Iv российский философский конгресс

1   ...   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25

61, 561-574, 1971; Kamien, M. I., Tauman, Y., and Zamir, S., 'On the value of information in a strategic conflict', Games and Economic Behavior 2, 129-153, 1990; Kamien, M. I., Tauman, Y., and Zamir, S., 'Information transmission', in Ichiishi, T., Neyman, A., and Tauman, Y. (eds.), Game Theory and Applications, Academic Press, 273-281, 1990; Neyman, A., 'The positive value of information', Games and Economic Behavior 3, 350-355, 1991; K. Binmore, Games and Fun, pp. - , 1992; Bassan, B, and Scarsini, M., 'On the value of information in multi-agent decision theory', Journal of Mathematical Economics 24, 557-576, 1995; Gossner, O., 'Comparison of information structures', Games and Economic Behavior, to appear, 1997; Korilis, Y. A., Lazar, A. A. and Orda, A., 'Avoiding the Braess paradox in non-cooperative networks', Journal of Applied Probability 36, 211-222, 1999.

78 Technically, it means that opting for the PD/CP with the Veil of Ignorance at the initial move is part of the unique Nash equilibrium of the Kind Jailer. This unique Nash equilibrium is the strategy profile in which each player’s complete strategy is ‘First, reject the jailer's offer; then, cooperate under the veil of ignorance'.

79 See Neyman (1985).

80 For some formal aspects of the issue, see Blinov (2001).

81 For an enlightening discussion of this question, see North (1998), pp.713-721. North seeks an answer along different lines than mine, though.

82 The results of economic theory state analysis are derived from: Блауг М. Методология экономической науки. М. 2004, с. 31-34.

83 D. Ricardo himself was sure he discovered unbiased economic laws. (See e.g. Автономов В.С. Человек в зеркале экономической теории. М. 1993. C. 13). A social need for “laws” that could explain pauperism and cope with poverty in England of the XVII century was so great that as soon they were found they started to be treated above the decrees of nature. K. Polanyi gives prove to a paradoxical from the first sight idea that trust of the society to natural sciences was the result of discovering the laws that regulate social life. “Triumphs of natural science were truly theoretical and couldn’t compare with the achievements of social sciences on its practical value <… > The authority of natural sciences has gained a lot due to collaboration with the humanities”. (See Поланьи К. Великая трансформация. С-Пб., 2002, c. 136).

84 On the peculiarities of culture-centrist research programme see: Федотова В.Г. Основные исследовательские программы социально-гуманитарных наук. М.:ИФРАН, 1984, с. 109-141.

85 See Боулдинг К. Экономическая наука и социальные системы. В кн.: Панорама экономической мысли конца ХХ столетия. С-Пб. 2002, c. 926.

86 A Rusian economist V.S. Avtonomov asserts that “social psychology that is allocated between psychology and sociology is best suited for constructive interaction with economic theory”. “Attitudes” as a central concept of social psychology which means human’s readiness for a certain reaction based on life experience is similar to the concept of “preference” in economics. That’s why it is possible to build a model for investigation of economic phenomena as well. Cit. from: Автономов В.С. Модель человека в экономической теории и других социальных науках. В кн.: Истоки. Выпуск 3. М.2001. c. 48.

87 Maslow A. Motivation and Personality. N.Y., 1954.

88 Integrative economic ethics of Peter Ulrich is an example of interdisciplinary investigation that “problematizes” economics, history of economic thought, sociology and ethics of philosophy. (See in: Ульрих П. Критика экономизма. М., 2004). In his Nobel Prize works Amartia Sen links economic development with processes of expanding the real rights and freedoms in a society. The investigation of social and political institutes’ influence undertaken by Sen leads to a change in economic theory drawing together institutionalism and neoclassics as well as in modern ethics theories, e.g. of J. Rawls. (See: Сен А. Развитие как свобода. М., 2004).

89 See: Касавин И.Т. Философия познания и идея междисциплинарности // Эпистемология и философия науки. Т. II, № 2. С. 7.

90 Давыдов Ю.Н. Вебер и Булгаков (христианская аскеза и трудовая этика) // Вопросы философии. 1994, № 2.

91 Weber M. Zur Lage der burgerlichen democratie in Russland // Archiv Sozialwissenschaft und Sozial Politik. Bd.12. 1906; Вебер М. Исторический очерк освободительного движения в России и буржуазной демократии.Киев. 1906; Вебер М. К состоянию буржуазной демократии в России// Русский исторический журнал. Зима 1998. Т. I, № 1. P. 211 – 266. Весна 1998. Т. I, № 2. P. 261– 315.

92 Вебер М. К состоянию буржуазной демократии в России. Т. I. № 2, p. 296 – 300.

93 See in: Heilbroner R. Economics as Universal Sciences // Social Research / An International Quarterly of the Social Sciences. Fall 2004. Vol. 71, N 3, p. 617 – 618.

