University of Arts in Belgrade
Digital Repository of the Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of BelgradeNot a member yet
4571 research outputs found
Sort by
Svako zlo za neko dobro: kriza i obrazovanje
No full textRad nastoji da pronađe razloge na osnovu kojih bi se pandemijska kriza mogla videti kao šansa za unapređenje obrazovanja. Pritom se oslonac pronalazi u kritičkim zapažanjima i vizijama obrazovanja Karla Popera. S jedne strane se uočava da izmena školske rutine i decentriranje nastave može da razotkrije slabosti postojećeg obrazovnog protokola. S druge strane, centriranost na učenika kao pojedinca, njegova autonomizacija i (auto)refleksija, izdvajaju se kao prinudni ali potencijalno korisni korektivi tekućih obrazovnih praksi. Ne postoji jednoznačan zaključak u pogledu mogućnosti ostvarenja poželjnih uticaja krize na obrazovanje, ali se iskušava i potkrepljuje otvorena sugestija da ne moraju postojati samo oni, nesumnjivo prisutni i dobro znani, nepoželjni uticaji
Atanasijević on Fallacies in Aristotle’s Understanding of Friendship
No full textAristotel o prijateljstvu govori u nekoliko spisa. Posebno se izdvajaju osma i deveta knjiga Nikomahove etike o kojima diskutuje i filozofkinja Ksenija Atanasijević u svom tekstu „Aristotelovo shvatanje prijateljstva“. Tekst je objavljen 1928. godine u časopisu Srpski književni glasnik, gotovo trideset godina pre nego što je Nikomahovu etiku na srpski jezik prevela Radmila Šalabalić. Tokom izlaganja, oslanjaćemo se prvenstveno na taj, ali i na druge tekstove Ksenije Atanasijević, kao što su „O emancipaciji žena kod Platona“ (iz 1923. g.) i „Pesnikinje i filosofkinje stare Grčke“ (iz 1924. g.). Aristotel navodi da su, kada je reč o „problemu prijateljstva“, mnoge stvari sporne. Analizirajući i Aristotelovu poziciju, Ksenija Atanasijević ističe da o prijateljstvu „nijednu novu reč vremena koja dolaze“ neće znati da saopšte. Štaviše, stiče se utisak da je ono najvažnije o prijateljstvu, već
saopštio, ako ne i razrešio, upravo Aristotel. Aristotelu pripisuje istančan osećaj za psihologiju, iako je i on povremeno naivan i sklon greškama. Naime, kada je reč o „jednakim prijateljstvima“, Aristotel greši jer ne smatra prijateljstvo „jednom od velikih retkosti“, već i odnose zasnovane na korisnosti i zadovoljstvu naziva prijateljskim. Kada je reč o „nejednakim prijateljstvima“, gde se ubraja i prijateljstvo između muškarca i žene, konstatuje se da Aristotel neupadljivo ističe razliku koja postoji u pravnim i prijateljskim odnosima. Međutim, time se ne problematizuje Aristotelov odnos prema ženama, što može da deluje neobično, posebno ako imamo u vidu feminističku misao koju je Ksenija Atanasijević izrazila u pomenutim tekstovima iz 1923. i 1924. godine.Aristotle speaks on the subject of friendship in several of his writings. The eighth and ninth books of his Nicomachean ethics are notable among them, which Ksenija Atanasijević discusses in her paper “Aristotle on Friendship”. The paper was published in 1928 in the journal The Serbian Literary Herald, thirty years before Nicomachean ethics was translated to Serbian by Radmila Šalabalić. In this presentation, we will concentrate on that and other essays of Ksenija Atanasijević, such as “On Emancipation of Women in Plato” (1923) and “Women Poets and Philosophers of Ancient Greece” (1924). Aristotle notes that many things are disputable when it comes to “the problem of friendship”. However, in her analysis of Aristotle, Atanasijević accentuates that nothing new about friendship will be conveyed in the forthcoming times. Furthermore, one can get the impression that the most confusing issues have already been solved by Aristotle as far as the question of friendship is concerned. Ksenija Atanasijević ascribes a refined sense of psychology to Aristotle despite of his sporadic naivety and tendency to make fallacies. Namely, Aristotle is wrong when it comes to “equal friendships”, because he did not consider friendship one of the greatest rarities, but classified relationships based on utility and pleasure as friendships as well. When it comes to “unequal friendships”, one of them being friendship between husband and wife, Atanasijević says that Aristotle emphasized the difference between legal relationships and friendships. However, Ksenija Atanasijević does not problematize Aristotle’s attitude towards women, which seems potentially controversial, especially considering her feminism expressed in earlier essays
Učešće u hijerarhiji kompetencija kao element normativne normalnosti društva
No full textTekst se bavi hijerarhijom kompetencija kao normativnim okvirom na artikulisanje ne samo kompetentnosti, nego i normalnosti pojedinaca i grupa u jednom društvu
Albanac kao Drugi: kako su Albanci zamišljani u srpskoj kulturi?
No full textRad se bavi slikom o Drugom, dakle percepcijama, konstrukcijama i predstavama o Albancima u srpskoj kulturi, koji nas vodi opštem zaključku koji je svojevremeno izvukao Ger Dujzings u svojoj knjizi Religija i identitet na Kosovu, a koji glasi da „u glavama većine Srba i Albanaca, kao i posmatrača izvana, sada dominira slika duboko ukorenjenog i nepremostivog jaza između Srba i Albanaca, ‘drevnijeg’ i oštrijeg nego i podela u Bosni“ (Duijzings 2000:8). U radu se afirmišu drugi, inherentno pozitivni glasovi iz srpske i albanske kulture koji potenciraju afirmativne i pozitivne percepcije
Psychometric properties of the Serbian version of Workplace arrogance scale (WARS) in the sample of members’ of students’ organizations.
No full textWorkplace arrogance is defined as a stable belief in superiority and increased feeling of self importance that is manifested by excessive and arrogant claims within the workplace. It
encompasses a set of behaviors in which a person expresses an excessive sense of superiority,
which is often achieved by belittling others. In its extreme form, arrogant behavior boils
down to the perception of oneself as invincible. We have translated the WARS instrument
from English to Serbian. The instrument contains 26 items that we transposed from the third
to the first person, so that the items would not refer to superiors, since we wanted to examine
the existence of arrogance among students who are members of the student organizations.
Although this instrument was originally made for workers, the aim of this study was to
determine the psychometric characteristics of the WARS scale on a sample of students who
are members of student organizations. The sample was convenient and it was assembled
through contacting the various students' organizations. Total of 56 respondents (82.1%
women), completed the questionnaire. The method conducted for exploratory factor analysis
was Principal components analysis by the means of which we identified one factor that
accounts for 24.48% of total variance which corresponded to the total score of the instrument
(α = .85, KMO = .92, H5 = .39). Subjects achieved very low scores on the instrument and the
distribution of scores differed significantly from normal (zSk = 4.9, zKu = 7.19). The
analysis guided by the theory of item response determined that the average Infit for items was
1.09, while the average Outfit for items was .96. The average Infit for respondents was 1.08,
and the Outfit was .96. The items proved to be very difficult for the respondents. Most
informative items were those below average. Problematic items that are not informative
enough for students within student organizations can be excluded. The instrument shows
good metric characteristics, although it is necessary to acquire a much larger sample and
more male respondents, as number of 56 respondents is not recommended for applying
complex statistical procedures. Convergent and divergent validity should also be tested in
order to give a final assessment of the usefulness of this instrument in the students’
population