Thursday 28 November 2019

Martin Kohlrausch: Brokers of Modernity East Central Europe and the Rise of Modernist Architects, 1910-1950. Leuven University Press 2019. ISBN: 9789462701724 (open access)



The story of modernist architects in East Central Europe
The first half of the twentieth century witnessed the rise of modernist architects. Brokers of Modernity reveals how East Central Europe turned into one of the pre-eminent testing grounds of the new belief system of modernism. By combining the internationalism of the CIAM organization and the modernising aspirations of the new states built after 1918, the reach of modernist architects extended far beyond their established fields. Yet, these architects paid a price when Europe’s age of extremes intensified.  Mainly drawing on Polish, but also wider Central and Eastern European cases, this book delivers a pioneering study of the dynamics of modernist architects as a group, including how they became qualified, how they organized, communicated and attempted to live the modernist lifestyle themselves. In doing so, Brokers of Modernity raises questions concerning collective work in general and also invites us to examine the social role of architects today.

Martin Kohlrausch is professor of European Political History and head of the research unit Modernity and Society at the KU Leuven.

Ebook available in Open Access.

Mikhail Epstein: The Phoenix of Philosophy Russian Thought of the Late Soviet Period (1953–1991). London, New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2019. ISBN: 9781501316395

About The Phoenix of Philosophy

This groundbreaking work by one of the world's foremost theoreticians of Russian literature, culture, and thought gives for the first time an extensive and detailed examination of the development of Russian thought during the late Soviet period. Countering the traditional view of an intellectual wilderness under the Soviet regime, Mikhail Epstein offers a systematic account of Russian thought in the second half of the 20th century. In doing so, he provides new insights into previously ignored areas such as Russian liberalism, personalism, structuralism, neo–rationalism, and culturology.

Epstein shows how Russian philosophy and culture has long been trapped in an intellectual prison of its own making as it sought to create its own utopia. However, he demonstrates that it is time to reappraise Russian philosophical thought and cultural theory, now freed from the bonds of totalitarianism. We are left with not only a new and exciting interpretation of Russian thought, but also an opportunity to rethink our own intellectual heritage.


Table of contents

Acknowledgments
Introduction
Part 1. Vicissitudes of Soviet Marxism
Part 2. Neo-rationalism. Structuralism. General methodology
Part 3. The philosophy of personality and of freedom
Part 4. Culturology, or, the philosophy of culture
Conclusion
Works cited
Appendix: Original Russian and other foreign-language titles
Name index
Subject index

Vladislav Lektorsky, Marina F. Bykova (eds.): Philosophical Thought in Russia in the Second Half of the Twentieth Century: A Contemporary View from Russia and Abroad. London, New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2019 ISBN: 9781350040595


About Philosophical Thought in Russia in the Second Half of the Twentieth Century

Philosophical Thought in Russia in the Second Half of the 20th Century is the first book of its kind that offers a systematic overview of an often misrepresented period in Russia's philosophy. Focusing on philosophical ideas produced during the late 1950s – early 1990s, it reconstructs the development of genuine philosophical thought in the Soviet period and introduces those non-dogmatic Russian thinkers who saw in philosophy a means of reforming social and intellectual life.

Covering such areas of philosophical inquiry as philosophy of science, philosophical anthropology, the history of philosophy, activity approach as well as communication and dialogue studies, the volume presents and thoroughly discusses central topics and concepts developed by Soviet thinkers in that particular fields. Written by a team of internationally recognized scholars from Russia and abroad, it examines the work of well-known Soviet philosophers (such as Mikhail Bakhtin, Evald Ilyenkov and Merab Mamardashvili) as well as those important figures (such as Vladimir Bibler, Alexander Zinoviev, Yury Lotman, Georgy Shchedrovitsky, Genrich Batishchev, Sergey Rubinstein, and others) who have often been overlooked. By introducing and examining original philosophical ideas that evolved in the Soviet period, the book confirms that not all Soviet philosophy was dogmatic and tied to orthodox Marxism and the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. It shows Russian philosophical development of the Soviet period in a new light, as a philosophy defined by a genuine discourse of exploration and intellectual progress, rather than stagnation and dogmatism.

