Philosophy in the (Post) Humanitarian Mission of the University

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Philosophy in the (Post) Humanitarian Mission of the University

I. V. Karpenko, O. M. PEREPELYTSIA

V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University (Kharkiv, Ukraine)

Purpose. The current crisis situation is connected with the tendency to eliminate the philosophical basis of higher education, the classical university, whose mission is to form a certain type of state, culture, and person. Philosophy and humanities in general played an important role in forming the modern concept of man. In the context of the expansion of the information society and the development of the latest technologies (biotechnologies, artificial intelligence), which stimulates the world market, the problem of the fundamentals of the social and personal dimension of a person, his/her ability to consciously choose their own life, is becoming actualized. The main purpose of the article is in problematizing the development prospects for philosophy in a modern university, and its significance in the formation of a modern person with a certain level of self-awareness. To achieve this, the authors envisage providing a description of modern society, related trends in humanitarianism, determining the situation in university education, and characterizing the type of person or post-human that it mainly produces. Theoretical basis. The basis of the article is sociocultural anthropology. Originality. Trends in society and education, defined by the relationship between the state, education, and the market, reflect the situation of the post-human or trans-human, which is characterized by the creation of a nomadic subject with nomadic thinking. The crisis of the modern and classical university as an institution constituting a modern man is associated with the rapid development of technologies, the expansion of the information society, the orientation towards the knowledge economy, which subordinates the university to the market, requiring the formation of a person that corresponds to market feasibility. However, in today's world, the realization of freedom priorities, the prevention of manifestations of unfreedom, the ability to critically interpret information, and distinguish between truth and falsehood are of great importance. The formation of this depends on the education system. But, the situation in higher education is determined by the dominance of techno-scientific understanding and development of the world, the priorities of the economy, economic viability, and profit. Under such conditions, the humanities and philosophy, in search of ways and means of their own survival, risk turning into a kind of techno-sophistry that produces various images. These images can be more or less successfully sold on the market, recreating a certain figure of a human-consumer and a human-transformer who obeys the post-truth situation, even appearing as an object of transformation by ideology or propaganda. Conclusions. It is, therefore, essential to form a person who is capable of critically comprehending the reasons for his/her choice, which can be provided by philosophy with the foundations of searching for truth. In the conditions of technological development, in view of the achievements of artificial intelligence, and the latest network resources, it is important in education not only to overcome the orientation towards professional fragmentation and to verify permanent knowledge but also direct live communication on the basis of critical thinking, which forms the basis in the process of cultivating a person by philosophy. philosophy sophistry education

Keywords: philosophy; man; trans-human; post-human; post-truth; techno-sophistry; education

І. В. КАРПЕНКО, О. М. ПЕРЕПЕЛИЦЯ

Харківський національний університет імені В. Н. Каразіна (Харків, Україна)

Філософія у (пост)гуманітарній місії університету

Introduction

Almost everyone who is related to philosophy or the so-called philosophical disciplines today will probably agree with the statement that we are talking about a crisis or even a noticeable trend toward the elimination of the philosophical basis of higher education and the destruction of those foundations on which the classical university was built. Its mission fathers-founders saw in the creation of a cell for the formation of a certain type of state/culture with a person who had to correspond to it. Exactly philosophy (especially if we consider its definition by Immanuel Kant, Ludwig Feuerbach, and further up to philosophical anthropology and existentialism) and the humanities or the sciences of the spirit, as they were usually called at the beginning of the last century, formed the modern idea of man. At that time, it caused lively discussions, fueled by hopes for the foundation and development of new sciences, such as sociology or psychology, or the development of scientific apparatus, old ones, such as history or economics, which claimed to have comprehensive knowledge about man and outline the prospects for his/her future. On the other hand, human self-awareness in its proper human dimensions, from everyday life to high culture, was also provided by traditional philosophical disciplines, such as ethics, aesthetics, culturology, or religious studies, which, in turn, borrowed methods and results from the same history, psychology, or sociology. All this later - somewhere from the middle of the 20th century - gained a powerful development in various inter-/trans-disciplinary studies such as: postcolonial, gender, visual, etc.

