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
Makijaveli i rađanje „političkog programa“ u modernom smislu
No full textS francuskog preveo Ivan Milenkovi
Serbia: Who does (not) have a seat in parliament?
No full textParliaments are meant to represent different voices and interests of the people. However, they can also systematically exclude or underrepresent segments of the population. This study examines how effectively the Serbian Parliament fulfils its potential for comprehensive social representation. The electoral system ensures good representativeness for political lists, but the parliament lacks social balance. It favours men, highly educated, middle-aged individuals, residents of Belgrade, urban populations, and the upper classes. These systemic disparities persist across all parties, indicating systemic disparities. The electoral system should adopt preferential voting, enhance geographical representation by adding more electoral districts, and ensure MP replacements maintain gender balance. Political parties should offer more diverse candidates, including marginalized groups, and grant greater autonomy to local branches.Unequal Democracies is a project by FES Democracy of the Future. The main goal is to promote comparative understanding of why inequality in voting, political representation and other democratic processes hurt our democracies
Modal Integrative Psychotherapy: A Logical Integration of Psychotherapy
No full textThe book presents a modal logic based account of philosophically informed psychotherapy.. It develops a theory and a set of practical applications of modal logic in psychotherapeutic interventions, focusing on the epistemic, value and social emotions focused view of life horizon, suffering, anxiety, trauma and the philosophical concept of the good life
Political Experience of Local Representatives in a Flawed Democracy: Serbia in Comparative Perspective
No full textMany studies cite experience as a desirable characteristic of candidates standing for election, accompanied by debates on which electoral rules incentivize voters to value this type of information. However, the number of studies addressing this issue in local elections is limited, and even fewer focus on the state of play in flawed democracies. The local elections in Serbia in 2020 took place in a unique political climate, as they were boycotted by many opposition parties. In this context, the majority of local assemblies were filled by councillors from the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) and its minor partners. This paper utilizes data from the Local Councillors Project, a survey of local councillors conducted simultaneously in 27 European countries. The authors carried out a survey for Serbia in September and October 2023, involving 870 participants – members of city and municipal assemblies. Based on the survey results, it is possible to explore how the political and wider regional context, institutional rules, and other factors affect the distinct variable where considerable difference between Serbian and other European local representatives is expected, due to the flawed democratic context further complicated by the boycott of the opposition: the experience of elected representatives
Насилие, фигуры суверенности
No full textЭто не книга. Это текст о запятой.
От того, когда «насилие» произойдет, до того, как
оно поместится в существительное «суверенность» —
в кавычки заключены первое и второе слово из заголовка — всего два нетвердых шага в неизвестность, которые я обозначил «запятой» (она поставлена сразу после
«насилия») и словом «фигуры» (множественное число от
существительного «фигура», написанное и выделенное
курсивом).
Задумался о том, чтобы в следующий раз составить
два более объемных и, возможно, более важных текста: один — о насилии, которое происходит (Является
ли насилие событием? Являются ли условием того, чтобы нечто было событием, — сила и грубость?), а второй
текст — посвященный напряженности и неприметности
перехода некоего прилагательного в превосходной степени «СУверенный» (или «супер») в существительное «суверенность» или «суверен» (перехода в целостность, идентичность, субъект или личность)
Ljudi i androidi: humanizam i posle
No full textNamera priloga je da iskuša izazov koji za samorazumevanje čoveka predstavlja takozvana veštačka inteligencija uopšte, a naročito androidi. Ali prizma kroz koju će se to iskušati biće unekoliko neobična: (ne)zamislivost školovanja androida, odnosno analizovanje jednog naizgled naivnog pitanja: zašto androidi ne idu u školu? To je pitanje, međutim, u bitnom smislu tendenciozno: čini se da bi se mogućnost obrazovanja ljudi, obrazovanja kao školovanja, mogla smatrati možda onom specifičnom razlikom koja ih odvaja od androida i kroz koju se prelamaju i druge „privilegije“ čoveka. Pitajući se za razloge zbog kojih su androidi isključeni iz prosvetnog sistema, istovremeno dakle nastojimo da mislimo liniju njihovog razgraničenja od ljudi i definišemo ljude. Disciplinarno govoreći, lik ili figura androida – onog ne-humanog ali ipak humanoida – poslužiće, možda bolje nego drugi, za izlaganje jedne obrazovno intonirane kritike humanizma. U svakom slučaju, trebalo bi da postane očito da se, naporedo sa promenama u shvatanju čoveka i sa napretkom tehno-nauke, menjao i menja se i njegov odnos prema svom veštačkom Drugom i njegovom obrazovanju: od kardinalne odbojnosti prema ideji da mašine, uslužne sprave, bezdušne stvari, mogu da pohađaju školu, preko rezervnog položaja da samostalni automati doduše mogu da uče, ali da je i domet njihovog učenja već isprogramiran, pa im je obrazovanje u uobičajenom humanističkom smislu te reči onemogućeno, do dopuštanja mogućnosti da se pridruže našim školama – zasad doduše samo u naučnofantastičnim projekcijama budućnosti.The purpose of the article is to test the challenge that so-called artificial intelligence in general, and androids in particular, pose to human self-understanding. But the prism through which this will be tested will be somewhat unusual: the (un)conceivability of educating androids, or rather, the analysis of a seemingly naive question: why don’t androids go to school? This question, however, is tendentious in an essential sense: it seems that the possibility of educating humans, education as schooling, could perhaps be considered the specific difference that separates them from androids and through which other human ’privileges’ are refracted. By asking ourselves the reasons why androids are excluded from the educational system, we are simultaneously standing in the position of thinking about the line of their demarcation from humans and defining humans. Disciplinarily speaking, the character or figure of the android – the non-human but still humanoid – will serve, perhaps better than others, to present an educationally intoned critique of humanism. In any case, it should become obvious that, along with changes in the understanding of man and the progress of techno-science, his attitude towards his artificial Other and its education has changed and is changing: from a cardinal aversion to the idea of machines, serviceable devices, soulless things, can attend school, through the fallback position that autonomous automatons can indeed learn, but that the scope of their learning is already programmed, so education in the usual humanistic sense of the word is impossible for them, to allowing them the opportunity to join our schools – for now, admittedly only in science fiction projections of the future
Does Pure Consciousness Eliminate Emotional Intentionality?
