasti. M., 2009, № 7.-S. 136-144.
Ismailov N. O. Teoriya spravedlivosti.-Armavir. RITs AGPU. 2007.-116 s.
Ismailov N. O. Etika diskursa Khabermasa v kontekste spravedlivosti // Pravo i politika. – 2014. – № 4. – S. 521-528. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2014.4.11704.
Kamyu A. Buntuyushchiy chelovek. – M.: Politizdat. 1990. – 415 s.
Kant I. Sochineniya v 6 t. T. 2. M.: Mysl'. 1964.-510 s.
Makiavelli N. Izbrannye proizvedeniya.-Rostov-na-Donu, «Feniks», 1998.-574 s.
Platon. Gosudarstvo. Zakony. Politik.-M.: Mysl', 1998. – 798 s.
A.V. Prokof'ev Etika nenasiliya kak begstvo
ot nravstvennogo riska // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2011. - 7. - C. 137 - 149.
Konstantinov M.S. Bremya dobrodeteli: moral'nye kontsepty kommunitarizma // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2013. - 12. - C. 1416 - 1422. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2013.12.10375.
A.V. Prokof'ev Zashchita interesov budushchikh pokoleniy:
utilitaristskaya perspektiva // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2012. - 9. - C. 139 - 150.
P.S. Gurevich Ocherki ob akademike A.A. Guseynove.
Ocherk tretiy. «Zhivotvoryashchie svyatyni». // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2010. - 11. - C. 17 - 24.
G.Yu. Kanarsh Teoriya spravedlivosti v zerkale
natsional'nogo kharaktera (o nekotorykh
zapadnykh i rossiyskikh osobennostyakh moral'nogo myshleniya). // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2010. - 11. - C. 93 - 102.
I.N. Titarenko Rol' filosofii v reshenii
global'nykh politicheskikh problem
i protivodeystvii nasiliyu:
antichnye idei i sovremennost' // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2011. - 9. - C. 85 - 96.
Palyulin A.Yu. «Moral' i dogma» o zakone i spravedlivosti // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2013. - 9. - C. 1177 - 1185. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2013.9.9392.

References (transliteration):
Guseynov A. A. Moral'naya demagogiya kak forma apologii nasiliya // Voprosy filosofii. – 1995,-№ 5. – S. 5 – 12.
Guseynov A. A. Ponyatiya nasiliya i nenasiliya // Voprosy filosofii. – 1994.-№ 6.-S. 35 – 41.
Guseynov A. A. Svoboda i spravedlivost': tochki sopryazheniya // Vedomosti NIIPE. Vyp. 28: Svoboda i/ili spravedlivost' / Red. V. I. Bakshtanovskiy, N. N. Karnaukhov. Tyumen': NIIPE, 2006.-S. 17 – 32.
Guseynov A. A. Chto takoe etika nenasiliya? // Svoboda sovesti v Rossii: istoricheskiy i sovremennyy aspekty. Sbornik dokladov.-M. 2006.
Guseynov A. A. Etika nenasiliya – velenie vremeni. Doklad na Vtoroy Rossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii "Religiya v izmenyayushcheysya Rossii". Perm'. 11-12 maya 2004 god. «Religiya i SMI» (www.religare.ru).
Guseynov A. A., Apresyan R. G. Etika. – M.: Gardarika, 1998.-472 s.
Ismailov N. O. K voprosu o sootnoshenii spravedlivosti i nravstvennosti // Gumanitarnye i sotsial'no-ekonomicheskie nauki.-Rostov-na-Donu, 2010, № 1.-S. 25 – 29.
Ismailov N. O. Spravedlivost' kak mera ravenstva // Sotsiologiya vlasti. M., 2009, № 8.-S. 95-103.
Ismailov N. O. Spravedlivost' kak mera svobody // Sotsiologiya vlasti. M., 2009, № 7.-S. 136-144.
Ismailov N. O. Teoriya spravedlivosti.-Armavir. RITs AGPU. 2007.-116 s.
Ismailov N. O. Etika diskursa Khabermasa v kontekste spravedlivosti // Pravo i politika. – 2014. – № 4. – S. 521-528. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2014.4.11704.
Kamyu A. Buntuyushchiy chelovek. – M.: Politizdat. 1990. – 415 s.
Kant I. Sochineniya v 6 t. T. 2. M.: Mysl'. 1964.-510 s.
Makiavelli N. Izbrannye proizvedeniya.-Rostov-na-Donu, «Feniks», 1998.-574 s.
Platon. Gosudarstvo. Zakony. Politik.-M.: Mysl', 1998. – 798 s.
A.V. Prokof'ev Etika nenasiliya kak begstvo
ot nravstvennogo riska // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2011. - 7. - C. 137 - 149.
Konstantinov M.S. Bremya dobrodeteli: moral'nye kontsepty kommunitarizma // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2013. - 12. - C. 1416 - 1422. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2013.12.10375.
A.V. Prokof'ev Zashchita interesov budushchikh pokoleniy:
utilitaristskaya perspektiva // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2012. - 9. - C. 139 - 150.
P.S. Gurevich Ocherki ob akademike A.A. Guseynove.
Ocherk tretiy. «Zhivotvoryashchie svyatyni». // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2010. - 11. - C. 17 - 24.
G.Yu. Kanarsh Teoriya spravedlivosti v zerkale
natsional'nogo kharaktera (o nekotorykh
zapadnykh i rossiyskikh osobennostyakh moral'nogo myshleniya). // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2010. - 11. - C. 93 - 102.
I.N. Titarenko Rol' filosofii v reshenii
global'nykh politicheskikh problem
i protivodeystvii nasiliyu:
antichnye idei i sovremennost' // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2011. - 9. - C. 85 - 96.
Palyulin A.Yu. «Moral' i dogma» o zakone i spravedlivosti // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2013. - 9. - C. 1177 - 1185. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2013.9.9392.

Аннотация: In modern Russian literature there are almost no researches of ethics in journalism. The author of the present article is filling in the gap. By analyzing six major journalistic codes in different countries as well as a number of theoretical researches, the author of the present article defines the following seven basic ethical values in journalism: truth, no harm, objectivity, freedom of speech, honesty, social responsibility and justice. Journalistic ethics is viewed as a part of a greater system of public morals.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, ethics, society, journalism, mass media, values, standards, rules, code, profession.

Контактная информация: Nazaretian Karine Akopovna, 119991, Russia, Moscow, ul. Pokrovka 1/13/6, str. 2.

Библиография:
1. Apresyan R. G. Novoe esse // Kruglyy stol Teoreticheskogo seminara sektora etiki «Moral':
mnogoobrazie ponyatiy i smyslov», 27 noyabrya 2012 goda. (URL: http://iph.ras.ru/uplfile/ethics/
seminar/27_11_2012/KS_Content.pdf).
2. Apresyan R. G. Fenomen vzaimnosti: kommunikativnye i normativnye predposylki istoricheskogo
formirovaniya morali // Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. 2012. № 1. S. 75–90.
3. Beseda s Rubenom Grantovichem Apresyanom // Postigaya dobro: sbornik statey / Otv. red.
O. V. Artem'eva, A. M. Prokof'ev. M.: Al'fa-M, 2013.
4. Guseynov A.A., Apresyan R. G. Etika. M.: Gardariki, 2004.
5. Lambet E. B. Priverzhennost' zhurnalistskomu dolgu. Ob eticheskom podkhode v zhurnalistskoy
professii. M.: Natsional'nyy institut pressy, 1998.
6. Professional'naya etika zhurnalista. Dokumenty i spravochnye materialy / Sost. Yu. V. Kazakov.
M.: Medeya, 2004.
7. Alleyne M. D. Global Media Ecology: Why There Is No Global Media Ethics Standard // The Handbook
of Mass Media Ethics / Ed. by L. Wilkins, C. G. Christians. N.Y.: Routledge, 2009.
8. Altschull J. H. From Milton to McLuhan: The Ideas Behind American Journalism. N.Y.: Longman, 1990.
9. Christians C.G., Cooper T. W. The Search for Universals // The Handbook of Mass Media Ethics / Ed. by
L. Wilkins, C. G. Christians. N.Y.: Routledge, 2009. P. 55–68.
10. Elliott D. All Is Not Relative: Essential Shared Values and the Press // Journal of Mass Media Ethics.
1988. Vol. 3. № 1. P. 28–32.
11. Elliott D. Essential Shared Values and 21st Century Journalism // The Handbook of Mass Media Ethics
/ Ed. by L. Wilkins, C. G. Christians. N.Y.: Routledge, 2009.
12. Hafez K. Journalism Ethics Revised: A Comparison of Ethics Codes in Europe, North Africa, the Middle
East, and Muslim Asia // Media Ethics in the Dialoge of Cultures / Ed. by K. Hafez. Hamburg: Deuhtsches
Orient-Institut, 2003.
13. Laitila T. Journalistic Codes of Ethics in Europe // European Journal of Communication. 1995. Vol. 10. № 4. P. 527–544.
14. McQuail D. Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest. London: SAGE, 1992.
15. Merrill J. C. Journalism Ethics: Philosophical Foundations for News Media. Boston: St. Martin’s press, 1997.
16. Roberts C. Identifying and Defining Values in Media Codes of Ethics // Journal of Mass Media Ethics.
2012. Vol. 27. № 2. P. 115–129.
17. Schulman R. Media in a values muddle // Journal of Mass Media Ethics. 1986. Vol. 2. № 1. R. 23–29.
18. Ward S.J.A. The Invention of Journalism Ethics: The Path to Objectivity and Beyond. Montreal&Kingston:
McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2006.