It should be noted that in the academic higher education of Ukraine, socio-humanities for a certain time constituted a rather powerful segment of obligatory disciplines: ethics, aesthetics, political science, economic theory, as well as logic, which were supposed to create the basis for a broad outlook of an educated person. Actually, continuing the trends of enlightened vision in the formation of civil society and the state, which was embodied in the idea of a classical university, which, according to the words of Jose Ortega y Gasset (2014), was supposed to form not just specialists in a certain profession, but specialists-philosophers capable of directing the development of society and culture (pp. 45-46). Today, these disciplines are no longer obligatory, although their demand does not seem to be denied by the requirement of so-called social competencies (soft skills). However, this "non-obligation" in itself legitimizes as a fundamental certain focus of state policy, constituting as a self-evident vision/definition of a person as a certain given with stable properties and defined potentials.

However, even if this vision corresponds to the virtues of a democratic society and comes from the pluralism and non-determinism of man, the problem of the basis in the choice that a person must make in his/her own self-determination or self-creation remains relevant, even exacerbated in the context of the expansion of the information society and the development of the latest technologies, in particular biotechnology or artificial intelligence, stimulated by the world market. After all, it is about the extent to which a person himself/herself is able to choose their own life (conscious of your choice). This is manifested by philosophy from its beginning and until now, research by humanitarian, social, and behavioral sciences, or in the end it is enough for him/her to be a certain determined institution or technology.

Purpose

Of course, without in any way denying the development of the market, especially scientific and technological progress, we aim to problematize the possibilities and prospects of philosophy in a modern university, precisely taking into account the formation of a modern person with a certain level of self-awareness, embodied in his/her professional self-realization and everyday life. We intend to defend the thesis about the significance of philosophy in relation to human self-determination, in particular, inheriting a certain philosophical tradition that has been developed at the Karazin University since J. B. Schad, to which our philosophical research also belongs, the subject of which is the very definition of the place and role of philosophy in culture (Karpenko, 2006; Karpenko & Guzhva, 2021; Perepelytsia, 2014), as well as based on personal teaching and administrative experience. First, we will outline the general situation that characterizes modern society and trends in humanitarianism. Then we will define the internal situation of university education and characterize the type of person that it mainly produces. After, we will turn to the social context that reproduces the same type of person and in which the university is currently, and finally we will try to determine whether there is still a place for philosophy in it.

Statement of basic materials

Perhaps the above-mentioned trends reflect some dimension of the state that today prefers to be called post-human, the positive side of which obviously consists in the vision that Nataliia Zahurska (2018) characterizes as such, according to which, overcoming anthropocentrism, "Posthuman resists to a virus or an animal as an equal in the differences, which imply multiplicity of regimes of attraction"), constituting randomness and spontaneity (p. 29), ultimately a nomadic subject with nomadic thinking (Braidotti, 2013). Obviously, this condition problematizes a person and his/her place in the world, which cannot but affect the humanities as a whole. To some extent, today we observe a challenge to these sciences not so much from the side of scientism, which was actualized at the beginning of the 20th century, as from the side of an ethical perspective, which is based on overcoming the ideology of the so-called "human exceptionalism" and expanding ecological awareness.

Of course, the crisis of the humanities, about which Rosie Braidotti writes, for example, can be overcome, and in particular through the spread of the "vitalist notion" of self-organizing matter, or through the development of gender, feminist or postcolonial studies, which, according to Braidotti (2013), are "prototypes of new experimental" multidisciplinary areas of research focused on "horrors of our times" (Holocaust, slavery, colonialism, traumatic memory of numerous genocides provoked by ideologies, etc.) (pp. 147-148). But it does not yet solve the crises of a modern or classical university as an institution, which constituted a modern man, an institution whose challenge is not only the rapid development of technologies (which, do not forget, are being developed by the university!) and the expansion of the information society (in the end, the expansion of access to information and its rapid dissemination should stimulate scientific research), and above all the focus on the so-called economy of knowledge, etc., which in fact only subordinates the university to the market, demanding to form a person that corresponds exclusively to market feasibility. Actually, if one does not even defend leftist pessimism like Mark Fisher (2009), it is difficult not to admit that such a person (or post-human) is limited in his/her being as a kind of market operator processing information and modifying himself/herself according to new technological possibilities. In our opinion, this requires us to be even more persistent in addressing those humanitarian foundations of education, which are nourished precisely by philosophy.