In addition to providing the historical and cultural background that explains the development of the 20th-century Russian philosophy, the book also puts the discussed ideas and theories in the context of contemporary philosophical discussions showing their relevance to nowadays debates in Western philosophy. With short biographies of key thinkers, an extensive current bibliography and a detailed chronology of Soviet philosophy, this research resource provides a new understanding of the Soviet period and its intellectual legacy 100 years after the Russian Revolution.




Table of contents

List of Contributors
Acknowledgements

Philosophy in Soviet Russia. A Brief Overview, Marina F. Bykova (North Carolina State University, USA) and Vladislav A. Lektorsky (Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia)

PART I: RUSSIAN PHILOSOPHY OF THE SECOND HALF OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY IN THE CONTEXT OF CULTURE AND SCIENCE1. The Russian Philosophy of the Second Half of the Twentieth Century as a Socio-Cultural Phenomenon, Vladislav A. Lektorsky (Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia)
2. Main Configurations of Russian Thought in the Post-Stalin Epoch, Mikhail N. Epstein (Emory University, USA)
3. Punks versus Zombies: Evald Ilyenkov and the Battle for Soviet Philosophy, David Bakhurst (Queen's University, Canada)
4. On Soviet Philosophy: A Philosophical Reflection, Karen A. Swassjan (Forum fur Geisteswissenschaft, Basel, Switzerland)
5. The Philosophy of the Russian Sixtiers in the Humanist Context: A Philosophical Reflection, Abdusalam A. Guseynov (Institute of Philosophy, RAS Moscow, Russia)
6. Philosophy From the Period of “Thaw” to the Period of “Stagnation”: A Philosophical Reflection, Vadim M. Mezhuyev (Institute of Philosophy, RAS Moscow, Russia)

PART II: PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE7. The Russian Philosophy of Science in the Second Half of the Twentieth Century, Vyacheslav S. Stepin
8. Systemic Analysis of Science: Ideas of Equifinality and Anthropo-Measurement, Alexander P. Ogurtsov (Institute of Philosophy, RAS Moscow, Russia)
9. Soviet Philosophy and the Methodology of Science in the 1960s-1980s: from Ideology to Science: A Philosophical Reflection, Boris I. Pruzhinin (Inst. of Philosophy, RAS / Journal Voprosy Filosofii, Moscow, Russia)

Part III: PHILOSOPHY AS THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY10. Spinoza in Western and Soviet Philosophy: New Perspectives after Postmodernism, Vesa Oittinen (Aleksanteri Institute, University of Helsinki, Finland)
11. On the Perception of German Idealism, Marina F. Bykova (North Carolina State University, USA)
12. Ilyenkov's Hegelian Marxism and Marxian Constructivism, Tom Rockmore (Beijing State University, China)
13. The West Reception of Alexei Losev's Philosophical Thought in the Late Twentieth and the Early Twenty-First Century, Maryse Dennes (Universite Bordeaux Montaigne, France)

PART IV: THE PROBLEM OF ACTIVITY IN PHILOSOPHY, METHODOLOGY AND HUMAN SCIENCES14. The Activity Approach in Soviet Philosophy and Contemporary Cognitive Studies, Vladislav A. Lektorsky (Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia)
15. The Activity Theory in Soviet Philosophy and Psychology in the 1960s-1980s, Peter G. Schedrovitsky (Moscow Engineering and Physical Institute, Russia)
16.Activity and the Formation of Reason, David Bakhurst (Queen's University, Canada)
17. Georgy Shchedrovitsky's Concept of Activity and Thought-Activity, Vadim M. Rozin (Institute of Philosophy, RAS, Moscow, Russia)

PART V: DIALOGUE AND COMMUNICATION18. Between “Voice” and 'Code”: Encounters and Clashes in the Communication Space, Natalia S. Avtonomova (Institute of Philosophy, RAS/ Russian University of Humanities, Moscow, Russia)
19. A Belated Conversation, Vitaly L. Makhlin (Moscow State Pedagogical University, Russia)
20. From Historical Materialism to the Theory of Culture: The Philosophy of Mikhail Bakhtin as a Cultural Phenomenon, Maja E. Soboleva (Phillips-University of Marburg, Germany)
21. On the Role of the Communication Topic in the Discussions of the 1980s-1990s: A Philosophical Reflection, Victor A. Malakhov (Independent scholar, Israel)