References (transliteration):
1. Apresyan R. G. Novoe esse // Kruglyy stol Teoreticheskogo seminara sektora etiki «Moral':
mnogoobrazie ponyatiy i smyslov», 27 noyabrya 2012 goda. (URL: http://iph.ras.ru/uplfile/ethics/
seminar/27_11_2012/KS_Content.pdf).
2. Apresyan R. G. Fenomen vzaimnosti: kommunikativnye i normativnye predposylki istoricheskogo
formirovaniya morali // Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. 2012. № 1. S. 75–90.
3. Beseda s Rubenom Grantovichem Apresyanom // Postigaya dobro: sbornik statey / Otv. red.
O. V. Artem'eva, A. M. Prokof'ev. M.: Al'fa-M, 2013.
4. Guseynov A.A., Apresyan R. G. Etika. M.: Gardariki, 2004.
5. Lambet E. B. Priverzhennost' zhurnalistskomu dolgu. Ob eticheskom podkhode v zhurnalistskoy
professii. M.: Natsional'nyy institut pressy, 1998.
6. Professional'naya etika zhurnalista. Dokumenty i spravochnye materialy / Sost. Yu. V. Kazakov.
M.: Medeya, 2004.
7. Alleyne M. D. Global Media Ecology: Why There Is No Global Media Ethics Standard // The Handbook
of Mass Media Ethics / Ed. by L. Wilkins, C. G. Christians. N.Y.: Routledge, 2009.
8. Altschull J. H. From Milton to McLuhan: The Ideas Behind American Journalism. N.Y.: Longman, 1990.
9. Christians C.G., Cooper T. W. The Search for Universals // The Handbook of Mass Media Ethics / Ed. by
L. Wilkins, C. G. Christians. N.Y.: Routledge, 2009. P. 55–68.
10. Elliott D. All Is Not Relative: Essential Shared Values and the Press // Journal of Mass Media Ethics.
1988. Vol. 3. № 1. P. 28–32.
11. Elliott D. Essential Shared Values and 21st Century Journalism // The Handbook of Mass Media Ethics
/ Ed. by L. Wilkins, C. G. Christians. N.Y.: Routledge, 2009.
12. Hafez K. Journalism Ethics Revised: A Comparison of Ethics Codes in Europe, North Africa, the Middle
East, and Muslim Asia // Media Ethics in the Dialoge of Cultures / Ed. by K. Hafez. Hamburg: Deuhtsches
Orient-Institut, 2003.
13. Laitila T. Journalistic Codes of Ethics in Europe // European Journal of Communication. 1995. Vol. 10. № 4. P. 527–544.
14. McQuail D. Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest. London: SAGE, 1992.
15. Merrill J. C. Journalism Ethics: Philosophical Foundations for News Media. Boston: St. Martin’s press, 1997.
16. Roberts C. Identifying and Defining Values in Media Codes of Ethics // Journal of Mass Media Ethics.
2012. Vol. 27. № 2. P. 115–129.
17. Schulman R. Media in a values muddle // Journal of Mass Media Ethics. 1986. Vol. 2. № 1. R. 23–29.
18. Ward S.J.A. The Invention of Journalism Ethics: The Path to Objectivity and Beyond. Montreal&Kingston:
McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2006.

Аннотация: George Moor’s basic theorem about indefinability of goodness has been the topic of debates in metaethics up to the present. It is quite understandable because the solution of this question has an influence on many ethic programs. However, this problem is mostly solved a priori and just in theory. The author of the article describes how it is possible to solve the problem from the point of history and philosophy. If, in spite of the evident proof that goodness has a ‘simple’ and ‘absolute’ meaning and therefore it is an indefinable concept, history and philosophy provide certain definitions of this term, then Moor’s position can be corrected. If not, then Moor’s theorem will be proved a posteriori. The author of the article analyzes definitions (and proof that there are no definitions) of goodness in ancient philosophy from the first Indian philosophers to Sextus Empiricus.

Ключевые слова: George Moor’s basic theorem about indefinability of goodness has been the topic of debates in metaethics up to the present. It is quite understandable because the solution of this question has an influence on many ethic programs. However, this problem is mostly solved a priori and just in theory. The author of the article describes how it is possible to solve the problem from the point of history and philosophy. If, in spite of the evident proof that goodness has a ‘simple’ and ‘absolute’ meaning and therefore it is an indefinable concept, history and philosophy provide certain definitions of this term, then Moor’s position can be corrected. If not, then Moor’s theorem will be proved a posteriori. The author of the article analyzes definitions (and proof that there are no definitions) of goodness in ancient philosophy from the first Indian philosophers to Sextus Empiricus.

Контактная информация: Shokhin Vladimir Kirillovich , 119991, Russia, Moscow, ul. Volkhonka 14/1, str. 5, komn. 409.

Библиография:
Aristotel'. Sochineniya v chetyrekh tomakh. T. 4. M.: Mysl', 1984.
Diogen Laertskiy. O zhizni, ucheniyakh i izrecheniyakh znamenitykh filosofov / Per. M.L. Gasparova. M.: Mysl', 1986.
Mur Dzh.E. Priroda moral'noy filosofii / Per. s angl., sost. i prim. L.V. Konovalovoy. M.: Respublika, 1999.
Sekst Empirik. Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1976.
Fragmenty rannikh stoikov. T. III. Ch. 1. Khrisipp iz Sol. Eticheskie fragmenty / Per. i komment. A.A. Stolyarova. M.: Greko-Latinskiy kabinet Yu.A. Shichalina, 2007.
Fragmenty rannikh stoikov. T. III. Ch. 2. Ucheniki i preemniki Khrisippa / Per. i komment. A.A. Stolyarova. M.: Greko-Latinskiy kabinet Yu.A. Shichalina, 2010.
Shokhin V.K. Indiyskaya filosofiya. Shramanskiy period (seredina I tysyacheletiya do n.e.). SPb: Izd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta, 2007.
Anscombe E.G.M. Modern moral philosophy // Philosophy. The Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy. 1958. Vol. 33. № 124. P. 1-19.
Ars Rhetorica. Aristotle. W.D. Ross. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959.
Frankena W.K. The Naturalistic Fallacy // Mind. 1939. Vol. 48. (192). P. 464–477.
Lives of Eminent Philosophers. Diogenes Laertius / Ed. by R.D. Hicks. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972.
MacIntyre A. After Virtue: a Study in Moral Theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 2010.
Moore G.E. Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1903.
Pali Text Society. Dīgha-Nikāya / Ed. by Prof. T.W. Rhys Davids and Prof. J.E. Carpenter. Vol. I. L., 1967

References (transliteration):
Aristotel'. Sochineniya v chetyrekh tomakh. T. 4. M.: Mysl', 1984.
Diogen Laertskiy. O zhizni, ucheniyakh i izrecheniyakh znamenitykh filosofov / Per. M.L. Gasparova. M.: Mysl', 1986.
Mur Dzh.E. Priroda moral'noy filosofii / Per. s angl., sost. i prim. L.V. Konovalovoy. M.: Respublika, 1999.
Sekst Empirik. Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1976.
Fragmenty rannikh stoikov. T. III. Ch. 1. Khrisipp iz Sol. Eticheskie fragmenty / Per. i komment. A.A. Stolyarova. M.: Greko-Latinskiy kabinet Yu.A. Shichalina, 2007.
Fragmenty rannikh stoikov. T. III. Ch. 2. Ucheniki i preemniki Khrisippa / Per. i komment. A.A. Stolyarova. M.: Greko-Latinskiy kabinet Yu.A. Shichalina, 2010.
Shokhin V.K. Indiyskaya filosofiya. Shramanskiy period (seredina I tysyacheletiya do n.e.). SPb: Izd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta, 2007.
Anscombe E.G.M. Modern moral philosophy // Philosophy. The Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy. 1958. Vol. 33. № 124. P. 1-19.
Ars Rhetorica. Aristotle. W.D. Ross. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959.
Frankena W.K. The Naturalistic Fallacy // Mind. 1939. Vol. 48. (192). P. 464–477.
Lives of Eminent Philosophers. Diogenes Laertius / Ed. by R.D. Hicks. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972.
MacIntyre A. After Virtue: a Study in Moral Theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 2010.
Moore G.E. Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1903.
Pali Text Society. Dīgha-Nikāya / Ed. by Prof. T.W. Rhys Davids and Prof. J.E. Carpenter. Vol. I. L., 1967

Аннотация: Currently ethical codes and ethical regulation in the higher education institutions become more and more popular in the USA, the Western European states and Russia. At the same time structure and organization of ethical regulation are not clearly defined, and some researchers deprive ethical regulation of the very term “ethical”. The nature of this matter is quite ambiguous.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, Code, University, regulation, ethics, professional, corporate, compliance, higher educational institution, management.

Контактная информация: Savvina, Olga Vladimirovna, 119991, Russia, Moskva, GSP-1, Lomonosovskiy pr., d. 27, korp. 4.

