<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Břetislav Horyna</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tři negace environmentální filosofie</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Filozofia</style></secondary-title><translated-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Three Negations of Environmental Philosophy</style></translated-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">(Neo-)liberalism</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anthropocene</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Change of interest</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Change of rationality</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Crony capitalism</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Free enterprise</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Global sustainability</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Post-industrial political economy</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.sav.sk/journals/uploads/12181514filozofia.2020.75.10.2.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10</style></number><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">75</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">832 – 844</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The subject of this study are the axial features of social change that exhibit the environmental and economic tendencies towards crisis and civilisational risk. Change also affects the identifying marks of rationality that should be processing and evaluating the transformation of post-industrial countries during the Anthropocene, and directing human behaviour according to our current level of knowledge. Analysing rationality is the task of philosophy: a philosophy that is &lt;i&gt;critical&lt;/i&gt;, is supposed to understand, comprehend and explain. Philosophy does not as such rectify, change, prescribe or direct anything. But if philosophy is &lt;i&gt;critical&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;political&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;social&lt;/i&gt;, it is obliged to find ways to give humanity at least one more (not two, not a do-over, not the last, but just at least just one more) chance. The author is attempting to make that possible using a triple negation: No to the further liberalisation of the open and diverse liberalism of late modernity. No to the further post-industrialisation of a post-industrial political economy. No to further rationalisations of modernistic rationality.</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">State</style></work-type><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Articles</style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">832844</style></custom3></record></records></xml>