On the one hand, one can agree with the reasoning of Braidotti and other theorists of posthumanity, because it is obvious that at the basis of higher education, even under the condition in the realization of the ideal of a classical university that combines teaching, education and scientific research, cannot be established any kind of disconnected from the development of scientific knowledge ideology, or, even worse, political (sub)theology. But the same Martha Nussbaum (2010), with whom Braidotti argues, is right concerning the significance of the principles of liberal-democratic humanism. Current humanities studies or, as defined by Michel Foucault, microhistories, undoubtedly expand the idea of multifacetedness, and multilayeredness of human existence, but at the same time produce their own specific methodologies and discourses, which can be problematic for non-specialists to assimilate, and the generalization of their results requires synthesizing humanitarian science. However, even when humanitarianism does abandon "nostalgia" or "idealization of philosophical meta-discourse" and chooses the path of "solving more pragmatic tasks of self-transformation/experimentation" (Braidotti, 2013, p. 150), this does not mean that it will be able to defend or to strengthen its position in the university, as, by the way, and the university in the state. The war in Ukraine additionally and vividly proves that when it comes to freedom or the principles of a decent human life, it is unlikely that research arguments or proofs will be effective - after all, as Immanuel Kant noted, freedom does not need proof, but only protection and self-assertion. But the recognition of the priority of freedom, as well as the recognition of manifestations of unfreedom, just like the distinction between truth and falsehood, or, to speak in the old philosophical language, the real good for a person, in fact still does not belong to the obvious things and, it seems, are not a priority for modern systems of higher education.

The internal situation in higher education is determined, on the one hand, by the dominance of a techno-scientific understanding of the world - science itself, which is aimed at the technological development of the world, which is strengthened by two complementary trends: the requirement for the implementation of results in the economy and the requirement for commercial viability and profit, which should provide this implementation. The strategies and intentions of modern universities must meet these exclusive market requirements. The market principle, however, is vague about what is usually associated with scientific truth. There is no doubt that the powerful development of modern, primarily natural, sciences ensured the development of the production of goods and contributed to the development of the service sector, but the timeliness, and even more so, the profitability of scientific results cannot be a condition for their existence or a criterion for their success. It is not about that some results of even fundamental sciences can be revealed only in a distant perspective, the point is that the transformation of science and higher education into work deprives them of that atmosphere of leisure, which almost all theoreticians of the idea of the university considered as obligatory for creative searches and formation of a creative person. The university's focus on planning and reporting, the denominator of which is market profit, ultimately turns it into a factory, prompting truly creative people to seek other topos for self-realization. Others, in conditions where any implementation is measured by commercial success, is forced to look for non-valid, then speculative ways of achieving it.

It is here the techno-sophistic principle is the base regarding the meaning of the existence of the humanities. By and large, if they are not able to bring a purely applied utilitarian profit, or to sell something on the market, they have to involve the whole sophistic apparatus and become part of the "spectacle society", producing a certain number of images that can be successfully sold, depending on the level of development, dispersion or centralization of the spectacle. Such latest techno-sophistry can mimic any market demand, which introduces an external factor as decisive, in the case of the humanities, regarding the reproduction of certain values and a certain person as their bearer. Humanities and "philosophy", professing a techno-sophistic approach to their existence, by definition produce exclusively something for sale, that is, a product or a service, eventually turning into ideology or propaganda, at least advertising - that is, technology. Therefore, the meaning of the concept of techno-sophistry is revealed in the fact that technology appears as being itself and the goal of existence, and sophistry is a means of promoting this existence. In other words, the existence of humanitarianism and especially philosophy - the meaning of which was the cultivation of a person - turns into a search for ways and means of survival and self-justification in the situation of supporting and reproducing a certain figure of a human-consumer.

Perhaps this fully corresponded to the trends of the so-called postmodern situation, worked well and quite safely in the conditions of the so-called end of history, and was even natural for the development of the entertainment culture industry. However, the war calls into question not so much the truth or naturalness of such an existence, as it exposes the risks associated with it, and once again actualizes the theme of the philosopher and humanitarian's responsibility, as well as the theme in the idea or mission of the university and education in general. It is precisely in this connection one should comprehend the external situation, the position in which a person is and which is often referred to as post-human.