Библиография:
1. Bern E. Igry, v kotorye igrayut lyudi. Lyudi, kotorye igrayut v igry. M.: Eksmo, 2007.
2. Bukharestskaya deklaratsiya eticheskikh tsennostey i printsipov vysshego obrazovaniya v Evro-
pe 10 avgusta 2005 g. YuNESKO-SEPES, ofitsial'nyy sayt TyumGU — http://penh.tsogu.ru/nii/
folder.2006-12-18.7122125891/Folder.2008-09-24.1310/Document.2008-10-10.5222.
3. Gutner G.B. Sotsial'nye praktiki i gabitus nauchnogo soobshchestva // Etos nauki / pod red. L.P. Ki-
yashchenko, E.Z. Mirskoy. M.: Academia, 2008. S. 341.
4. Makarkin N.P., Tomilin O.B., Fadeeva I.M. Opyt strategicheskogo planirovaniya v Mordovskom
Gosudarstvennom Universitete // Ofitsial'nyy sayt zhurnala «Universitetskoe upravlenie: prak-
tika i analiz» [elektronnyy resurs — http://www.umj.ru/index.php/pub/inside/398/].
5. Prokof'ev A.V. Eticheskiy kodeks akademicheskogo soobshchestva: parallel'nyy opyt razrabotki //
Vedomosti № 34 / pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova; NII Prikladnoy etiki,
Gosudarstvennoe obrazovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyu-
menskiy gosudarstvennyy neftegazovyy universitet» [elektronnyy resurs — http://www.tsogu.
ru/nii/ethics/].
6. Skvortsov A.A. Eticheskoe regulirovanie v akademicheskoy srede // Eticheskoe regulirovanie v akade-
micheskoy srede. Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii 4-5 dekabrya 2009 g.
M.: Maks-press, 2009. S. 63-80.
7. Sogomonov A.Yu. Dlya chego sovremennomu universitetu svoy eticheskiy kodeks? // Vedomosti № 34 /
pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova; NII Prikladnoy etiki, Gosudarstvennoe obra-
zovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy gosudarstvennyy
neftegazovyy universitet» [elektronnyy resurs — http://www.tsogu.ru/nii/ethics/].
8. Tomilin O.B. Ottsy eli kislyy vinograd, a u detey na zubakh oskomina // Vedomosti № 34 / pod red.
pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova; NII Prikladnoy etiki, Gosudarstvennoe obra-
zovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy gosudarstvennyy
neftegazovyy universitet» [elektronnyy resurs — http://www.tsogu.ru/nii/ethics/].
9. Tul'chinskiy G.L. Avtory smelo vstupili na malo razvedannuyu territoriyu nravstvennoy kul'tury
universiteta // Vedomosti № 34 pod red. pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova; NII
Prikladnoy etiki, Gosudarstvennoe obrazovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo
obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy gosudarstvennyy neftegazovyy universitet» [elektronnyy resurs —
http://www.tsogu.ru/nii/ethics/].
10. Freyd Z. O psikhoanalize. Lektsii. / Per. M.V. Vul'f. Minsk: Kharvest, 2007.
11. Shopengauer A. Ob universitetskoy filosofii // Biblioteka Ikhtika [elektronnyy resurs — http://
www.ihtika.net].
12. Codes of Conduct in the Private Sector. A Review of the Academic Literature from 1987 to 2007. Carson A.
S., Baetz M., McGill S. 2008.
13. Kaptein M., Schwarz M.S. The Effectiveness of Business Codes: A Critical Examination of Existing Studies
and the Development of an Integrated Research Model. Journal of Business Ethics. 2008.
14. Ladd J. The Quest for a Code of Professional Ethics: An Intellectual and Moral Confusion. // Engineering,
Ethics, and the Environment // Aarne P. Vesilind, Alastair S. Gunn // GB: Cambridge University Press,
1998. P. 210-218.
15. Luegenbiehl, Heinz C. «Codes of Ethics and the Moral Education of Engineers», Business and Professional
Ethics Journal 2 (1983); Heinz C. Luegenbiehl: Computer professionals: Moral autonomy and a code of
ethics. Journal of Systems and Software 17(1): 61-68 (1992).

References (transliteration):
1. Bern E. Igry, v kotorye igrayut lyudi. Lyudi, kotorye igrayut v igry. M.: Eksmo, 2007.
2. Bukharestskaya deklaratsiya eticheskikh tsennostey i printsipov vysshego obrazovaniya v Evro-
pe 10 avgusta 2005 g. YuNESKO-SEPES, ofitsial'nyy sayt TyumGU — http://penh.tsogu.ru/nii/
folder.2006-12-18.7122125891/Folder.2008-09-24.1310/Document.2008-10-10.5222.
3. Gutner G.B. Sotsial'nye praktiki i gabitus nauchnogo soobshchestva // Etos nauki / pod red. L.P. Ki-
yashchenko, E.Z. Mirskoy. M.: Academia, 2008. S. 341.
4. Makarkin N.P., Tomilin O.B., Fadeeva I.M. Opyt strategicheskogo planirovaniya v Mordovskom
Gosudarstvennom Universitete // Ofitsial'nyy sayt zhurnala «Universitetskoe upravlenie: prak-
tika i analiz» [elektronnyy resurs — http://www.umj.ru/index.php/pub/inside/398/].
5. Prokof'ev A.V. Eticheskiy kodeks akademicheskogo soobshchestva: parallel'nyy opyt razrabotki //
Vedomosti № 34 / pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova; NII Prikladnoy etiki,
Gosudarstvennoe obrazovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyu-
menskiy gosudarstvennyy neftegazovyy universitet» [elektronnyy resurs — http://www.tsogu.
ru/nii/ethics/].
6. Skvortsov A.A. Eticheskoe regulirovanie v akademicheskoy srede // Eticheskoe regulirovanie v akade-
micheskoy srede. Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii 4-5 dekabrya 2009 g.
M.: Maks-press, 2009. S. 63-80.
7. Sogomonov A.Yu. Dlya chego sovremennomu universitetu svoy eticheskiy kodeks? // Vedomosti № 34 /
pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova; NII Prikladnoy etiki, Gosudarstvennoe obra-
zovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy gosudarstvennyy
neftegazovyy universitet» [elektronnyy resurs — http://www.tsogu.ru/nii/ethics/].
8. Tomilin O.B. Ottsy eli kislyy vinograd, a u detey na zubakh oskomina // Vedomosti № 34 / pod red.
pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova; NII Prikladnoy etiki, Gosudarstvennoe obra-
zovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy gosudarstvennyy
neftegazovyy universitet» [elektronnyy resurs — http://www.tsogu.ru/nii/ethics/].
9. Tul'chinskiy G.L. Avtory smelo vstupili na malo razvedannuyu territoriyu nravstvennoy kul'tury
universiteta // Vedomosti № 34 pod red. pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova; NII
Prikladnoy etiki, Gosudarstvennoe obrazovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo
obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy gosudarstvennyy neftegazovyy universitet» [elektronnyy resurs —
http://www.tsogu.ru/nii/ethics/].
10. Freyd Z. O psikhoanalize. Lektsii. / Per. M.V. Vul'f. Minsk: Kharvest, 2007.
11. Shopengauer A. Ob universitetskoy filosofii // Biblioteka Ikhtika [elektronnyy resurs — http://
www.ihtika.net].
12. Codes of Conduct in the Private Sector. A Review of the Academic Literature from 1987 to 2007. Carson A.
S., Baetz M., McGill S. 2008.
13. Kaptein M., Schwarz M.S. The Effectiveness of Business Codes: A Critical Examination of Existing Studies
and the Development of an Integrated Research Model. Journal of Business Ethics. 2008.
14. Ladd J. The Quest for a Code of Professional Ethics: An Intellectual and Moral Confusion. // Engineering,
Ethics, and the Environment // Aarne P. Vesilind, Alastair S. Gunn // GB: Cambridge University Press,
1998. P. 210-218.
15. Luegenbiehl, Heinz C. «Codes of Ethics and the Moral Education of Engineers», Business and Professional
Ethics Journal 2 (1983); Heinz C. Luegenbiehl: Computer professionals: Moral autonomy and a code of
ethics. Journal of Systems and Software 17(1): 61-68 (1992).

Аннотация: The article is devoted to theodicy and its role in Kant’s and Dostoevsky’s philosophies. The author of the article tries to show that the problem of theodicy appeared in Kant’s and Dostoevsky’s work as a part of the question about the moral ideal, freedom and responsibility. Despite different approaches and quite obvious difference in their concepts of rationality as well as philosophizing methods, both of these philosophers have many topics in common. In particular, they both talked about the relation between the absolute and personal freedom, from one side, and the problem of the moral idea form the other. Both Kant and Dostoevsky were also interested in the problem of self-will and how it relates to freedom and autonomy. However, despite the philosophers’ belief that it was impossible to solve the problem of theodicy, the author shows that Kant and Dostoevsky had very different definitions of freedom as well as borders and logic of moral reasoning.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, ethics, Kant, Dostoevsky, theodicy, freedom, absolute, autonomy, ideal, morals.

Контактная информация: Mekhed Gleb Nikolaevich, 119991, Russia, Moscow, ul. Volkhonka 14/1, str. 5.

Библиография:
1. Berdyaev N.A. Mirosozertsanie Dostoevskogo. M.: AST, 2007.
2. Beme Ya. O troystvennoy zhizni cheloveka. Ufa, 2011.
3. Golosovker Ya.E. Dostoevskiy i Kant. M., 1963.
4. Dostoevskiy F.M. Poln. sobr. soch. v 30 t. L.: Nauka, 1973.
5. Dostoevskiy F.M. Brat'ya Karamazovy. V 2 t. M., 1958.
6. Evlampiev I.I. Antropologiya Dostoevskogo [elektronnyy resurs] // http://anthropology.rchgi.spb.
ru/dostoev/dostoevsk_i2.htm
7. Kant I. Sobr. soch. v 8-i t. M., 1994.
8. Kantor V.K. Ispoved' i teoditseya v tvorchestve Dostoevskogo (retseptsiya Avreliya Avgustina) // Vo-
prosy filosofii. 2011. № 4.
9. Maler A. Transtsendental'naya teologiya Kanta [elektronnyy resurs] // http://www.katehon.ru/html/
top/philosophia/transcendentalnaya_teologia_kanta.htm.
10. Protopopov I.A. Svoboda i ponyatie zla v «Religii v predelakh tol'ko razuma» Kanta. SPb., 2010.
11. Frank S.L. Nepostizhimoe. M., 2007.
12. Cherkasova E. Dostoevsky and Kant: dialogues on ethics. N.Y.-Amsterdam, 2009.

References (transliteration):
1. Berdyaev N.A. Mirosozertsanie Dostoevskogo. M.: AST, 2007.
2. Beme Ya. O troystvennoy zhizni cheloveka. Ufa, 2011.
3. Golosovker Ya.E. Dostoevskiy i Kant. M., 1963.
4. Dostoevskiy F.M. Poln. sobr. soch. v 30 t. L.: Nauka, 1973.
5. Dostoevskiy F.M. Brat'ya Karamazovy. V 2 t. M., 1958.
6. Evlampiev I.I. Antropologiya Dostoevskogo [elektronnyy resurs] // http://anthropology.rchgi.spb.
ru/dostoev/dostoevsk_i2.htm
7. Kant I. Sobr. soch. v 8-i t. M., 1994.
8. Kantor V.K. Ispoved' i teoditseya v tvorchestve Dostoevskogo (retseptsiya Avreliya Avgustina) // Vo-
prosy filosofii. 2011. № 4.
9. Maler A. Transtsendental'naya teologiya Kanta [elektronnyy resurs] // http://www.katehon.ru/html/
top/philosophia/transcendentalnaya_teologia_kanta.htm.
10. Protopopov I.A. Svoboda i ponyatie zla v «Religii v predelakh tol'ko razuma» Kanta. SPb., 2010.
11. Frank S.L. Nepostizhimoe. M., 2007.
12. Cherkasova E. Dostoevsky and Kant: dialogues on ethics. N.Y.-Amsterdam, 2009.