No full textIn the concept of pure consciousness, the metaphor of “purity” refers
to the fact that consciousness becomes empty. Sensory perception
and thought are absent, there is no experience of time or self-localization in a spatial frame of reference, no sense of body ownership,
and no egoic self-awareness. In general, all intentional objects and
all directedness are absent. The experience of pure consciousness
has been part of contemplative traditions for millennia, but in recent
decades it has received increasing neuroscientific and philosophical
attention. The most important analysis is Thomas Metzinger’s book,
The Elephant and the Blind: The Experience of Pure Consciousness:
Philosophy, Science, and 500+ Experiential Reports (MIT Press, 2024),
which simultaneously offers concepts for the phenomenology of this
experience, dialogues with contemplative and philosophical traditions, and takes into account relevant insights from neuroscience.
However, the accounts of the experience of pure consciousness are
not homogeneous and unambiguous. In some of the experiences, at
least according to the accounts, all emotions cease in complete neutrality. Others, however, explicitly report that the experience was accompanied by specifically positive emotions. This could be interpreted as meaning that the experience with (positive) emotions was not
yet “pure” enough, but a rigorous conceptualization that distinguishes
between emotional intentionality and affective tone is also possible.
The lecture will attempt the latter, drawing on contemporary theorists
of emotions and affectivity (Ratcliffe, Slaby, Stephan, etc.). A methodological and substantive critique of Metzinger’s analysis will also be
provided. The experience of pure consciousness is crucial to the study
of consciousness in general, since, at least phenomenologically, it can help to isolate what is truly essential about consciousness. At the same
time, the question arises: what role do emotions or affectivity play in
a consciousness freed from “non-essential” elements
Metafizičke strukture i holizam: Odgovor Šeferu
No full textThis paper deals with Schaffer’s distinction between metaphysical structures, as well as his appeal for the revival of neo-Aristotelian approaches that imply ordered structure, based on the criticism of Quine’s method that, in his view, implies flat metaphysical structure. However, although I believe that Schaffer’s distinction between metaphysical structures is an interesting and, basically, acceptable view, I will try to show that Schaffer’s arguments are not convincing enough to persuade us to abandon Quine’s method and adopt the Aristotelian metaphysical model. Moreover, when mistakes that Schaffer makes are corrected and Quine’s method is given due attention, we will see that this can enable us to have a more tenable interpretation of the concepts that Schaffer speaks of (metaphysical structures), but also – as in his case – to draw certain conclusions that go beyond the objectives of classification as such.Ovaj rad bavi se Šeferovom razlikom između metafizičkih struktura, kao i njegovim pozivom
na oživljavanje neoaristotelovskih pristupa koji podrazumevaju uređenu strukturu, zasnovanih na kritici Kvajnove metode koja, po njegovom mišljenju, implicira ravnu metafizičku strukturu. Ipak, iako smatram da je Šeferova razlika između metafizičkih struktura zanimljivo i, u
osnovi, prihvatljivo stanovište, pokušaću da pokažem da Šeferovi argumenti nisu dovoljno
uverljivi da bi nas naveli da napustimo Kvajnovu metodu i prihvatimo aristotelovski metafizički model. Štaviše, kada se isprave greške koje Šefer pravi i Kvajnova metoda dobije pažnju
koju zaslužuje, videćemo da to može omogućiti potpunije tumačenje pojmova o kojima Šefer
govori (metafizičkih struktura), ali i – kao u njegovom slučaju – izvođenje određenih zaključaka koji prevazilaze same ciljeve klasifikacije
Algorithmic Architectures: Spatial Politics of Critical Art in the Age of AI
No full textIn contemporary postdigital condition, algorithmic infrastructures increasingly shape the contours of everyday life. From data extraction and classification to predictive modeling and decision-making, artificial intelligence systems function as invisible architectures that structure perception, behavior, and access. This talk explores how critical AI art practices interrogate these algorithmic frameworks, revealing their embedded biases, socio-technical entanglements, and implications for power, agency, and social organization. By exposing and disrupting the logics of automation, surveillance, and optimization, artists reclaim agency within systems that otherwise obscure the conditions of their own operation.
The central argument is that algorithmic systems should be understood as a form of spatial and architectural design, not only shaping digital environments but also structuring how we inhabit and navigate physical and social realities. Critical AI artworks function as counter-architectural practices: they map, destabilize, and reimagine the infrastructures that increasingly define identity, labor, and governance. Rather than treating these systems as neutral tools, such works foreground their aesthetic, ethical, and structural dimensions, challenging viewers to engage with the material and societal stakes of datafication.
Drawing on postdigital and new media frameworks, the talk considers how algorithmic architectures operate at the intersections of code, culture, and space. It reflects on how these systems produce not only representations but also lived conditions, redefining the boundaries between art, politics, and infrastructure. By tracing how artists conceptualize, expose, and rework the logics of AI, the paper shows how such practices create a critical vocabulary for engaging with contemporary technopolitical environments. They offer speculative imaginaries and situated interventions that help us reimagine how digital systems could be repurposed toward more transparent, equitable, and collectively shaped futures