PART VI: PHILOSOPHICAL ANTHROPOLOGY22. Human Ontology: On Discussion in the Soviet Philosophy in the Late Twentieth Century, Alexander A. Khamidov (Biisk Pedagogical University, Biisk, Russia)
23. On the Problem of Morality in Soviet-Era Philosophy, Yuri V. Pushchayev (Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences, RAN, Moscow)
24. The Individual and the Problem of Responsibility: Merab Mamardashvili and Alexander Zinoviev, Daniela Steila (University of Turin, Italy)
25. Alexander Zinoviev's Teaching on Life, Abdusalam A. Guseynov (Institute of Philosophy, RAS Moscow, Russia)

A Chronology of Key Events in the Russian Philosophy (1953-1991)
Selected Bibliography (1954-1991)
Index of Terms
Index of Names

Teresa Obolevitch: Faith and Science in Russian Religious Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2019. ISBN: 9780198838173

Description
Faith and Science in Russian Religious Thought provides a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between science and faith in Russian religious thought. Teresa Obolevitch offers a synthetic approach on the development of the problem throughout the whole history of Russian thought, starting from the medieval period and arriving in contemporary times. She considers the relationship between science and religion in the eighteenth century, the so-called academic philosophy of the 19th and 20th century, the thought of Peter Chaadaev, the Slavophiles, and in the most influential literature figures, such as Fedor Dostoevsky and Lev Tolstoy. The volume also analyses two channels of the formation of philosophy in the context of the relationship between theology and science in Russia. The first is connected with the attempt to rationalize the truths of faith and is exemplified by Vladimir Soloviev and Nikolai Lossky; the second wtih the apophatic tradition is presented by Pavel Florensky and Semen Frank. The book then describes the relation to scientific knowledge in the thought of Lev Shestov, Nikolai Berdyaev, Sergius Bulgakov, and Alexei Losev as well as the original project of Russian Cosmism (on the examples of Nikolai Fedorov, Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, and Vladimir Vernadsky). Obolevitch presents the current state of the discussion on this topic by paying attention to the Neopatristic synthesis (Fr Georges Florovsky and his followers) and offers the brief comparative analyse of the relationship between science and religion from the Western and Russian perspectives.

Author Information

Teresa Obolevitch, Head of the Chair of Russian and Byzantine Philosophy, The Pontifical University of John Paul II in Krakow

Teresa Obolevitch is Head of the Chair of Russian and Byzantine Philosophy at the Pontifical University of John Paul II in Krakow. Obolevitch belongs to the Catholic Congregation of the Servants of the Immaculate Virgin Mother of God and is a member of the Committee on Philosophical Sciences in Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw and Copernicus Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Krakow. Her publications include Faith and Reason in Russian Thought (co-edited with Pawel Rojek; 2015), Apology of Culture: Religion and Culture in Russian Thought (co-edited with Artur Mrowczynski-Van Allen and Pawl Rojek; 2015), and Beyond Modernity: Russian Religious Philosophy and Post-Secularism (co-edited with Artur Mrowczynski-Van Allen and Pawel Rojek; 2016).

Table of Contents
1: The Religious Thought in Medieval Rus
2: Age of Enlightenment in Russia
3: Russian Academic Philosophy
4: Peter Chaadaev: Fides and Ratio
5: The Slavophile Contribution
6: Motif of the Correlation of Faith and Science in Russian Literature
7: Vladimir Soloviev: The First Philosophical System in Russia
8: Nikolai Lossky: Rationalization of the Truths of Faith
9: Fr. Pavel Florensky: "The Russian Leonardo da Vinci"
10: Semen Frank: Quest for Religion
11: Russian Existential Philosophy
12: Philosophy from the Perspective of Language
13: Project of Russian Cosmism
14: Neopatristic Synthesis and Science
Conclusion
Bibliography

[From https://global.oup.com/academic/product/faith-and-science-in-russian-religious-thought-9780198838173 ]

Monday 25 November 2019

Call for Papers: 14th Annual Graduate Conference in European History (GRACEH) | 22-24 April 2020 | Villa Salviati, European University Institute | Florence, Italy | Deadline 31 December 2019