Аннотация: The main cause of theoretical discussions and disputes about the origin and functions of morals is the difference in methodological and world perception principles forming the basis of ethical theories. Part of the problem is also the absence of generally accepted interpretation of the key term, morals. A common definition of the morals would allow to minimize the dissidences caused by terminology with multiple meanings. It would also allow to considerably narrow the scope of issues related to ethics. This article contains a critical analysis of approached to defining morals. The author underlines the following common errors: 1) confusion of the two functionally different use of the terms ‘morals’ – as a descriptive concept denoting a specific social and psychological phenomenon, and as an estimating term expressing some kind of a positive attitude to certain motives and behavior; 2) equation of morals and customs, therefore the variety of customs is interpreted as the variety of ‘morals’; 3) defining morals from the point of view of ‘higher values’ thus specific moral values are substituted by the others. Moreover, when giving the definition of morals, many researchers stress out the contents of moral principles and norms while the actually important indicator of its specific nature is the unique intention or ‘the must’. In those few cases when this intention is recognized as an essential feature of morals (for instance, in Kant’s works) when it is interpreted as a speculative ‘necessity’ deprived of the ‘desire material’ and any support in human psyche. The author of the article makes an assumption that the only way of existence of the moral intention is the feeling of moral duty as a special reality of individual and public consciousness which forms the common empire basis for theoretical (scientific and philosophical) interpretation and, consequently definition of the moral phenomenon and its special features.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, morals, ethics, definition, phenomenon, intention, intuition, value, reflection, the must.

Библиография:
1. Apresyan R.G. Moral' // Novaya filosofskaya entsiklopediya: v 4-kh tt. T. II. M.: Mysl', 2001.
2. Apresyan R.G. Moral' // Etika: Entsiklopedicheskiy slovar'. M.: Gardariki, 2001.
3. Artem'eva O.V. Angliyskiy eticheskiy intellektualizm XVIII-XIX vv. M.: IF RAN, 2011.
4. Guseynov A.A. Moral': istoriya ponyatiya // Chto takoe moral': sb. nauch. tr. / otv. red. R.V. Petropav-
lovskiy. M.: IF AN SSSR, 1988.
5. Drobnitskiy O.G. Ponyatie morali. M.: Nauka, 1974.
6. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma // Kant I. Soch.: v 6-ti tt. T. 4. Ch. 1. M.: Mysl', 1965.
7. Kant I. Osnovy metafiziki nravstvennosti // Kant I. Soch.: v 6-ti tt. T. 4. Ch. 1. M.: Mysl', 1965.
8. Maksimov L.V. Kognitivizm kak paradigma gumanitarno-filosofskoy mysli. M.: ROSSPEN, 2003.
9. Maksimov L.V. Kognitivnyy status etiki // Eticheskaya mysl'. Vyp. 8 / Otv. red. A.A. Guseynov.
M.: IF RAN, 2007.
10. Moral' // Vikipediya. — URL = http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral'
11. Moral' // Sovremennaya entsiklopediya. — URL = http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc1p/31134
12. Mur Dzh.E. Printsipy morali. M.: Progress, 1984.
13. Shopengauer A. Svoboda voli i nravstvennost' / Obshch. red., sost., vstup. st. A.A. Guseynova i A.P.
Skripnika. M.: Respublika, 1992.
14. Shopengauer A. Volya v prirode // Shopengauer A. Poln. sobr. soch.: v 4-kh tt. T. 3. M., 1909.
15. Gert B. Morality: Its Nature and Justification. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
16. Gert, B. The Definition of Morality // The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2012 Edition). — URL =
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2012/entries/morality-definition/.

References (transliteration):
1. Apresyan R.G. Moral' // Novaya filosofskaya entsiklopediya: v 4-kh tt. T. II. M.: Mysl', 2001.
2. Apresyan R.G. Moral' // Etika: Entsiklopedicheskiy slovar'. M.: Gardariki, 2001.
3. Artem'eva O.V. Angliyskiy eticheskiy intellektualizm XVIII-XIX vv. M.: IF RAN, 2011.
4. Guseynov A.A. Moral': istoriya ponyatiya // Chto takoe moral': sb. nauch. tr. / otv. red. R.V. Petropav-
lovskiy. M.: IF AN SSSR, 1988.
5. Drobnitskiy O.G. Ponyatie morali. M.: Nauka, 1974.
6. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma // Kant I. Soch.: v 6-ti tt. T. 4. Ch. 1. M.: Mysl', 1965.
7. Kant I. Osnovy metafiziki nravstvennosti // Kant I. Soch.: v 6-ti tt. T. 4. Ch. 1. M.: Mysl', 1965.
8. Maksimov L.V. Kognitivizm kak paradigma gumanitarno-filosofskoy mysli. M.: ROSSPEN, 2003.
9. Maksimov L.V. Kognitivnyy status etiki // Eticheskaya mysl'. Vyp. 8 / Otv. red. A.A. Guseynov.
M.: IF RAN, 2007.
10. Moral' // Vikipediya. — URL = http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral'
11. Moral' // Sovremennaya entsiklopediya. — URL = http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc1p/31134
12. Mur Dzh.E. Printsipy morali. M.: Progress, 1984.
13. Shopengauer A. Svoboda voli i nravstvennost' / Obshch. red., sost., vstup. st. A.A. Guseynova i A.P.
Skripnika. M.: Respublika, 1992.
14. Shopengauer A. Volya v prirode // Shopengauer A. Poln. sobr. soch.: v 4-kh tt. T. 3. M., 1909.
15. Gert B. Morality: Its Nature and Justification. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
16. Gert, B. The Definition of Morality // The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2012 Edition). — URL =
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2012/entries/morality-definition/.

Аннотация: The given article analyzes pluses and minuses of the utilitarian ethics as the grounds for moral criteria of the decision making process which touches the interests of future generations. The author shows that utilitarianism does not have any difficulties with involvement of future generations into the moral community and this is the advantage compared to moral conceptions based on agreement. However, it also requires the discounting of future benefits and costs which in its turn demands special ethical grounds. The author shows the conditional and situation nature of all arguments for the benefit of discounting and makes a conclusion that utilitarian approach cannot be the only one officially recognized methodology of ethics of the future. Utilitarian methods of decision making process including the analysis of benefits and costs play an important role in social and ethical researches dedicated to the problem of protection of interests of future generations but they must be combined with other ways and methods of discovering of the public good from the point of view of generation relations.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, morals, ethics, economics, utilitarianism, justice, future, discounting, resources, eco systems.

Библиография:
1. Apresyan R.G. Moral'no-filosofskiy smysl dilemmy antropotsentrizma i non-antropotsentrizma //
Eticheskaya mysl'. Vyp. 10. M.: IF RAN, 2010. S. 5-19.
2. Prokof'ev A.V. Po tu storonu bespristrastnosti // Chelovek. 2009. № 3. S. 21-34.
3. Ackerman F., Heinzerling L. Pricing the Priceless: Cost-Benefit Analysis of Environmental Protection //
University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 2001. Vol. 50. P. 1553-1584.
4. Arrow K.J. Discounting, Morality, and Gaming // Discounting and Intergenerational Equity / Ed. P. Portney
and J. Weyant. Washington: Resources for the Future, 1999. P. 13-21.
5. Beckerman W., Hepburn C. Ethics of the Discount Rate in the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate
Change // World Economics. 2007. Vol. 8. № 1. P. 187-210.
6. Chapman G.B. Time Preferences for the Very Long Term // Acta Psychologia. 2001. Vol. 108. № 2. P. 95-116.
7. Cowen T. Caring about the Distant Future: Why It Matters and What It Means // The University of Chicago
Law Review. 2007. Vol. 74. № 1. P. 5-40.
8. Dasgupta P.S., Heal G.M. Economic Theory and Exhaustible Resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1979. 501 p.
9. Heinzerling L. Discounting Our Future // Land and Water Law Review. 1999. Vol. 34. № 1. P. 40-74.
10. Johannesson M., Johansson P.-O. The Discounting of Lives Saved in Future Generations — Some Empirical
Results // Health Economics. 1996. Vol. 5. №. 4. P. 329-332.
11. Mulgan T. Understanding Utilitarianism. Stocksfield: Acumen, 2007. 194 p.
12. Norton B. Commodity, Amenity, and Morality: The Limits of Quantification of Valuing Biodiversity //
Biodiversity / Ed. by E.O. Wilson. Washington: National Academy Press, 1988. P. 200-206.
13. Pearce D.W., Mourato S., Atkinson G. Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent Developments.
Paris: OECD Publishing, 2006. 316 p.
14. Posner E.A. Agencies Should Ignore Distant-Future Generations // The University of Chicago Law Review.
2007. Vol. 74. № 1. P. 139-143.
15. Revesz R.L. Environmental Regulation, Cost-Benefit Analysis, and the Discounting of Human Lives //
Columbia Law Review. 1999. Vol. 99. № 4. P. 941-1017.
16. Sidgwick H. The Methods of Ethics. L.: Macmillan, 1884. 507 p.
17. Smart J.J. An Outline of a System of Utilitarian Ethics // Smart J.J., Williams B.O. Utilitarianism: For and
Against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. P. 3-76.
18. Sunstein C. Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment // Ethics. 2005. Vol. 115. № 2. P. 351-385.
19. Sunstein C, Rowell A. On Discounting Regulatory Benefits: Risk, Money, and Intergenerational Equity //
American Economic Review. 2007. Vol. 74. P. 171-208.