Theoreticians who are critical of the situation, have declared it a state of post-truth (Harsin, 2018; McIntyre, 2018), emphasizing that it consists in creating a distorted, illusory or fake, simulative reality using technologies, ignoring any "standards of truths, objective facts and critical thinking, and appeals instead to people's emotions and personal beliefs" (Hegenbart & Kolmel, 2023, p. 1). Yes, of course, people always transform or distort reality in their own way. This process, after all, is called culture. However, if all previous cultures were characterized by a certain localization or restriction/selection of culture samples or restriction in information circulation, today we are talking about inflation and acceleration of the information flow, where is extremely difficult (there is no time) to distinguish truth from falsehood. Therefore, everything looks like that only innovative velocity/reactivity guarantees by definition temporary success in the streams of the information culture industry. There is no time to stop because everything quickly becomes outdated. Accelerated production of images with the help of the latest technologies puts a person in a state of a kind of trance when s/he is almost unconsciously in a transformative flow of images/information, and in order to comply with it, s/he must constantly transform oneself, so to speak, accelerate («)own(») post. All these dimensions, which Jean Baudrillard (1993) once conceptualized as trans-aesthetics, trans-economics, and trans-sexuality, correspond to the formation of the form of the trans-human (man-transformer), which in the flow of transforming one's own image constantly becomes a post-human.

From this, it follows that only such a science, such a philosophy has a chance of success, which is capable of creating the most twisted images, realities, the most sophisticated manipulators or simulators of consciousness, or, more precisely, of the unconscious. After all, it is about the return and publication/printing (the 3D printer is a vivid example of the material embodiment of this trend) of images that were usually supplanted by culture. Of course, such a state can exist only under the condition of value pluralism, recognition of ontological multiplicity and equality of singular ethos, intertwined in network interaction only under the condition of fundamental openness to the other. However, the representation of the supplanted one does not actually overcome social contradictions and instead produces inequality and competition, fueled by the counter of capital on which this man-transformer gets hooked. There are many examples of this quantitative approach to measuring the value of anything: rating systems in production or in education, counting cited literature in science, likes and/or dislikes in the network, etc. In order to at least somehow correspond to the acceleration in the growth of numbers, a person must constantly focus on self-transformation, without having clear criteria and principles for its implementation. Appropriately, techno-sophistry should try to create explanatory narratives, even metanarratives (albeit with an emphasis on that meta not on, but on between) that legitimize any temporary forms of the transformer.

Indeed, a person who is open to transformation can be malleable to the point of being used as an object of transformation by any ideology or propaganda. To a certain extent, this was evidenced by russian propaganda, and not only with regard to Russian citizens in the promotion of a simulacrum of the "russian world", which contaminates various historical/nostalgic narratives that form what is called schizo-fascism (Perepelytsia & Khrabrova, 2022, pp. 33-34), but also regarding various informational fakes that are thrown into the global information space. The war actually unleashed by the putin regime requires us to rethink the situation in such a way as to preserve and protect all the freedoms acquired by man, even the freedom of transformation, which is possible only in the space of an appropriate educational perspective, which involves the formation of the ability to think, to question any ideologies, because, as Fisher (2009) observes, "An ideological position can never be really successful until it is naturalized, and it cannot be naturalized while it is still thought of as a value rather than a fact" (p. 21).

Originality

You can prevent the inflation of negativity by making a gesture similar to what the ancient Greek philosophers opposed to sophistry. It is about the search for truth. It is the model of how to practice the skill of distinguishing truth and lies at different levels that Plato offers in the dialogue "Sophist". This gesture is possible either in the union of philosophers with the state or a network of civilized (or those aspiring to civilizational development) states, which was produced by the Enlightenment paradigm and embodied/institutionalized by the classical university, and/or through the creation of non-state philosophical platforms. Be that as it may, philosophy, as long as there is a being capable of thinking, will continue to develop this thinking, and the state will decide whether it will be based on philosophy, whether the university will be the focus of its implementation, or something else.