ADJUSTING THE FOCUS: SCALES, SPACES AND TRAJECTORIES IN EUROPEAN HISTORY

Readjustments of scale continuously challenge established narratives in history. Which approaches have historians taken to tackle this issue? In 1967, Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie famously divided his colleagues into two categories: truffle hunters and parachutists. More than fifty years later this rigid distinction might seem like a tired cliché.  All parachutists, after all, must safely land on the ground, while even the most talented truffle hunters need to take their eyes off the forest floor at some point.
Nowadays, historians carefully choose and combine various scales, from the global to the local, in their research. The act of zooming in and out between them allows us to fundamentally change our notions of space. Whereas we used to look at spaces – in the widest sense of the word – as fixed areas, delimited by a number of easily identifiable fence-posts, they increasingly appear to us as a set of blurred boundaries, constantly eluding our attempts to pin them down. Adjusting our focus to such ambivalent and contradictory spaces allows us to discern trajectories inside and across them which would have otherwise remained hidden from view. Following these trajectories can lead us to reveal networks which operate in hitherto invisible spaces, giving us a different perspective on supposedly fixed categories. By changing the scale, movement may emerge where before only stasis was visible, and fluidities may appear where previously only certainty was found.
What kind of questions arise for historians as a result of adjusting the scale? How do these questions influence the way we engage with spaces and trajectories? The 14th Annual Graduate Conference in European History invites participants to discuss these and other related questions. We welcome submissions on topics including, but not limited to:
Fields of research include, but are not limited to:
– Defining scales in historical research: Micro, Meso, Macro – The Global in Microhistory, the Micro in Global history – Following personal trajectories to decentre master narratives – Transcending spatial and social boundaries – People, ideas and objects in motion – Networks of power, information, and technology – Transcultural and/or transnational spaces – Fluidity across historical categories: Gender, Race, Class – Reconceptualizing the relationship between public and private spheres – The Spatial turn and its influence on historical method and theory
Paper abstracts of up to 300 words and a brief biography of up to 100 words should be submitted through our online abstract submission platform by 31 December 2019:
cfp.tempopedia.org/graceh2020/cfp
Participants will receive a notification of acceptance no later than 31 January 2020. Final papers of up to 2,000 words should be submitted by 15 March 2020 so they can be pre-circulated to commentators in a timely fashion.
Accepted speakers who do not have access to institutional support can apply for financial assistance. For questions or clarifications, the organisers can be contacted at graceh2020@eui.eu.

HPS.CESEE job digest (1.11.2019-20.11.2019)





Job: (PhD, Post-Doc, Coordinator) Ethics and Epistemology of Science. DFG Reserch Group 2073 (Bielefeld University). Dedline December 12: https://grk2073.org/apply/

PHD

Job: Doctoral Research Fellowship "Environmental History" (Univ. Oslo), Deadline 15.01.2020: https://www.jobbnorge.no/en/available-jobs/job/165052/doctoral-research-fellowship-in-environmental-history

Job: 10 Doktorandenpositionen DFG-Graduiertenkolleg „Kulturelle und technische Werte historischer Bauten“ (BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg): Deadline 11.01.2020: https://www.b-tu.de/news/artikel/16483-ausschreibung-der-doktoranden-positionen-zum-142020

Job: History and Philosophy Joint PhD Fellowship Program (CEU Budpest/Vienna). Deadline: January 31, 2020: https://history.ceu.edu/history-and-philosophy-joint-phd-fellowship-program

Job: Two PhD positions in economic history and history of social sciences at the University of Lausanne Deadline : 15.01.2020: http://bit.do/fhUMV

Job: PhD scholaships, International Graduate Centre for the Study of Culture (GCSC), Giessen. Deadline February 1, 2020: http://www.uni-giessen.de/faculties/gcsc/info/Scholarships/1910_announcement%20GCSC-scholarships%202019.pdf

International conference: Between the Labyrinth and the Way of Light: Early Modern Metaphors of Knowledge and Johannes Amos Comenius, 30 September – 3 October 2020, Institute of Philosophy, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague. Abstract submission deadline: 30 November 2019

  • Between the Labyrinth and the Way of Light:
    Early Modern Metaphors of Knowledge
    and Johannes Amos Comenius