References (transliteration):
1. Apresyan R.G. Moral'no-filosofskiy smysl dilemmy antropotsentrizma i non-antropotsentrizma //
Eticheskaya mysl'. Vyp. 10. M.: IF RAN, 2010. S. 5-19.
2. Prokof'ev A.V. Po tu storonu bespristrastnosti // Chelovek. 2009. № 3. S. 21-34.
3. Ackerman F., Heinzerling L. Pricing the Priceless: Cost-Benefit Analysis of Environmental Protection //
University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 2001. Vol. 50. P. 1553-1584.
4. Arrow K.J. Discounting, Morality, and Gaming // Discounting and Intergenerational Equity / Ed. P. Portney
and J. Weyant. Washington: Resources for the Future, 1999. P. 13-21.
5. Beckerman W., Hepburn C. Ethics of the Discount Rate in the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate
Change // World Economics. 2007. Vol. 8. № 1. P. 187-210.
6. Chapman G.B. Time Preferences for the Very Long Term // Acta Psychologia. 2001. Vol. 108. № 2. P. 95-116.
7. Cowen T. Caring about the Distant Future: Why It Matters and What It Means // The University of Chicago
Law Review. 2007. Vol. 74. № 1. P. 5-40.
8. Dasgupta P.S., Heal G.M. Economic Theory and Exhaustible Resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1979. 501 p.
9. Heinzerling L. Discounting Our Future // Land and Water Law Review. 1999. Vol. 34. № 1. P. 40-74.
10. Johannesson M., Johansson P.-O. The Discounting of Lives Saved in Future Generations — Some Empirical
Results // Health Economics. 1996. Vol. 5. №. 4. P. 329-332.
11. Mulgan T. Understanding Utilitarianism. Stocksfield: Acumen, 2007. 194 p.
12. Norton B. Commodity, Amenity, and Morality: The Limits of Quantification of Valuing Biodiversity //
Biodiversity / Ed. by E.O. Wilson. Washington: National Academy Press, 1988. P. 200-206.
13. Pearce D.W., Mourato S., Atkinson G. Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment: Recent Developments.
Paris: OECD Publishing, 2006. 316 p.
14. Posner E.A. Agencies Should Ignore Distant-Future Generations // The University of Chicago Law Review.
2007. Vol. 74. № 1. P. 139-143.
15. Revesz R.L. Environmental Regulation, Cost-Benefit Analysis, and the Discounting of Human Lives //
Columbia Law Review. 1999. Vol. 99. № 4. P. 941-1017.
16. Sidgwick H. The Methods of Ethics. L.: Macmillan, 1884. 507 p.
17. Smart J.J. An Outline of a System of Utilitarian Ethics // Smart J.J., Williams B.O. Utilitarianism: For and
Against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. P. 3-76.
18. Sunstein C. Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment // Ethics. 2005. Vol. 115. № 2. P. 351-385.
19. Sunstein C, Rowell A. On Discounting Regulatory Benefits: Risk, Money, and Intergenerational Equity //
American Economic Review. 2007. Vol. 74. P. 171-208.

Аннотация: The article is devoted to design studies of the ‘evil’ by Vasily Zenkovsky — historian, philosopher and participant of a philosophical process discussing the following questions: Does human responsible for all his actions? Are the abuse of power and freedom the same things? Is following of God a forced process? Is the evil real? Is the evil absolute? Can it be overcome? The author also describes dialectics of attitudes towards the evil and talks about the integral world perception and organic synthesis in mono-dualism?

Ключевые слова: philosophy, good, evil, dualism, mono-dualism, ethics, faith, organic synthesis, Zenkovsky, freedom.

Библиография:
1. Berdyaev N.A. Russkaya ideya // O Rossii i russkoy filosofskoy kul'ture. Filosofy russkogo po-
sleoktyabr'skogo zarubezh'ya. M.: Nauka, 1990.
2. Bulgakov S.N. Nevesta agntsa. M., 1945. S. 545.
3. Vysheslavtsev B.P. Etika preobrazhennogo erosa / Vstup. st., sost. i komment. V.V. Sapova. M.: Res-
publika, 1994.
4. Zen'kovskiy V.V. Istoriya russkoy filosofii. V 2-kh tt. Rostov-n/D: Feniks, 1999.
5. Zen'kovskiy V.V. Osnovy khristianskoy filosofii. M.: Kanon+, 1996.
6. Solov'ev V.S. Opravdanie dobra // Solov'ev V.S. Sochineniya v 2-kh tt. T. 1. M.: Mysl', 1988.
7. Solov'ev V.S. Chteniya o Bogochelovechestve // Solov'ev V. S. Sochineniya. V 2-kh tt. M., Pravda, 1989.
8. Frank S.L. Nepostizhimoe // Frank S.L. Sochineniya. M.: Pravda, 1990.
9. Nesmelov V.I. Nauka o cheloveke. T. 2. Metafizika zhizni i khristianskoe Otkrovenie. Kazan', 1901.

References (transliteration):
1. Berdyaev N.A. Russkaya ideya // O Rossii i russkoy filosofskoy kul'ture. Filosofy russkogo po-
sleoktyabr'skogo zarubezh'ya. M.: Nauka, 1990.
2. Bulgakov S.N. Nevesta agntsa. M., 1945. S. 545.
3. Vysheslavtsev B.P. Etika preobrazhennogo erosa / Vstup. st., sost. i komment. V.V. Sapova. M.: Res-
publika, 1994.
4. Zen'kovskiy V.V. Istoriya russkoy filosofii. V 2-kh tt. Rostov-n/D: Feniks, 1999.
5. Zen'kovskiy V.V. Osnovy khristianskoy filosofii. M.: Kanon+, 1996.
6. Solov'ev V.S. Opravdanie dobra // Solov'ev V.S. Sochineniya v 2-kh tt. T. 1. M.: Mysl', 1988.
7. Solov'ev V.S. Chteniya o Bogochelovechestve // Solov'ev V. S. Sochineniya. V 2-kh tt. M., Pravda, 1989.
8. Frank S.L. Nepostizhimoe // Frank S.L. Sochineniya. M.: Pravda, 1990.
9. Nesmelov V.I. Nauka o cheloveke. T. 2. Metafizika zhizni i khristianskoe Otkrovenie. Kazan', 1901.

Аннотация: Philosophers have been debating whether there is a rational basis of morals for three centuries by now. The debates on this very important topic have not led to any results, which can be explained by the diversity of incompatible visions and approaches to this topic as well as uncertain interpretation of key terms and concepts and general uncertainty of the discussed issue. The main goal of the article is to clarify the meaning and general logic of the issue which is an essential condition for a productive discussion and solution. The article defends David Hume’s idea about nonderivability of statements about what we ‘ought’ from what there ‘is’, i.e. the idea that it is impossible to understand grounds of morals on the basis of knowledge about the world order. The article also contains a critical analysis of modern literature on philosophy and attempts to argue against this Hume’s statement or give a completely different meaning to it. The article is ended with the statement that a rational argumentation of fundamental morals is logically impossible and, moreover, completely useless from the practical point of view because these principles create a unified system of human values which are formed and internalized by the means of natural and social factors. In other words, people adopt these values disregarding the fact whether they have a rational basis or not.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, morals, basis, explanation, belief, knowledge, values, norms, is (existing), ought (the must), imperative.

Библиография:
1. Guseynov A.A. Dolg // Novaya filosofskaya entsiklopediya: V 4-kh tt. T. 1. M.: Mysl', 2000. S. 686-689.
2. Dekart R. Soch.: v 2 t. T. 1. M.: Mysl', 1989.
3. Kant I. Osnovy metafiziki nravstvennosti // Soch. M.: Mysl', 1965. T. 4. Ch. 1.
4. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma // Soch. M.: Mysl', 1965. T. 4. Ch. 1.
5. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma. M.: Mysl', 1994.
6. Leybnits G.V. Soch.: v 4-kh tt. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1982.
7. Maksimov L.V. Ocherk sovremennoy metaetiki // Voprosy filosofii. 1998. № 10.
8. Maksimov L.V. Kognitivizm kak paradigma gumanitarno-filosofskoy mysli. M.: ROSSPEN, 2003.
9. Solov'ev B.C. Opravdanie dobra. M.: Respublika, 1996.
10. Shakhov M.O. Vozmozhen li perekhod ot znaniya o sushchem k znaniyu o dolzhnom? // Voprosy filosofii.
2009. № 11.
11. Shokhin V. Dva tipa eticheskikh kontseptsiy. — URL = http://aliom.orthodoxy.ru/arch/023/sh23-fr.htm
12. Yum D. Traktat o chelovecheskoy prirode. V 2-kh tt. T. 2. M.: Kanon, 1995.
13. Corvino J. Review of the book: Cohon, R. Hume’s Morality: Feeling and Fabrication. Oxford, 2008. — In: Ethics,
July 2010. Vol. 120. № 4.
14. Felux J.M. A Defense of Moral Objectivism (URL = http://www.angelfire.com/biz2/sexydood/philpaper1.html)
15. Gensler H.J. Ethics is Based on Rationality // The Journal of Value Inquiry. Dordrecht, 1986.
16. Gert B. Morality: Its Nature and Justification. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
17. Gewirt A. The Justification of Morality // Philos. Studies. Dordrecht, 1988. Vol. 53. № 2.
18. Kraft V. Rationale Moralbegründung. Wien etc., 1963.
19. Nielsen K. Why I Should be Moral? Revisted // American Philos. Quarterly. 1984. Vol. 21. № 1.
20. Sterba J.P. Justifying morality: The right and the wrong ways // Synthese. 1987. Vol. 72. № 1.

