Abstract: This article is dedicated to the conceptual difficulty occurred in philosophy directly when the latter attempts to comprehend the analogies to which constantly refers. Indeed, in order to understand something obscure, we are force to lean on something that seems common and familiar. As a result, something obscure becomes comprehensible by analogy with what we have seemingly discerned. Thus, human consciousness begins to cogitate by analogy with the computer; society – with the Internet; and world – with the computer game. Is it possible in such instance to rely on philosophy if its results appear to be just a consequence of the selected analogy? In order to answer this question, the author specifically refers to the analysis of media determinism, the unspoken foundation for the modern media research. It is demonstrated that media determinism is inevitable, if behind analogy stands not just a philosophical method, but profound possibility to achieve the “action itself” (in other words, media determinism is inevitable because the analogy is understood improperly). The author concludes that analogy should be acknowledged as the imperative method of philosophical work. Therefore, it is necessary to specifically examine the analogies used by the philosophers, give critical insight, as well as verify if they selected analogies actually lead to significant results, or on the contrary, only confuse the researcher.

Abstract: The author refers to the new ontologies that attained the name of “flat”, among which are the ontologies of Latur, Deslandes, Harman, Bogost, Bryant, Morton, and others. However, the author believes that it is not enough to just describe the peculiarities of this new type on ontologies (which have already been done by the representatives themselves), but also demonstrate why and in what ways the non-flat ontology transformed into the flat, in other words, how the flat ontology fits the general philosophical context.  The author suggest examining the flat ontology as one of the four basic ontological schematisms, which are the four different versions of the answer to the question “what is?” As a result, the author determines that the flat ontology emerged due to the denial of the assumptions that lie in the foundation of the three ontological schematisms (Parmenidean, ascent, Democritus’ descent, Kant’s medium that sets up and down). As demonstrated by the author, all of these schematisms originated from the clear in one or another way vertical. The refusal of it became the cause that the new ontology holds just the horizontal.

Abstract: ,Video game became an imperative part of the modern culture, which at the present stage finds its application in education, science and business, as well as training of cosmonauts, military officers, and medical personnel. We can also see video games exhibited in museums of modern art, and of course, they are studied in universities all over the world. In this sense, the authors attempt to cognize the philosophical aspect of video games, namely the ontology. Because without the description and analysis of the ontology of video games, it is impossible to understand their structure, as well as which ontological and gnoseological positions they are based upon. However, the authors believe that there is no single ontology, considering that there are different apprehensions of video games. Thus, the authors suggest referring to the three main ontologies of video games: the first one views them as the cultural phenomenon; the second – as the virtual words; and the thirds – as the mediator between a human (gamer and developer) and gaming platform, the interaction of which, as a matter of fact, makes the video games possible.

Abstract: This article turns to a number of events from the life of Alan Turing, the founding father of the computer era and the author of the famous test that allows verifying the presence of consciousness in the machine in order to answer the question “What is referred to as artificial intelligence?” Because namely the discussion about the artificial intelligence, instantaneously disseminated in the special scientific research and products of mass culture, is one of the main consequences of Turing’s revolution. In this sense, the task of this article consists in reference to the source of emergence of the computer and narrative about the artificial intelligence, for the purpose of uncapping those meanings which were compressed in the very beginning, as well as never presented together in the specialized literature. The article answers the question “What is referred to as artificial intelligence”, demonstrating that it simultaneously incorporates three different names: 1) natural human intelligence, 2) human excluded, 3) new form of life.

Abstract: In this article the author problematizes the history of materialism and the way it has established within the tradition of dialectical materialism. Referring to the works of the materialists from La Mettrie, d'Holbach, Engels to Žižek and Meillassouxm, the author detects that not nearly all of the materialists argued and continue to argue against the idealism. In addition to that, the author believes that we should not forget that explicitly materialism has opposed idealism just in the XIX century; and materialism in its clear form has been existing since the XVIII century. Thus, the question arises: with whom in this case the materialism has struggled against the entire century. Moreover, does the taking place in the XIX-XX centuries fight between the materialism and idealism guarantee that the modern materialism in reality struggles namely against the idealism? Analyzing the texts by the materialists of the XVIII-XXI centuries, the author suggest the question: whom in reality the materialists of the past and the present argue against? The conclusion made by the author consists in the fact that the history of materialism should not be viewed as homogeneous and not containing the gaps; but on the contrary, it should be viewed through the prism of the series of changing each other conflicts. The first conflict is materialism vs spiritualism. The second is materialism vs idealism. The third is materialism vs obscurantism. At the same time, the author believes that namely the third conflict and peculiar attention towards it can allow us to understand and realize the specificities of the modern Western materialism.