In this essay we explore a variety of instrumental and intrinsic values associated with teaching philosophy in wartime Ukraine. Duclos, an American, argues that teaching philosophy in Ukraine can cultivate habits of thought and action that promote democratic citizenship while opposing authoritarian dogmatism. Duclos further argues that the intrinsic joy associated with philosophical activity should not be overlooked, even in times of crisis. Conscious of Ukraine’s Soviet past, Bila, a Ukrainian, cautions against using philosophers and philosophy departments as an ideological (...) arm of any political party. She then argues that philosophy has value as a distinct form of thinking with the power to provide consolation. Finally, she identifies philosophical activity as agent of creative change. To teach philosophy in wartime Ukraine is to advance these instrumental and intrinsic values with an eye towards influencing the Ukrainian society that will emerge after the war. (shrink)

The fragility of the post-war international order is threatened not only by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, but even more tellingly, by the decisions that Western nations, the European Union, and NATO make in response to Russian aggression. This paper frames Western responses to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine within what Reinhart Koselleck calls ‘the sediments of time’ or Zeitschichten that contain different temporalities, speeds, and directions. Koselleck’s approach of parsing the ‘sediments of time’ is a heuristic device for understanding how (...) Western responses to the war in Ukraine are framed by very different historical markers. Just as one might parse the grammatical components of a sentence in order to understand its meaning, so one might parse Western responses within different historical timescales that include Zeitenwende, déjà vu, interregnum, and Never Again. (shrink)

This article scrutinizes discourse surrounding the Russia-Ukraine war in Western nations, where, despite widespread support for Ukraine, a contingent advocates for peace by rejecting military aid. This “pacifist” stance gains traction through public demonstrations in European countries and political endorsement. However, by opposing military aid while advocating peace, these messages, while ostensibly altruistic, distort genuine efforts for establishing peace in Ukraine. The article argues that recent developments from the philosophy of language, combined with the realities of Russia’s invasion and main (...) war objectives, provide clarity on this phenomenon, making a case for considering such calls for peace as propagandistic, perverting the meaning of the word. (shrink)