    International conference

    Dates: 30 September – 3 October 2020
    Venue: Institute of Philosophy, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague
    Organiser: Institute of Philosophy, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague
    Co-organiser: German Historical Institute Warsaw
    Keynotes: Paula Findlen (Stanford), Howard Hotson (Oxford)
    Abstract submission deadline: 30 November 2019
    In his "baroque" novel The Island of the Day Before, Umberto Eco devoted a chapter to a debate about metaphors. A learned Jesuit, Padre Emanuele, praises metaphors as "the most acute and farfetched among Tropes", as the very quintessence of ingenium, which consists "in connecting remote Notions & finding Similitude in things dissimilar" and produces Wonder, while enabling us to learn "new things without effort & many things in small volume".
    It is no coincidence that Eco attributes a keen interest in metaphors and their close connection with the field of knowledge to his seventeenth-century characters. His fiction reflects the early modern boom of practical and theoretical interest in metaphor as an effective, though in a certain sense problematical, instrument of the imagination. The entirety of early modern scholarly discourse is imbued with a multitude of metaphors that denote different segments of the culture of knowledge, involve various methods of its production, organisation and administration, and help to capture the nature of the new knowledge and the meaning of new theories. The terms labyrinth, path, light, darkness, tree, gate, theatre, mirror, garden and other metaphors are poetic, and at the same time cognitively effective, instruments for representing knowledge. However, the rhetorical nature of the metaphor made it also a subject of criticism. Many members of the early modern scholarly community dissociated themselves from the use of metaphors altogether and created an image of the new science as something separate, set at an ostentatious distance from such rhetorical figures. What emerges is a particular situation in which metaphors are simultaneously desired and not desired, and in which they function not only as an effective means of explicating knowledge and theories but also as a means of self-definition and self-presentation.
    The aim of this conference is twofold. Its first purpose is to discuss and analyse metaphors representing scholarship, learning and knowledge in early modern scholarly discourse. We would like to focus on their multiplicity, function and ambivalent standing. A possible starting point is the well-known cognitive concept of metaphor according to which this trope is not only a linguistic adornment of poetic language but also an important tool of cognition. However, we do not want to prevent participants from using other interpretative frameworks; indeed, interdisciplinary approaches to the topic are highly encouraged.
    As its second aim, the conference will focus on Johannes Amos Comenius and his works in order to mark the 350th anniversary of his death. Comenius, like his contemporaries, enjoyed making use of rich figurative language. In his texts he employed a number of metaphors through which he conceptualised knowledge, learning, memory, the universe, and other things. Some of his book titles are themselves metaphorical and indeed became emblematic (Theatrum/Amphitheatrum universitatis rerum, Via lucis, Lux in tenebris, Labyrinth of the World, Janua linguarum, Vestibulum latinae linguae). As the author of theoretical writings from the fields of poetics and rhetoric, he also dealt with the nature of metaphors and parables and their place in contemporary rhetoric.
    We welcome contributions related to Comenius and/or to broader topics of early modern knowledge, focusing on the following thematic groups:
    1)      What do metaphors and the scholarly strategies which use or refuse them reveal about early modern cultures of knowledge? In what way are they connected with the systematisation of learning and its division into disciplines? Were metaphors universally shared in the common literary and scholarly space of the respublica litteraria or are they tied to specific social environments, scholarly networks, fields of knowledge or languages?
    2)      To what extent do changes in the cultures of knowledge correlate with changes in using metaphors? Is there a tendency for figurative language to reaffirm established images (the continuity of medieval metaphors), or is it rather an instrument that creatively transforms models of thinking, producing new meanings for old metaphorics?
    3)      How does language react to a changing audience, to the emergence of new communication media and to the transformed functions of text in a society whose literateness is steadily increasing? And in what way do these developments prepare the ground for the use of figurative language in post-eighteenth-century discourses of knowledge?
    4)      Do metaphors function as an instrument for creating grand narratives? Do self-legitimation narratives, for instance, use specific figurative tools?
    5)      How does figurative language reflect denominational and religious differences? For example, does the extent, to which metaphor is used in the Catholic milieu and in the Protestant one, differ? Can such a comparison be valid in relation to Jewish or Muslim scholarly texts, if we know that different religious currents had radically different attitudes towards metaphorical/non-metaphorical interpretations of their sacred texts?
    6)      Early modern natural science discourse abounded in proclamations about the need to eliminate metaphors. To what extent are these bold statements connected with a departure from the tradition of philosophical rhetoric that was based on ancient philosophy? What was the relationship between these proclamations and new experimental practices?
    7)      Do new types of non-elitist knowledge related to crafts and arts produce new metaphors? And what place do these metaphors occupy in cultures of knowledge?
    8)      In general, what is the role of the construction of similarity and the transfer of meaning in the scholarly discourse of the 17th century? How is a metaphor (on the lexical level) connected with the construction of similarity on the syntactic level or even on the level of larger textual units?
    9)      How is the language of science used in other segments of early modern textuality? And particularly, in what way do early modern poetic and theological texts use "scientific" metaphors?
    10)   How do metaphors of learning apply in early modern fine art, architecture and festivities, and how can one study the relationship between their artistic and textual representation?
    We also welcome case studies devoted to individual metaphors (such as cognition as light, ignorance as darkness, method as a path, lack of a system of information as a labyrinth) or to sets of metaphors in such fields as book printing, agriculture, craft, mechanics, optics, or cartography.
    Conference fee: 50 EUR, 30 EUR for students.
    An abstract (250–300 words) and a brief CV should be sent via email to the main organisers no later than 30 November 2019:
    Vladimír Urbánek              Lenka Řezníková              Petr Pavlas
    urbanek@flu.cas.cz              reznikova@flu.cas               pavlas@flu.cas.cz
    Applicants will be notified by 15 January 2020. We plan to publish selected contributions in a peer-reviewed SCOPUS journal or edited volume.