For our part, we see the following perspective. It is very good that there is a branching of disciplines that investigate and collectively project the human being today, receiving support from various political and civil movements. From our own experience, we can speak of a rather promising example in the introduction of interfaculty disciplines at V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, where students can personally choose four disciplines, in particular philosophical and humanitarian. Some of them, which are offered by teachers of the Faculty of Philosophy, by the way, reflect the most current trends in modern humanitarian studies. The demand for interdisciplinary, philosophical disciplines in university education is also confirmed by the experience of other universities (Boiko et al., 2020). However, it should be noted that the choice can be random, which corresponds to the trends of the network society. A student can/or not choose something. And this choice to a certain extent is not guided by anything except personal interest, even belief.

Without a doubt, this is better than forced forms of education, and choosing the trajectories of one's own learning is a significant achievement of university autonomy. However, this by no means solves the problem of a torn, fragmented consciousness. Should we be satisfied with this? Should we insist on integrity or systematic thinking?

This issue, as we can judge, remains relevant for at least a century. At least, Edmund Husserl acutely raised it in the context of the so-called crisis of European sciences. The German philosopher rightly notes that modern (then it meant positivist-oriented) science rejects the "most burning" questions about "the intelligence or senselessness of human existence itself", issues "concerning man as a being freely defining oneself in one's own relationships with the human and outside the human environment, be free in the ability to intelligently create oneself and one's environment" (Husserl, 2002, p. 137). In his opinion, ancient science, which the Renaissance tried to restore, corresponded to all this. And the defining factor was the philosophical theory, which "makes free not only the researcher, but also everyone who is philosophically educated" (Husserl, 2002, p. 139). Defending a universal philosophy or metaphysics, Husserl insists on the philosopher's responsibility for directing human life to the truth. In the conditions of the posttruth state, this demand undoubtedly acquires additional relevance. However, responsibility requires the constant work of thought on the problematization of truth, the understanding of the risks of philosophy falling into doxography or ideology, the understanding that the vocation of philosophy is, as Serhiy Proleiev rightly notes in the discussion devoted to the prospects for the development of philosophical education in Ukraine, moderated by Mykhailo Boichenko, "to constantly multiply the human ability to understand and open new semantic horizons" (Boiko et al., 2020, p. 303).

In our opinion, in the conditions of technological development, given the achievements of artificial intelligence, resources such as ChatGPT, which can generate seemingly meaningful texts, a shift of emphasis in education from an orientation towards the feigned objectivity of knowledge testing, which can only be considered as an additional means of control or selforganization of the educational process, to direct live communication, which formed the basis of the process of human cultivation from the ancient Greek paideia to the classical university. It is philosophy, philosophical dialectic in its immediate meaning, that forms the skills of such communication, thinking in its living, effective form.

Conclusions

Today, even simplifying the pathos of Husserl's formulation, we still believe that it is better with at least some philosophy than without it. After all, in the expansion of man's relations with the non-human world, philosophy remains the only way to man's self-preservation, even the only way of his/her expansion and, even more, superiority. The point is not even that philosophy overcomes the fragmentation of consciousness, which is formed by modern sciences and the market division of labor, and the splitting of consciousness, which is stimulated by flows of information, the point is rather that philosophy helps to set unbiased goals. The world of the latest technologies, digitalization, and the development of artificial intelligence should not be considered as self-sufficient, as a complete replacement for human existence. At least as long as there is a person, even multiplied by the prefixes post or trans. In the end, precisely the person who chooses her/himself, and directs her/his life, but under the condition of intellectual dialogue with others, which is not possible without philosophy.

REFERENCES

1. Baudrillard, J. (1993). The Transparency of Evil: Essays on Extreme Phenomena (J. Benedict, Trans.). Verso. (in English)

2. Boiko, A., Dakhniy, A. Y., Karpenko, I. V., Menzhulin, V. I., Proleiev, S. V., Shashkova, L. O., & Boichenko, M. I. (2020). Prospects for the development of philosophical education in Ukraine. Round Table. Filosofiya Osvity. Philosophy of Education, 26(1), 282-325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2020-26-1-18 (in Ukrainian)

3. Braidotti, R. (2013). The Posthuman. Cambridge: Polity Press. (in English)

4. Fisher, M. (2009). Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? Washington: John Hunt Publishing. (in English)

5. Harsin, J. (2018, December 20). Post-Truth and Critical Communication Studies. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.757 (in English)

