Different concepts of personality: Nikolaj Berdjaev and Sergej Bulgakov

The main concern of both Berdjaev's and Bulgakov's philosophical strivings consists in developing a concept of the person as the foundation of human dignity and creativity within a Christian worldview. Once attracted by Marxism with its emphasis on human dignity and social justice, they started to struggle against Marxism's atheist materialism because of its lack of a concept of person. However, the same concern will lead both thinkers down very different paths with different consequences. This paper argues that, even though Berdjaev has become famous as a philosopher of the person and a herald of creative ethics, Bulgakov developed a more solid Christian justification of the same claims. Both systems are presented by means of comparing some crucial notions within their concepts of personality—potentiality, trinity and autonom

What is a “Healthy National Feeling”? Serge Bulgakov’s Response to Chaadaev’s Despair

In Serge Bulgakov’s thought “Chaadaev’s despair” is concerned with Russia’s search for a proper mission. Bulgakov’s “national turn” after the first Russian Revolution was based on “cultural patriotism” and intended to provide a progressive alternative to the “militant nationalism” of the time. A return to Orthodox Christianity is, according to Bulgakov, both the right medicine for his sick country and the Russian people’s mission in world history. The article critically explores the changes in Bulgakov’s thoughts about the concept of “the nation” against the background of the historical context of his time.Według Sergiusza Bułgakowa „rozpacz Czaadajewa” jest związana z poszukiwaniem przez Rosję właściwej misji. „Zwrot narodowy” Buł­ga­kowa po pierwszej rewolucji rosyjskiej był oparty na „patriotyzmie kulturowym” i miał na celu dostarczenie alternatywy dla „wojującego nacjonalizmu” epoki. Zdaniem Bułgakowa powrót do prawosławia jest zarówno odpowiednim lekiem dla jego chorego kraju, jak i misji narodu rosyjskiego w historii świata. W artykule dokonano krytycznej analizy zmiany w myśleniu Bułgakowa na temat „narodu” w historycznym kontekście jego czasów

Leo Tolstoy and Russian Religious Philosophy (part II)

The Ideas of Leo Tolstoy are one of the key catalyzers for the emergence of the “new religious consciousness” and religious philosophy at the beginning of the XX century in Russia. Many religious philosophers who, unlike Leo Tolstoy, believed in the possibility of reforming the Russian Orthodox Church, developed a detailed arguments both for and against Tolstoy’s moral doctrine. As for faith in Christ resurrection, art of understanding, attitude to “this world”, progress and culture, many of them followed the ideas of Vladimir Solovyov, who had sharply criticized the views of Leo Tolstoy. In 1912 the publishing house called “The Way” released a book “About Leo Tolstoy’s religion”, it was dedicated to the memory of the deceased Count in 1910, which would serve as “his own great task” - “religious awakening of modern society” - and at the same time to deal with the errors of Tolstoy. The results of debate with the Tolstoy’s religion had given a good basis for the projections of the key issues of Russian philosophy: first, the relationship between faith and reason, and secondly, the relationship between spirit and nature, and thirdly, the conflict between the individual and society, fourthly, purpose and meaning of human creativity and culture. In view of the different interpretations of the ideas of Leo Tolstoy Russian religious philosophy revealed itself not as a homogenous unity, but they demonstrated diversity of personal aspirations of its members. What they have in common are the appreciation of the literary work of Russian writer and his lofty moral claims, but at the same time, they separated themself from him, in order to remain faithful to Church dogmas

Leo Tolstoy and Russian religious philosophy. Trans. from German by A.S. Tsygankov

The Ideas of Leo Tolstoy are one of the key catalyzers for the emergence of the “new religious consciousness” and religious philosophy at the beginning of the XX century in Russia. Many religious philosophers who, unlike Leo Tolstoy, believed in the possibility of reforming the Russian Orthodox Church, developed detailed arguments both for and against Tolstoy’s moral doctrine. As for faith in Christ resurrection, art of understanding, attitude to “this world”, progress and culture, many of them followed the ideas of Vladimir Solovyov, who had sharply criticized the views of Leo Tolstoy. In 1912 the publishing house called “The Way” released a book “About Leo Tolstoy’s religion”, it was dedicated to the memory of the deceased Count in 1910, which would serve as “his own great task” - “religious awakening of modern society” - and at the same time to deal with the errors of Tolstoy. The results of debate with the Tolstoy’s religion had given a good basis for the projections of the key issues of Russian philosophy: first, the relationship between faith and reason, and secondly, the relationship between spirit and nature, and thirdly, the conflict between the individual and society, fourthly, purpose and meaning of human creativity and culture. In view of the different interpretations of the ideas of Leo Tolstoy Russian religious philosophy revealed itself not as a homogenous unity, but they demonstrated diversity of personal aspirations of its members. What they have in common are the appreciation of the literary work of Russian writer and his lofty moral claims, but at the same time, they separated themself from him, in order to remain faithful to Church dogmas

Impact of Thrombolysis on Stroke Outcome at 12 Months in a Population: The Bern Stroke Project

Thrombolysis improves outcome of patients with acute ischemic stroke, but it is unknown whether thrombolysis has a measurable effect on long-term outcome in a defined population

The state of the art of cancer control in 30 European countries in 2008.

Inequalities in cancer incidence, mortality and survival represent a major challenge for public health. Addressing this challenge requires complex and multidisciplinary approaches. Sharing successful experiences from across Europe may therefore be of benefit. We describe the state of the art of cancer control structures in the 27 European Union countries, plus Iceland, Norway and Switzerland, at the beginning of 2008. Information on cancer plans, cancer registries, cancer screening, Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and smoking restrictions in each country was identified through PubMed, the official websites of national and international organizations and Google searches. Experts and/or health authorities from each country completed and validated the information. Sixteen countries had implemented national cancer plans in 2008. Twenty four countries had population-based cancer registries with 100% coverage. The exceptions were Greece and Luxembourg (no population-based registry yet), France, Italy and Spain (<50%), and Switzerland (62%). In 9 countries, population coverage of breast cancer screening was 100% with participation ranging from 26 to 87%; 8 countries did not have organized programmes. Seven countries had cervical cancer screening programmes with 100% coverage with participation ranging from 10 to 80%; 8 countries had no organized programme. Nine countries had announced national HPV vaccination policies by early 2008. Six countries had organized colorectal cancer screening programmes. Five countries had complete bans on smoking in public places. There is wide international heterogeneity in cancer control structures in Europe. This provides considerable scope and motivation for cooperation and sharing of experience