References (transliteration):
1. Guseynov A.A. Dolg // Novaya filosofskaya entsiklopediya: V 4-kh tt. T. 1. M.: Mysl', 2000. S. 686-689.
2. Dekart R. Soch.: v 2 t. T. 1. M.: Mysl', 1989.
3. Kant I. Osnovy metafiziki nravstvennosti // Soch. M.: Mysl', 1965. T. 4. Ch. 1.
4. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma // Soch. M.: Mysl', 1965. T. 4. Ch. 1.
5. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma. M.: Mysl', 1994.
6. Leybnits G.V. Soch.: v 4-kh tt. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1982.
7. Maksimov L.V. Ocherk sovremennoy metaetiki // Voprosy filosofii. 1998. № 10.
8. Maksimov L.V. Kognitivizm kak paradigma gumanitarno-filosofskoy mysli. M.: ROSSPEN, 2003.
9. Solov'ev B.C. Opravdanie dobra. M.: Respublika, 1996.
10. Shakhov M.O. Vozmozhen li perekhod ot znaniya o sushchem k znaniyu o dolzhnom? // Voprosy filosofii.
2009. № 11.
11. Shokhin V. Dva tipa eticheskikh kontseptsiy. — URL = http://aliom.orthodoxy.ru/arch/023/sh23-fr.htm
12. Yum D. Traktat o chelovecheskoy prirode. V 2-kh tt. T. 2. M.: Kanon, 1995.
13. Corvino J. Review of the book: Cohon, R. Hume’s Morality: Feeling and Fabrication. Oxford, 2008. — In: Ethics,
July 2010. Vol. 120. № 4.
14. Felux J.M. A Defense of Moral Objectivism (URL = http://www.angelfire.com/biz2/sexydood/philpaper1.html)
15. Gensler H.J. Ethics is Based on Rationality // The Journal of Value Inquiry. Dordrecht, 1986.
16. Gert B. Morality: Its Nature and Justification. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
17. Gewirt A. The Justification of Morality // Philos. Studies. Dordrecht, 1988. Vol. 53. № 2.
18. Kraft V. Rationale Moralbegründung. Wien etc., 1963.
19. Nielsen K. Why I Should be Moral? Revisted // American Philos. Quarterly. 1984. Vol. 21. № 1.
20. Sterba J.P. Justifying morality: The right and the wrong ways // Synthese. 1987. Vol. 72. № 1.

Аннотация: The article well shows that a traditional claim against non-violence ethics disguising simple helplessness and cowardice is beneath any criticism. However, imperative non-violence can hide a spiritual and psychological pragmatics of another kind – intention of a subject to avoid any risks in the sphere of moral improvement. The author of the article assumes that non-violence ethics is indeed an escape from the moral risk, and this tendency ruins the basic moral about sincere starvation towards the other person’s well-being. This study is based on such concepts as L. N. Tolstoy’s moral doctrine and M. Weber’s phenomenology.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, ethics, morals, duty, responsibility, perfection, non-violence, risk, L.N. Tolstoy, M. Weber.

Библиография:
1. Veber M. Politika kak prizvanie i professiya // Veber M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya. M.: Progress,
1990. S. 644-705.
2. Guseynov A. A. Etika nenasiliya // Voprosy filosofii. 1992. № 3. S. 72-82.
3. Il'in I.A. O soprotivlenii zlu siloy // Il'in I.A. Put' k ochevidnosti. M.: Respublika, 1993.
S. 6-175.
4. Kant I. Osnovanie metafiziki nravov // Kant I. Lektsii po etike. M.: Respublika, 2000. S. 224-283.
5. Nitsshe F. K genealogii morali // Nitsshe F. Soch. v 2-kh tt. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1990. S. 407-524.
6. Prokof'ev A.V. Vybor v pol'zu men'shego zla i problema granits moral'no dopustimogo // Eticheskaya
mysl': Ezhegodnik. Vyp. 9. M.: IF RAN, 2009. S. 122-145.
7. Prokof'ev A.V. Dolzhenstvovanie i vozmozhnost' // Voprosy filosofii. 2003. № 6. S. 69-83.
8. Prokof'ev A.V. Kant, obman, primenenie sily… // Logos: filosofsko-literaturnyy zhurnal.
№ 5 (68). 2008. S. 60-90
9. Solov'ev V.S. Tri razgovora o voyne, progresse i kontse vsemirnoy istorii // Solov'ev V.S. Sochi-
neniya v 2-kh tt. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1988. S. 635-763.
10. Tolstoy L.N. Zakon nasiliya i zakon lyubvi // Tolstoy L.N. Poln. sobr. soch. v 91-m tt. T. 37. M.:
Khudozhestvennaya literatura, 1956. C. 149-121.
11. Tolstoy L.N. Tsarstvo Bozhie vnutri vas // Tolstoy L.N. Poln. sobr. soch. v 91-m tt. T. 28. M.: Khudo-
zhestvennaya literatura, 1957. C. 1-293.
12. Shveytser A. Kul'tura i etika. M.: Progress, 1973. 328 c.
13. Breiner P. Max Weber and Democratic Politics. L.: Sornell University Press, 1996. 237 p.
14. Foot P. The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect // Foot P. Virtues and Vices and
Other Essays in Moral Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002. P. 19-32.
15. Hare R.M. Moral Thinking. Its Levels, Method, and Point. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981. 242 p.
16. Lockhart T. Moral Uncertainty and Its Consequences. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2000. 227 p.
17. Ross W. D. The Right and the Good. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002. 183 p.

References (transliteration):
1. Veber M. Politika kak prizvanie i professiya // Veber M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya. M.: Progress,
1990. S. 644-705.
2. Guseynov A. A. Etika nenasiliya // Voprosy filosofii. 1992. № 3. S. 72-82.
3. Il'in I.A. O soprotivlenii zlu siloy // Il'in I.A. Put' k ochevidnosti. M.: Respublika, 1993.
S. 6-175.
4. Kant I. Osnovanie metafiziki nravov // Kant I. Lektsii po etike. M.: Respublika, 2000. S. 224-283.
5. Nitsshe F. K genealogii morali // Nitsshe F. Soch. v 2-kh tt. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1990. S. 407-524.
6. Prokof'ev A.V. Vybor v pol'zu men'shego zla i problema granits moral'no dopustimogo // Eticheskaya
mysl': Ezhegodnik. Vyp. 9. M.: IF RAN, 2009. S. 122-145.
7. Prokof'ev A.V. Dolzhenstvovanie i vozmozhnost' // Voprosy filosofii. 2003. № 6. S. 69-83.
8. Prokof'ev A.V. Kant, obman, primenenie sily… // Logos: filosofsko-literaturnyy zhurnal.
№ 5 (68). 2008. S. 60-90
9. Solov'ev V.S. Tri razgovora o voyne, progresse i kontse vsemirnoy istorii // Solov'ev V.S. Sochi-
neniya v 2-kh tt. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1988. S. 635-763.
10. Tolstoy L.N. Zakon nasiliya i zakon lyubvi // Tolstoy L.N. Poln. sobr. soch. v 91-m tt. T. 37. M.:
Khudozhestvennaya literatura, 1956. C. 149-121.
11. Tolstoy L.N. Tsarstvo Bozhie vnutri vas // Tolstoy L.N. Poln. sobr. soch. v 91-m tt. T. 28. M.: Khudo-
zhestvennaya literatura, 1957. C. 1-293.
12. Shveytser A. Kul'tura i etika. M.: Progress, 1973. 328 c.
13. Breiner P. Max Weber and Democratic Politics. L.: Sornell University Press, 1996. 237 p.
14. Foot P. The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect // Foot P. Virtues and Vices and
Other Essays in Moral Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002. P. 19-32.
15. Hare R.M. Moral Thinking. Its Levels, Method, and Point. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981. 242 p.
16. Lockhart T. Moral Uncertainty and Its Consequences. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2000. 227 p.
17. Ross W. D. The Right and the Good. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002. 183 p.

Аннотация: The article descries the history of researches in the sphere of ethics of academic community from R. Merton up to our time and makes certain conclusions about further development of ethics of academic community. The author lays an emphasis on the study of existing mechanisms of ethical regulation not only within the academic community but also in other related spheres such as education and business organizations. At the end of the article the author makes a conclusion about a possibility to adopt certain mechanisms of ethical regulation of ethics in academic community from corporate governance and business ethics.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, academic community, applied ethics, ethics of science, university, academic institution, ethical regulation, code of ethics, corporation, science.

Библиография:
1. Allakhverdyan A.G., Moshkova G.Yu., Yurevich A.V., Yaroshevskiy M.G. Psikhologiya nauki // http://www.
gumer.info/bibliotek_Buks/Psihol/Allahv/intro_2.php.
2. Burd'e P. Struktura, gabitus, praktika // Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial'noy antropologii. 1998.
T. I. Vypusk 2.
3. Vedomosti № 33 / pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova. NII Prikladnoy etiki, Gosu-
darstvennoe obrazovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy
gosudarstvennyy neftegazovyy universitet». 272 s.
4. Vedomosti № 34 / pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova. NII Prikladnoy etiki, Gosu-
darstvennoe obrazovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy
gosudarstvennyy neftegazovyy universitet». 264 s.
5. D'yui Dzh. // Demokratiya i obrazovanie. M.: Pedagogika-Press, 2000. S. 270-321.
6. D'yui Dzh. // Rekonstruktsiya v filosofii. Problemy cheloveka. M.: Respublika, 2003.
7. Konovalova L.V. Prikladnaya etika. M.: IF RAN, 1998. 214 s.
8. Kun T. // Struktura nauchnykh revolyutsiy. M.: AST, 2003. S. 4-608.
9. Merton R. // Sotsial'naya teoriya i sotsial'naya struktura. M.: AST, 2006. S. 4-576.
10. Popanek V. Dizayn dlya real'nogo mira. M.: D. Andronov, 2008. 413 s.
11. Tishchenko P. Bio-vlast' v epokhu biotekhnologiy. M.: IF RAN, 2001.
12. Etos nauki / Pod red. L.P. Kiyashchenko, E.Z. Mirskoy. M.: Academia, 2008. S. 87-107.
13. Code of Ethics of The University of Southern California // http://www.usc.edu/about/core_documents/
usc_code_of_ethics.html.
14. Code of Standards and Ethics for Survey Research. Council of American Survey Research Organizations //
www.casro.org.
15. Conflicts of Interest in Engeniring // Paula Wells, Hardy Jones, Michael Davis. — USA: Hunt Pablishing
Company, 1986.
16. Kaptein, Muel. Business Codes of Multinational Firms: What Do They Say? // Journal of Business Ethics
50.1. March, 2004. S. 13-31.
17. Research Code of Ethics. University of Derby // http://www.derby.ac.uk/.
18. University Code of Ethics University of Virginia // www.virginia.edu.
19. University Guaide to the State Codes of Ethics. University of Connecticut // www.audit.uconn.edu/doc/
codeofethics.pdf.
20. Ziman // Real Science — What It is and what it means, 2000.