6. Hegenbart, S., & Kolmel, M.-J. (Eds.). (2023). Dada Data: Contemporary Art Practice in the Era of Post-Truth Politics. Bloomsbury Visual Arts. (in English)

7. Husserl, Е. (2002). Kryza yevropeiskykh nauk i transtsendentalna fenomenolohiia. Filosofska dumka, (3), 134-149. (in Ukrainian)

8. Karpenko, I. V. (2006). Filosofskoe prostranstvo kultury: chelovek filosofstvuyushchii i chelovek povsednevnosti: Monografiya. Kharkiv: V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. (in Russian)

9. Karpenko, I. V., & Guzhva, A. A. (2021). Human Being in the Dimension of the Psycho sociocultural Matrix of Philosophizing. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (20), 69-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i20.249565 (in English)

10. McIntyre, L. C. (2018). Post-Truth. The MIT Press. (in English)

11. Nussbaum, M. C. (2010). Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. Princeton University Press. (in English)

12. Ortega y Gasset, J. (2014). Mission of the University (H. L. Nostrand, Trans.). Routledge. (in English)

13. Perepelytsia, O. M. (2014). Mediumy Prosveshcheniya: obstsennye otkloneniya: Monografiya. Kharkiv: V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. (in Russian)

14. Perepelytsia, O. M., & Khrabrova, O. V. (2022). Neo-modern vs retrospective non/pre-modern in the battle for Enlightenment. Filosofiya Osvity. Philosophy of Education, 28(1), 28-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31874/ 2309-1606-2022-28-1-2 (in Ukrainian)

15. Zahurska, N. V. (2018). Speculative Posthumanism: Naturalization and Vitalization. The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Philosophy. Philosophical Peripeteias", (59), 25-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/2226-0994-2018-59-3 (in English)

LIST OF REFERENCE LINKS

1. Baudrillard J. The Transparency of Evil: Essays on Extreme Phenomena / trans. by J. Benedict. Verso, 1993. 174 p.

2. Бойко А., Дахній А. Й., Карпенко І. В., Менжулін В. І., Пролеєв С. В., Шашкова Л. О., Бойченко М. І. Перспективи розвитку філософської освіти в Україні. Круглий стіл. Філософія освіти. Philosophy of Education. 2020. T. 26, № 1. С. 282-325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2020-26-1-18

3. Braidotti R. The Posthuman. Cambridge : Polity Press, 2013. 229 p.

4. Fisher M. Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? Washington : John Hunt Publishing, 2009. 73 p.

5. Harsin J. Post-Truth and Critical Communication Studies. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. 2018. December 20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.757

6. Dada Data: Contemporary Art Practice in the Era of Post-Truth Politics / ed. by S. Hegenbart, M.-J. Kolmel. Bloomsbury Visual Arts, 2023. 359 p.

7. Гуссерль Е. Криза європейських наук і трансцендентальна феноменологія. Філософська думка. 2002. № 3. С. 134-149.

8. Карпенко И. В. Философское пространство культуры: человек философствующий и человек повседневности : монография. Харьков : Харьковский национальный университет имени В. Н. Каразина, 2006. 292 c.

9. Karpenko I. V., Guzhva A. A. Human Being in the Dimension of the Psychosociocultural Matrix of Philosophizing. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research. 2021. No. 20. P. 69-77. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.15802/ampr.v0i20.249565

10. McIntyre L. C. Post-Truth. The MIT Press, 2018. 240 p.

11. Nussbaum M. C. Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. Princeton University Press, 2010. xv+158 p.

12. Ortega y Gasset J. Mission of the University / trans. by H. L. Nostrand. Routledge, 2014. 81 p.

13. Перепелица О. Н. Медиумы Просвещения: обсценные отклонения : монография. Харьков : Харьковский национальный университет имени В. Н. Каразина, 2014. 260 с.

14. Перепелиця О. М., Храброва О. В. Неомодерн vs ретроспективний недомодерн у битві за просвітництво. Філософія освіти. Philosophy of Education. 2022. Т. 28, № 1. С. 28-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31874/ 2309-1606-2022-28-1-2

15. Zahurska N. V. Speculative Posthumanism: Naturalization and Vitalization. The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Philosophy. Philosophical Peripeteias". 2018. No. 59. P. 25-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/2226-0994-2018-59-3

Размещено на Allbest.ru