  • Soňa Štrbáňová: Bohuslav Raýman: vědec, vlastenec a Evropan. Praha: Národohospodářský ústav Josefa Hlávky, 2019. 297 s. Studie Národohospodářskkého ústav Josefa Hlávky; 1/2019. ISBN 978-80-88018-23-0.


    Bohuslav Raýman (1852-1910) was a Czech chemist, popular science writer and a foremost organizer of the linguistically Czech science at the turn of the 19th century. The monograph deals with both professional and personal aspects of his personality. Raýman studied with the leading European chemists F. A. Kekulé, Ch. A. Wurtz and Ch. Friedel in Bonn and Paris. In Prague he became dozent at the Czech Technical University (1878), then professor of organic chemistry at the Czech University (1890, 1897). His scientific research and university lectures encompassed organic chemistry, biochemistry and physical chemistry. As organizer of science he held leading positions in the Society of Czech Chemists, the Czech Academy of Sciences and Arts and other institutions and edited several professional and popular journals.  His contacts included not only top notch Czech scientists and artists, but also scholars from several European countries and India. Among his important popularizing activities belong restoration of the Živa journal and numerous articles in Otto’s Encyclopaedia. The monograph presents not only new findings on Raýman’s life and work but also reflects his efforts to link up science and culture in the Czech society, eradicate nationalism and provinciality from the Czech science and integrate Czech science and culture  into international scientific currents.

    Table of contents: http://www.usd.cas.cz/publikace/bohuslav-rayman-vedec-vlastenec-a-evropan/?l=en

    STUDIA HISTORIAE SCIENTIARUM, Vol 18 (2019) (open access)


    Edited by Michał Kokowski

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    EDITORIAL

    Michał Kokowski
    13–17
    Michał Kokowski
    19–23

    SCIENCE IN POLAND

    Paweł Polak
    27–53
    Stanisław Domoradzki, Małgorzata Stawiska
    55–92
    Alicja Zemanek, Piotr Köhler
    93–137
    Reinhard Siegmund-Schultze
    139–162

    SCIENCE IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE

    Martin Rohde
    165–218
    Roman Gilmintinov
    219–254

    SCIENCE BEYOND BORDERS

    Krzysztof Maślanka, Jacek Rodzeń, Ewa Wyka
    257–293
    Halina Lichocka
    295–313
    Tomasz Pudłocki
    315–326
    Michał Kokowski
    327–464
    Enrique Wulff
    465–490

    BIBLIOMETRICS, SCIENCE POLICY, SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION

    Michał Kokowski
    493–504
    Michał Kokowski
    505–513

    DISCUSSIONS, POLEMICS, LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

    Paweł E. Tomaszewski
    517–529
    Mariusz W. Majewski
    531–553

    SCIENTIFIC CHRONICLE

    Michał Kokowski
    557–561
    Michał Kokowski
    563–566
    Michał Kokowski
    567–570

    Vernacular Medicine in Tashkent/ Space Botany in Art. Online colloquium by Chorus group

    Online event by CHORUS: Colloquium for the History of Russian and Soviet Science , Thursday, May 16, at 8 am (Los Angeles) / 11 аm (New York...