Kant considers unity of aim as connected to the form of a whole, what makes impossible to reject any of its parts. Science emerges a priori as an idea which, requiring for its own realization a scheme, due to unity of the aim architectonically makes the whole possible. Scheme of science divides the whole in connection with its idea. Kant opposes science and technic, i.e. accidental efficient deeds, which cannot constitute the whole. Plato considers the One to be prior principle. (...) Connection between the One and intelligible to the mind is indicated by scheme. Therefore, the author aims to compare two types of schematism. Need do divide the whole serves as a basis for comparison. Plato needs it to dialectically envisage scheme of division the whole. Kant – to divide the whole in connection to aim. (shrink)

The Enlightenment invented a new unique format for philosophical thinking, turning philosophy into a force that affects the real world. The author calls for recognition of the productive forces of the Enlightenment, which appear as defenders of rational transparency and intellectual honesty. By rejecting the teleological context and focusing on formal aspects, Enlightenment ideas lead to a loss of connection with concrete reality and the purpose of actions. The last decades have seen a revival of the classical tradition, but there (...) are difficulties in understanding the physical order and its relationship with the moral order. The author agrees with the criticism of the Enlightenment project, but opposes the rejection of any universalist project in general. Considering value pluralism as a result of the late Enlightenment, the author points out that the universalist project is opposed by various forms of relativism. It is in this context that tradition should resume its role. (shrink)

У статті автор розмірковує над проблемою феноменологічної деструкції у творчості М. Гайдеґґера, яка отримала остаточне завершення в його фундаментальній роботі "Буття і час". Відтворюючи динаміку методологічних пошуків М. Гайдеґґера, автор статті обґрунтовує, що німецький філософ радше відходить від методу феноменології, аніж творчо розвиває його.

Review of Chiappero-Martinetti, E., Osmani, S., & Qizilbash, M. (Eds.). (2020). The Cambridge Handbook of the Capability Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.