Banakou Niki Chara, Delli Evdoxie, “Evanghelos A. Moutsopoulos: The works of professor Evanghelos A. Moutsopoulos” (2022) Greek Philosophical Review 39 (115) 3-5

The authors have made a systemic recording and list of the main works written by professor of philosophy Evanghelos A. Moutsopoulos.
Evanghelos Moutsopoulos was born in Athens in 1930. He studied Classical Philology and Philosophy at the University of Athens and Philosophy in Paris, where he was awarded a doctorate (1958), and attended music and musicology courses. In 1958 he was elected professor at the University of Aix-Marseille, in 1965 full professor at the University of Thessaloniki and in 1969 at the University of Athens, of which he was rector in 1977. He taught at foreign universities and research centres. His research in the fields of systematic philosophy and the history of philosophy led him to establish five new (internationally recognised) philosophical disciplines.
As president of the Foundation for the Research and Publications of Modern Greek Philosophy (1975) he created the Corpus Philosophorum Graecorum Recentiorum (CPGR). He founded and directed the philosophical magazine “Diotima” and was the supervisor of the Research Centre of Greek Philosophy of the Academy of Athens. He was awarded honorary doctorates by many universities. He served as a full member of the Academy of Athens since 1984, while his works, which consist of several tens of volumes, have been half published abroad and most of them have been translated into many foreign languages.

Markopoulos Joannis, "Philosophy of Art and Technology in Classical Antiquity and Modern Times" (2022) Greek Philosophical Review 39 (115) 6-18

Purpose of this present work is to highlight some particular, timeless interrelations between philosophy, art and technology, focusing, at the same time, on the relation of the essence of art and technology to truth, the loss of their substantial value as well, and on their instrumentally and problematically structured nature, in our technocratic, consumer oriented modern and post-modern techno-culture. In contrast to ancient Greek era and its aretological connection with truth, we proceeded, in modern times, to a disconnection of art evaluation from a moral point of view, to a denial of placing artworks within a socio-moral and educational framework, as well as to a denial of the necessity to accept the correlation of the technological and artistic truth with the concept of good, and consequently of science, technology and art with ethics. There is indeed a need for a unifying view of life with human mental and material achievements, and for a choice of a different way of life within the ontological and normative framework of philosophy; moreover, for an essential
exploration of art, science and technology within the unifying context of philosophy of art and philosophy of science and technology, that includes, as an inseparable part, the ethics of science and technology, as an ethics of techno-science. In this way, and with the clarification of the concepts of art and techno-science, and the emergence of their essence and substantial value, a human flourishing (eudaimonia) can be established instead of a human life that would be unexamined and with unexamined works.

Theocharides Soteris and Voudouris Ioannis, “Being in confinement and the effects of social distancing: a critical discussion on the political society” (2022) Greek Philosophical Review 39 (115) 19-38

In search of the city of well-being and the forces that support it, the article unfolds a critical discussion about the rupture of the meaning of everyday human relations and the risks in the cohesion of civil society. It is therefore an essay on the reconstruction of the meaning of life as it is affected by the pandemic. The analysis progresses from the political and social to the personal and interpersonal level, focusing mainly on the negative aspects and the risks involved. In this context, the article denotes the rupture of the citizen-state relationship, the threats to identity, the deregulation and the growing inability to manage emotions and related thoughts, by examining the impact of these effects on human existence, rights, and in particular the political person. Specifically, purpose of this paper is to report and address the following issues in the form of preparing a dialogue:

1. The personal challenges that man faces, due to social distancing;
2. The schematic analysis of the social situation, as it happens to be formed in situations of such confinement;
3. The de facto atonement of physical actions that affects the existence and the possibility of exercising human rights;
4. The risks involved due to the isolation in the digital immaterial world;
5. Brief discussion about the actions required.

Keywords: Social distancing, isolation, virtual space, risk, human rights, political risk, social risk, SARS-CoV-2, digital world

Melidonis Anastasios, “The expansion of meaning of reason in Merleau-Ponty and Lévi-Strauss” (2022) Greek Philosophical Review 39 (115) 49-58

In Maurice Merleau-Ponty's philosophy there is an attempt to broaden the meaning of reason [raison], in relation to the way it is used in science, with the aim of extending its ambit to the perceptible phenomena outside science. "Scientific thought," he will tell us in one of his recent articles, "must be repositioned in the context of a pre-existing 'existence’.
The French philosopher's new perspective may had been aided by his colleague's research at the Collège de France's chair of social anthropology, Claude Lévi-Strauss, that brought him closer to a more experiential approach to the wider reality concerning man.

Barboutis Georgios, “Socrates’s conception of the relation between knowledge and virtue and its Aristotelian critique” (2022) Greek Philosophical Review 39 (115) 59-79

Socrates’s conception of the relation between knowledge and virtue and its Aristotelian critique Aristotle criticizes Socrates’s doctrine that “virtue is knowledge”, considering that according to this view virtue is identified with the theoretical sciences, the volitional element of the soul is ignored and the usual case of knowing what is good and acting in the opposite way is not interpreted. Socrates refers to a perfect knowledge of the good, whereas Aristotle argues that the knowledge in the field of ethics is related to practical wisdom (phronesis), which is the capacity of deliberating well about actions. For Socrates the knowledge of virtue, as a deep awareness of the morally right which inevitably leads to good action, is what characterizes the good person. For Aristotle practical wisdom is absolutely necessary for someone to be good. Furthermore, for Socrates incontinence (akrasia) is something impossible, whereas for Aristotle it is taken to be existent and explicable. However, as Socrates believes that the coexistence of knowledge of virtue and incontinence is inconceivable, so Aristotle maintains that it is impossible for both practical wisdom and incontinence to coexist. In this paper we attempt to clarify Socrates’s conception of the relation between virtue and knowledge as well as to co-examine the relevant Aristotelian critique.

Farantakis Petros “Thanassis Sakellariadis: The Boundaries of Soul”. The Pathways to Conscience” (Psichis Pirata. Sta Monopatia tis Sinidisis) (2022) Greek Philosophical Review 39 (115) 83-91

Dr Farantakis reviews the book of Thanassis Sakellariadis “The Boundaries of Soul”. The Pathways to Conscience” (Psichis Pirata. Sta Monopatia tis Sinidisis). The book constitutes a systematic attempt to shed enough light on the logical as well as the
mental character of consciousness and its connection to the various states of mind. Overall, Professor Sakellariades examines and presents in a consistent manner the dialectical relationship between conscience and experience. More specifically, the whole book is structured into eight chapters:

First chapter: “Cartesian breakthrough or Cartesian thralldom?”
Second chapter: “Conscience”.
Third chapter: “Modern trends of thought and the investigation of mental states”.
Fourth chapter: “Neuroscience and philosophy; Two frenemies discuss about conscience”.
Fifth chapter: “Aspects of consciousness”.
Sixth chapter: “The ‘modern’ philosophical voice”.
Seventh chapter: “Illuminating nonsense’ and metaphor - The variations of conscious experience. A dialogue with ‘alternative’ meditation on consciousness”.
Eighth chapter: “Conscience and language; the dilemma of metaphor”.

Further, we can see what is the exact relationship between conscience and scientific realism; a relationship that is both startling and challenging since it delineates the distinction between the natural and the ethical in individual and social life.