94 Зомбарт В. Буржуа. Этюды по истории духовного развития современного экономического человека // Зомбарт В. Буржуа, евреи и хозяйственная жизнь. М.: Айрис Пресс, 2004. P. 248 – 249.

95 See in: Мирская Е.З. Шульман М.М,, 0 характере социальной детерминации научного знания. // Социология науки : вопросы теории и практики. М., 1982. P. 3-51.

96 Шулятиков В.М. Оправдание капитализма в западноевро­пейской философии. От Декарта до Маха. М., 1908; Его же. Из теории и практики классовой борьбы. М, 1907; Его же. Избранные литературно-критические статьи. М., 1929.

97 Шулятиков В.М. Оправдание капитализма в западноевро­пейской философии. С .9.

98 Соловьев Е.(Андреевич). Очерки по истории русской литературы XIX в. St. Petersburg, 1903, p. ХVI.

99 Open the Social Sciences. Report of the Gulbenkian Commission on the Restructuring of the Social Sciences. Ed. V.Y. Mudimbe, B. Jewsiewicki. Stanford: Stanford University Press. California. 1996.

100 Sen A. Economic Methodology: Heterogenity and Relrvance//Social research. An International Quaterly of the Social sciences. Fall 2004. Vol. 71. N 3. P. 604.

101 Фукуяма Ф. Социальный капитал // Культура имеет значение. Каким образом ценности способствуют общественному прогрессу. Под ред. Л. Харрисона и С. Хантингтона. М., 2002.С.129.

1 J. Derrida. “Faith and Knowledge: the Two Sources of “Religion” at the Limits of Reason Alone,” in Religion, by J. Derrida, edited by G. Vattimo, translated by D. Webb. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 1996. P. 5.

2 Derrida’s Response to Kevin Hart, in J. Caputo, M. Doodley, and M. J. Scanlon, eds. Questioning God. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2001, pp. 200-201.

3 J. Derrida. “Faith and Knowledge: the Two Sources of “Religion” at the Limits of Reason Alone,” p. 41. As it happens in this essay from time to time, “the religious” and religion without quotation marks are used as synonyms.

5 Ibid., p. 59.

6 Ibid., p. 40.

7 R. Kearney. “On the Gift. A Discussion between Jacques Derrida and Jean-Luc Marion,” in God, the Gift, and Postmodernism, p. 73.

8 Ibid., p. 8.

9 I. Kant. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. N. K. Smith. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1965, p. 29.

1⁰ Ibid., p. 26.

1¹ J. Derrida. “Faith and Knowledge: the Two Sources of “Religion” at the Limits of Reason Alone,” p. 28.

1³ J. Derrida. “Faith and Knowledge: the Two Sources of “Religion” at the Limits of Reason Alone,” p. 28.

1⁴ Ibid., p. 28.

1⁵ Ibid., pp. 28-29.

1⁶ Ibid., p. 37.

1⁷ Derrida emphasizes this latter in bold, together with the rest of his quotation of Bergson’s concluding words from The Two Sources of Morality and of Religion: “… the effort required to accomplish, down to our refractory planet, the essential function of the universe, which is a machine for the making of gods”. (Ibid., p. 41.)

1⁸ Ibid., p. 40.

1⁹ Ibid., pp. 63-64.

2⁰ Ibid.

2¹ Ibid., p. 65.

2² J. Derrida. “Différance,” in Speech and Phenomena, trans. D. B. Allison. Evanston: Evanston University Press, 1973, p. 153.

2³ Ibid., p. 14.

2⁴ Ibid.

2⁵ Like in any negative and negating approach, a number of such interpretations could be very significant, if not limitless.

2⁶ J. Derrida. “How to Avoid Speaking: Denials,” p. 77.

2⁹ Ibid., p. 27.

3⁰ In particular, the issue of proper names and related to it the question of signature: “Your recent work seems to be marked by a growing concern for the question of signature, the proper name” (J. Derrida. Points… Interviews, 1974-1994, p. 219).

3¹ J. Derrida. Points… Interviews, 1974-1994, p. 219.

3⁴ J. Caputo. Deconstruction in a Nutshell. New York: Fordham University Press, 1997, p. 97.

3⁵ Derrida’s “How to Avoid Speaking: Denials” was published earlier, in 1987.

3⁷ J. Derrida. Différance, p. 159. Translation is modified in order to bring it closer to a French original.

3⁸ M. Heidegger. The Anaximander Fragment, p. 52, quot. in J. Derrida. “Différance”, p. 160.

4⁰ Quot. in J. Caputo. Prayers and Tears of Jacques Derrida, p. 2.

4¹ J. Caputo. Prayers and Tears of Jacques Derrida, p. 2. Caputo’s following argument is centered on a relationship of deconstruction and religion, not an issue of différance being or not being God.

4² Ibid.

4³ This thinking, as it was pointed out already, was prepared by the entire legacy of early deconstruction.

4⁴ Such point is quite questionable: as a negative enterprise deconstruction cannot be completed by definition.