By the mid-20th century, Simone de Beauvoir has published an important and ground-breaking
research into the facts, myths and living experience of “the second sex” (Le Deuxième Sexe, 1949).
Drawing on contemporary theories based on phenomenology and existentialism, de Beauvoir argues that the “man” is a historical idea, and the woman as a “becoming”. At the end of the 20th
century pain studies have gained vast attention in political theory, especially in political effect theory
and “new materialism”. Numerous studies have neglected de Beauvoir’s frequent arguments dealing
with “women’s pain” and women’s agency in human mitsein, particularly regarding the woman’s
embeddedness in social myths that “feminise” the body of a woman, as a form of crisis and resistance to be subjected to species and reproduction. This paper deals with the crisis and critique
of physiological, economic, psychological and social disposability of female bodies. In addition,
this research re-questions the limits of physical, semiological, cultural and political dissemination
of (female) laughter, seen through the lens of interruptions and destabilizations of the hegemonic
gender discourse incarcerated within the gender divide. Consequently, we are to open up a space for
interrogating the “irony of giggle” as a form of resistance to the contemporary body politics – as a
non-place, devoid of any political agency.


The so-called “postmodern turn” has produced a sense of turmoil in contemporary philosophy
and the humanities, subverting the Western mind and provoking doubts in its existence, sense of
meaning and purpose. It disputes almost all basic premises of modernity. For example, notions such
as: the self, the subject, imagination, became a target of vicious attacks by postmodern thinkers.
Counter to the modern notion of the subject, the postmodern subject lacks an essential core of
identity: it is fragmented, decentred, in the process of perpetual change or disintegration. A “thinking and reflecting” subject who looks inward to inspect the self is denied, as neither such an interiorized being that examines, conceptualize and interacts with others, nor interiority as such, exist.
The subject is nowadays advised to search outward for the ways to interact with the social world, because this a privileged way of construing one’s self. In similar fashion, imagination is obliterated and
devoid of its creative powers. The “imaginary”, as a reference to an impersonal entity, is substituted
for the notion of imagination. While the latter stands for an “author” or “creator” who produces
or creates images, the former is nothing creative in itself. The outcome is that, in the postmodern
theory, the imagination is seen as an obsolete mental ability which is deposed of its power to create
meaning. My intention in this paper is not to reanimate the modern notions of the self, the subject
and imagination, but rather to consent with the postmodern verdict and proceed onward. It is my
intention to build a post-postmodern notion of the self. The purpose of my paper is to introduce a
post-Jungian account of the importance that the narrative and imagination have in human life for
the constitution of subjectivity and the self.


The aim of this paper is to explore the relation between changes in the economic sphere and the
emergence of postmodern culture during the twentieth century. After examining Jameson’s and
Harvey’s (neo)Marxist attempts at explaining the emergence of postmodern culture, the paper will
focus on Foucault’s contribution to the analysis of neoliberalism. Using Foucault’s analysis of neoliberalism as a “governmental regime” that creates systems of power relations to govern subjects, the
paper further explores the postmodern culture as a cultural dimension of this regime. In conclusion,
postmodern culture can be viewed as a cultural dimension of neoliberalism because it contributes to
the creation of subjects that correspond to the needs of the regime. Therefore, postmodern culture
will be called “the social logic of neoliberalism”.


The paper presents a polemical examination of the possibility of achieving interculturalism in the
context of Hegel’s totality, as the truth and the state of the modern world. In considering this problem, we start from the basic concepts of Hegel’s philosophy of Spirit, with the aim of providing
insight into the key problems of totality in the Hegel’s philosophical system. The dialectical relationship that operates within the Hegel’s system of Spirit is considered, and the question of the philosophy of history is opened as a specific way of thinking about historical movement that directs us to
re-examine the possibility of achieving interculturality in the modern global society. Overcoming
the current historical totality – global capitalism, requires a re-confrontation with Hegel’s philosophy and setting of a dialectic that exists at the core of the world in which we live. Also, the paper offers an attempt to consider alternative actions, steps towards the realization of the idea and practice
of interculturality and the development of a dialectical response to the perverted Hegelian totality
that marks the present.