References (transliteration):
1. Allakhverdyan A.G., Moshkova G.Yu., Yurevich A.V., Yaroshevskiy M.G. Psikhologiya nauki // http://www.
gumer.info/bibliotek_Buks/Psihol/Allahv/intro_2.php.
2. Burd'e P. Struktura, gabitus, praktika // Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial'noy antropologii. 1998.
T. I. Vypusk 2.
3. Vedomosti № 33 / pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova. NII Prikladnoy etiki, Gosu-
darstvennoe obrazovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy
gosudarstvennyy neftegazovyy universitet». 272 s.
4. Vedomosti № 34 / pod red. V.I. Bakshtanovskogo, N.N. Karnaukhova. NII Prikladnoy etiki, Gosu-
darstvennoe obrazovatel'noe uchrezhdenie vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Tyumenskiy
gosudarstvennyy neftegazovyy universitet». 264 s.
5. D'yui Dzh. // Demokratiya i obrazovanie. M.: Pedagogika-Press, 2000. S. 270-321.
6. D'yui Dzh. // Rekonstruktsiya v filosofii. Problemy cheloveka. M.: Respublika, 2003.
7. Konovalova L.V. Prikladnaya etika. M.: IF RAN, 1998. 214 s.
8. Kun T. // Struktura nauchnykh revolyutsiy. M.: AST, 2003. S. 4-608.
9. Merton R. // Sotsial'naya teoriya i sotsial'naya struktura. M.: AST, 2006. S. 4-576.
10. Popanek V. Dizayn dlya real'nogo mira. M.: D. Andronov, 2008. 413 s.
11. Tishchenko P. Bio-vlast' v epokhu biotekhnologiy. M.: IF RAN, 2001.
12. Etos nauki / Pod red. L.P. Kiyashchenko, E.Z. Mirskoy. M.: Academia, 2008. S. 87-107.
13. Code of Ethics of The University of Southern California // http://www.usc.edu/about/core_documents/
usc_code_of_ethics.html.
14. Code of Standards and Ethics for Survey Research. Council of American Survey Research Organizations //
www.casro.org.
15. Conflicts of Interest in Engeniring // Paula Wells, Hardy Jones, Michael Davis. — USA: Hunt Pablishing
Company, 1986.
16. Kaptein, Muel. Business Codes of Multinational Firms: What Do They Say? // Journal of Business Ethics
50.1. March, 2004. S. 13-31.
17. Research Code of Ethics. University of Derby // http://www.derby.ac.uk/.
18. University Code of Ethics University of Virginia // www.virginia.edu.
19. University Guaide to the State Codes of Ethics. University of Connecticut // www.audit.uconn.edu/doc/
codeofethics.pdf.
20. Ziman // Real Science — What It is and what it means, 2000.

Аннотация: The article is devoted to the analysis of the connection between Kant’s epistemology and ethics. The Kant’s idea of ethical absolutism is in essence a consequence of the erroneous interpretation of morality as a special sort of “knowledge” and, accordingly, a result of the illegitimate insertion into an ethical discourse the apriorist and constructivist methodology.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, ethics, absolutism, epistemology, gnoseocentrism, cognitivism, empiricism, apriorism, constructivism, ethical naturalism

Контактная информация: Maksimov Leonid Vladimirovich, lemax@inetcomm.ru

Библиография:
Kalinnikov L.A. Kant v russkoy filosofskoy kul'ture. Kaliningrad: Izd-vo RGU im. I.Kanta,
2005.
Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma. M.: Mysl', 1994.
Kant I. Osnovy metafiziki nravstvennosti // Soch. M., 1965. T. 4. Ch. 1.
Maksimov L.V. Kognitivnyy reduktsionizm v naukakh o dukhe // Kognitivnyy podkhod. Nauchnaya
monografiya / Otv. red. V.A.Lektorskiy. M.: «Kanon+» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2007.
Popper K. Vse lyudi — filosofy: Kak ya ponimayu filosofiyu; Immanuil Kant — filosof Pro-
sveshcheniya. M.: Editorial URSS, 2003.
Rokmor T. Kant o reprezentatsionizme i konstruktivizme» (Immanuil Kant: nasledie i pro-
ekt). M.: «Kanon+» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2007.
Rorti R. Filosofiya i zerkalo prirody. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo Novosibirskogo universiteta,
1997.
Fogel' U. K voprosu o sistemnykh ideyakh Kanta // Immanuil Kant: nasledie i proekt. M.: «Ka-
non+» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2007.

References (transliteration):
Kalinnikov L.A. Kant v russkoy filosofskoy kul'ture. Kaliningrad: Izd-vo RGU im. I.Kanta,
2005.
Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma. M.: Mysl', 1994.
Kant I. Osnovy metafiziki nravstvennosti // Soch. M., 1965. T. 4. Ch. 1.
Maksimov L.V. Kognitivnyy reduktsionizm v naukakh o dukhe // Kognitivnyy podkhod. Nauchnaya
monografiya / Otv. red. V.A.Lektorskiy. M.: «Kanon+» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2007.
Popper K. Vse lyudi — filosofy: Kak ya ponimayu filosofiyu; Immanuil Kant — filosof Pro-
sveshcheniya. M.: Editorial URSS, 2003.
Rokmor T. Kant o reprezentatsionizme i konstruktivizme» (Immanuil Kant: nasledie i pro-
ekt). M.: «Kanon+» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2007.
Rorti R. Filosofiya i zerkalo prirody. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo Novosibirskogo universiteta,
1997.
Fogel' U. K voprosu o sistemnykh ideyakh Kanta // Immanuil Kant: nasledie i proekt. M.: «Ka-
non+» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2007.

Аннотация: By understanding the problem of life and death from the philosophical point of view, human can learn a wiser attitude to his life. We should not run away from thinking about the end of our life. We should accept it and appreciate all what reminds us of vanity of life and our activities. This is what Karl Jasper called the theory of ‘borderline situations’ in existentialism. In his theory Jasper talked about existential meaning of life. Based on Jasper, existentially our life never ends.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, self-cognition, meaning of life, human, borderline situation, ideals, human being

Контактная информация: Katsapova Irina Anatolievna, Phone: (495) 697-84-38

Библиография:
Ado P. Chto takoe antichnaya filosofiya? M., 1999.
Adorno T. Problemy filosofii morali. M., 2000.
Aristotel'. Ritorika // Antichnye ritoriki. Kn. 1. (1366 b, 25). M.: MGU, 1978.
Gerasimova I.A. Vvedenie v teoriyu i praktiku argumentatsii. M., 2007.
Gurevich P.S. Chelovek kak ob'ekt sotsial'no-filosofskogo analiza // Problema cheloveka v zapadnoy filosofii. M.: Progress, 1988. S. 505.
Dostoevskiy F.M. Soch. T. 5. S. 113.
Kon I. V poiskakh sebya. Lichnost' i ee samosoznanie. M.: Polit. lit-ra, 1984.
K'erkegor S. Naslazhdenie i dolg. Kiev, 1994.
Leont'ev A.N. Deyatel'nost'. Soznanie. Lichnost'. M., 1975.
Novgorodtsev P.I. Sochineniya. M., 1995.
Riker P. Ya — sam kak drugoy. M., 2008.
Sartr Zh.-P. Pervichnoe otnoshenie k drugomu: lyubov', yazyk, mazokhizm // Problema cheloveka v zapadnoy filosofii. M.: Progress, 1988.
Sartr Zh.-P. Ekzistentsializm — eto gumanizm // Sumerki bogov. M.: Politizdat, 1989.
Tolstoy L.N. Ispoved'. SPb, 2009. S. 10.
Tolstoy L.N. O zhizni. SPb, 2009. S. 92-93.
Fromm E. Vo imya zhizni: portret cherez razgovor // Radi lyubvi k zhizni. M., 2000. S. 131.
Fromm E. Iskusstvo lyubvi. Issledovanie prirody lyubvi. Minsk, 1990.
Fromm E. Iskusstvo lyubit' // Dusha cheloveka. M., 2004.
Fuko M. O genealogii etiki: obzor tekushchey raboty // Logos. 2008. № 2 (65).
Shestov L. Kirgegard i ekzistentsial'naya filosofiya (Glas vopiyushchego v pustyne). M.: Progress — Gnozis, 1992.
Shostrom E. Anti-Karnegi, ili chelovek-manipulyator. Minsk, 1992.
Yung K.G. Psikhologicheskie tipy. M.: Alfavit, 1992.

References (transliteration):
Ado P. Chto takoe antichnaya filosofiya? M., 1999.
Adorno T. Problemy filosofii morali. M., 2000.
Aristotel'. Ritorika // Antichnye ritoriki. Kn. 1. (1366 b, 25). M.: MGU, 1978.
Gerasimova I.A. Vvedenie v teoriyu i praktiku argumentatsii. M., 2007.
Gurevich P.S. Chelovek kak ob'ekt sotsial'no-filosofskogo analiza // Problema cheloveka v zapadnoy filosofii. M.: Progress, 1988. S. 505.
Dostoevskiy F.M. Soch. T. 5. S. 113.
Kon I. V poiskakh sebya. Lichnost' i ee samosoznanie. M.: Polit. lit-ra, 1984.
K'erkegor S. Naslazhdenie i dolg. Kiev, 1994.
Leont'ev A.N. Deyatel'nost'. Soznanie. Lichnost'. M., 1975.
Novgorodtsev P.I. Sochineniya. M., 1995.
Riker P. Ya — sam kak drugoy. M., 2008.
Sartr Zh.-P. Pervichnoe otnoshenie k drugomu: lyubov', yazyk, mazokhizm // Problema cheloveka v zapadnoy filosofii. M.: Progress, 1988.
Sartr Zh.-P. Ekzistentsializm — eto gumanizm // Sumerki bogov. M.: Politizdat, 1989.
Tolstoy L.N. Ispoved'. SPb, 2009. S. 10.
Tolstoy L.N. O zhizni. SPb, 2009. S. 92-93.
Fromm E. Vo imya zhizni: portret cherez razgovor // Radi lyubvi k zhizni. M., 2000. S. 131.
Fromm E. Iskusstvo lyubvi. Issledovanie prirody lyubvi. Minsk, 1990.
Fromm E. Iskusstvo lyubit' // Dusha cheloveka. M., 2004.
Fuko M. O genealogii etiki: obzor tekushchey raboty // Logos. 2008. № 2 (65).
Shestov L. Kirgegard i ekzistentsial'naya filosofiya (Glas vopiyushchego v pustyne). M.: Progress — Gnozis, 1992.
Shostrom E. Anti-Karnegi, ili chelovek-manipulyator. Minsk, 1992.
Yung K.G. Psikhologicheskie tipy. M.: Alfavit, 1992.

