Purpose is the post-metaphysical conceptualization of the subject in the clinical discourse of philosophical anthropology. Theoretical basis of research combines the means of discursive analytics and the general principles of historical and philosophical science. The logic of the research coincides with the paradigmatic understanding of the subject’s transformations and suggests a transition from diagnostic strategies of the analysis of individual being as the basis of the pathological nature of the subject to the study of therapeutic models of communication as the (...) determinants of pathology and, finally, to the analytics of the subject in the horizon of polysubject sociality.Originality of the work consists in disclosing the basic anthropological models of the subject, corresponding to the functions of diagnosis and therapy. It is shown that, in spite of the revolutionary nature of certain projects, which allows them to be classified as postmetaphysical, they still have relapses of metaphysics existing in the image of the subject, which is conceived as the basis of authenticity. According to the criteria for practical implementation, the key is the transformation of the theories of the subject oriented toward self-determination and autonomy into concepts focused on responsibility, caring for what exists and how to exercise it as a person. Conclusions. The research proved that the image of the postclassical subject focused on the ideal of his own authenticity should be diagnosed as pathological. It showed that the accentuation is purely inexpedient in terms of discursiveness, conversation, and the result is the assertion of the independence of the internal, albeit marginal, world of the deviant subject. There is grounded the necessity of bringing the problem to the logic of social interaction, which raises the semantic phenomena organization form that is normal structure of the vital world; on its basis a full-fledged subject emerges with ideas about his own self-sufficiency, and concern for what exists. (shrink)

The article is devoted to the research of institutional principles of political opposition activity in democracies. The process of political opposition origin and development conception in political theory is researched. Political opposition activity factors and conditions are defined and described. The conditions of institutionalization of the political opposition are described. Main stage of political opposition development in Ukraine is defined. The author formulates the definition of the “true” political opposition on the contemporary stage development of the political opposition in Ukraine. (...) The conclusions are made and the practical guidelines are formulated on the basis of research outcomes. Modern political science and practical experience of developed democracies show that the publicity and competitive political environment, transparency in political processes are one of the most important factors in forming effective policies. Important mechanism for alternative, multiple decision-making bodies, transparency, rationality and availability of this process is the institution of the political opposition. In the twentieth century, its existence is recognized by an absolute majority of researchers as the organic phenomenon and a necessary feature of a democratic political system. However, the origin and the effective functioning of this institution requires special conditions and only possible under those regimes, which are guaranteed and ensured the right of citizens to express and defend their interests, to protest in case of violation, and where the opposition stands by one of its forms of such social activities. For a long time the existence of human society, the opposition was considered harmful phenomenon, which destroys the order in the country and is the source of all sorts of problems. But today almost everyone is clear that a strong opposition - a pledge of state stability. The existence of opposition creates balance in the political system and protects the country not only from the authoritarian excesses, but just from the influence of subjective factors when important decisions taken by the government, parliament and other governmental institutions. It is clear that the opposition, as a natural counterbalance to the power as its constant rival can lead to some tension in the political environment. But tension gets the threatening rice in the case where the opposition has no opportunity to influence the situation in the country has formal and institutionalized opportunities to express and defend their views, their position and interests. About this opposition can say that it is completely out of power interactions in a country outside the system of power relations. Thus the only possible, the only effective form of it remains the systemic actions aimed at destabilizing, discrediting and overthrow the existing regime. (shrink)