Аннотация: The article shows that origins of morals and law were a grand event in the process of culture development. The author analyzed the mechanisms of cultural genesis and viewed the image of human as it is understood from the point of views of morals.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, morals, law, cultural genesis, system of morals, human, culture, sociogenesis, unconsciousness

Контактная информация: Paleev Roman Nikolaevich, nb-media@mail.ru

Библиография:
Alekseev V.P., Pershits A.I. Istoriya pervobytnogo obshchestva. M., 1990.
Alekseev S.S. Teoriya prava. Khar'kov, 1996.
Vengerov A.B. Teoriya prava. T. 1. M., 1996.
Dyurkgeym E. O razdelenii obshchestvennogo truda. Metod sotsiologii. M., 1991.
Ivin A.A. Logika norm. M., 1973.
Kant I. Soch. v 6-ti t. M., 1963-196T. 4. Ch. 1.6.
Krinitskiy H.A. Algoritmy vokrug nas. M., 1977.
Pen'kov E.M. Sotsial'nye normy — regulyatory povedeniya lichnosti. M., 1972.
Plakhov V.D. Sotsial'nye normy. Filosofskie osnovaniya obshchey teorii. M., 1985.
Spenser G. Osnovaniya sotsiologii. SPb, 1898.
Frezer D.D. Zolotaya vetv'. M., 1983.
Freyd 3. Izbrannoe. London, 1969. T. 1.
Freyd 3. Totem i tabu. M., 1997.
Shershenevich G.F. Obshchaya teoriya prava. T. I. Riga, 1924.
Shul'ts D.V. Oshibka odinokogo Bizona. M., 1959.
Spencer N. An Autobiography — London, 1926. Vol. 1. P. 278.

References (transliteration):
Alekseev V.P., Pershits A.I. Istoriya pervobytnogo obshchestva. M., 1990.
Alekseev S.S. Teoriya prava. Khar'kov, 1996.
Vengerov A.B. Teoriya prava. T. 1. M., 1996.
Dyurkgeym E. O razdelenii obshchestvennogo truda. Metod sotsiologii. M., 1991.
Ivin A.A. Logika norm. M., 1973.
Kant I. Soch. v 6-ti t. M., 1963-196T. 4. Ch. 1.6.
Krinitskiy H.A. Algoritmy vokrug nas. M., 1977.
Pen'kov E.M. Sotsial'nye normy — regulyatory povedeniya lichnosti. M., 1972.
Plakhov V.D. Sotsial'nye normy. Filosofskie osnovaniya obshchey teorii. M., 1985.
Spenser G. Osnovaniya sotsiologii. SPb, 1898.
Frezer D.D. Zolotaya vetv'. M., 1983.
Freyd 3. Izbrannoe. London, 1969. T. 1.
Freyd 3. Totem i tabu. M., 1997.
Shershenevich G.F. Obshchaya teoriya prava. T. I. Riga, 1924.
Shul'ts D.V. Oshibka odinokogo Bizona. M., 1959.
Spencer N. An Autobiography — London, 1926. Vol. 1. P. 278.

Аннотация: This article is devoted to the principle and origins of philosophy which peculiarity is the absence of an object. This way, philosophy can be called ‘the science about ignorance’ and addresses to invisible (unconceivable) matter. It is possible to address to it only if we allow ‘invisible’ to ‘happen’, in other words, if we treat it both as a method and a goal. Based on his study, the author concluded that the method of philosophical learning comes from understanding the morals, so we have all rights to say that philosophy has an ‘ethical essence’.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, ethics, morals, nothing, invisible, the other, transcend, thinking, Kant, Schweizer

Контактная информация: Kotusov Dmitry Vyacheslavovich, dentor@yandex.ru

Библиография:
Alekseev P.V., Panin A.V. Khrestomatiya po filosofii. Uchebnoe posobie. Izdanie vtoroe, pererabotannoe i dopolnennoe. M.: OOO «VITREM», 2002. S. 3-224
Boroday Yu.M. Erotika-smert'-tabu. M.: Gnozis, Russkoe fenomenologicheskoe obshchestvo, 1996.
Gaydenko P.P. Proryv k transtsendentnomu: Novaya ontologiya KhKh veka. M.: Respublika, 1997.
Gartman N. Etika. S.-P.: «Vladimir Dal'», 2002.
Mamardashvili M.K. Neobkhodimost' sebya. Vvedenie v filosofiyu. M.: «Labirint», 1996.
Mamardashvili M.K. Kantianskie variatsii. M.: Agraf, 2002.
Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma. M.: Eksmo; SPb.: Midgard, 2007.
Khaydegger M. Iz razgovora na proselochnoy doroge o myshlenii // Gelassenheit. Günther Neske. Pfullingen, 1959. S. 31-73. © A.S. Solodovnikova, perevod, 1991.
Khaydegger. Preodolenie metafiziki // Bytie i vremya. M.: Respublika, 1993.
Shveytser. Kul'tura i etika. M.: Progress, 1996.

References (transliteration):
Alekseev P.V., Panin A.V. Khrestomatiya po filosofii. Uchebnoe posobie. Izdanie vtoroe, pererabotannoe i dopolnennoe. M.: OOO «VITREM», 2002. S. 3-224
Boroday Yu.M. Erotika-smert'-tabu. M.: Gnozis, Russkoe fenomenologicheskoe obshchestvo, 1996.
Gaydenko P.P. Proryv k transtsendentnomu: Novaya ontologiya KhKh veka. M.: Respublika, 1997.
Gartman N. Etika. S.-P.: «Vladimir Dal'», 2002.
Mamardashvili M.K. Neobkhodimost' sebya. Vvedenie v filosofiyu. M.: «Labirint», 1996.
Mamardashvili M.K. Kantianskie variatsii. M.: Agraf, 2002.
Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma. M.: Eksmo; SPb.: Midgard, 2007.
Khaydegger M. Iz razgovora na proselochnoy doroge o myshlenii // Gelassenheit. Günther Neske. Pfullingen, 1959. S. 31-73. © A.S. Solodovnikova, perevod, 1991.
Khaydegger. Preodolenie metafiziki // Bytie i vremya. M.: Respublika, 1993.
Shveytser. Kul'tura i etika. M.: Progress, 1996.

Аннотация: Review: the main content of the article is a review of such concepts in philosophical anthropology which ascribe the status of the moral object to certain creatures or material things based on their ‘inherent worth’ or ‘natural rights’. It is shown that the mentioned status does not depend on inherent worth because such the moral object is formed under the influence of a number of objective cultural and historical factors

Ключевые слова: philosophy, morals, bio ethics, environmental studies, anthropocentrism, bio centrism, eco centrism, inherent worth, personal goal, metaphysics, naturalism

Аннотация: Resume: the author of the article has tried to reconstruct some key tendencies in the history of the West-European social ethics based on changes in the classifications of forms of justice. The starting point of this research is Hugo Grotius’ classification of justice underling the secondary nature of the distributive component of justice. Grotius’ classification marked the beginning of new European views on justice. Grotius criticized Aristotelian approaches to the social ethics and sought other antique teachings to prove his views such as Cicero’s work “On Duties”.

Ключевые слова: philosophy, morals, ethics justice, forms, distribution, exchange, Grotius, Aristotle, Cicero.

Контактная информация: Prokofyev Andrey Vyacheslavovich, avprok2006@mail.ru

Аннотация: The article criticizes the consumer society and the idea of “the golden milliard”. The author touched upon the old thought that it often took just to limit one’s wishes to find true happiness. Large consumption and greed bring only antagonism and hatred, class struggle, revolution and thousands of deaths.

Аннотация: The article discusses J. St. Mill’s views on justice (mostly based on the fifth chapter of his work “Utilitarism”). Despite the general tendency of utilitarian ethics to treat justice as something having a secondary meaning, J. St. Mill tried to retain the high status which justice has in actual ethic experience. In order to achieve this goal he distinguished several types of “benefit”. Idea of justice corresponds to one of such benefits, in particular, to satisfaction of the safety need. Trying to reason his position and to make it accessible both for utilitarians and followers of traditional and common sense ethics, Mill forecasted a few problems which are actively discussed nowadays and formulated a whole range of contradictory judgments on morals, ways to define the right (morally bound) behavior and principles of justice.

Аннотация: В статье реконструируются представления Дж.С.Милля о справедливости (преимущественно на основе пятой главы трактата «Утилитаризм»). Несмотря на общую тенденцию утилитаристской этики придавать идее справедливости второстепенное и вспомогательное значение, Дж.С.Милль стремится сохранить за ней тот высокий статус, который она имеет в живом нравственном опыте. Основным приемом достижения этой цели является выделение разных видов пользы. Одному из них, а именно удовлетворению потребности в безопасности, и соответствует идея справедливости. Стремясь всесторонне обосновать эту позицию и сделать ее приемлемой как для утилитаристов, так и для сторонников этики традиции и здравого смысла, Милль предвосхищает несколько проблем, активно обсуждающихся в современной этике, и формулирует целый ряд противоречивых суждений, касающихся сущности морали, способов выявления морально обязательных (правильных) поступков, содержания принципов справедливости.

Аннотация: The paper is devoted to reconstruction of J.S.Mill’s understanding of justice (mainly according to the fifth chapter of Utilitarianism). Despite common tendency in utilitarianism to consider justice as a secondary and auxiliary moral concept Mill tried to give the idea of justice as high status as it has in live moral experience. For the purpose of this Mill distinguished different kinds of utility. According to Mill, the idea of justice corresponds to one of these kinds, which meets the need in security. In order to justify this approach and to make it acceptable by the untilitarianists, as well as to the adherents of the ethics of tradition and common sense Mill anticipated some problems which would be actively discussed in our days and proposed a number of controversial thesis regarding the essence of morality, the criteria of right actions, and the content of the principles of justice.