Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences is a double-blind peer-reviewed scientific journal dedicated to the study of philosophy, social sciences, and the humanities in the broadest sense. The journal publishes original scientific papers in the fields of philosophy, sociology, political science, anthropology, ethnology, religion and religious studies, history, psychology, cultural studies, ethics, aesthetics, as well as all other areas relevant to the understanding of human society, culture, and thought. Special attention is given to an interdisciplinary approach that connects philosophical analysis with sociological research, political theory, critical social theory, the study of religious systems, and epistemological examinations of contemporary social phenomena. Critical Reflections brings together researchers from diverse academic environments who contribute to the understanding of complex relationships between philosophical concepts, social structures, religious traditions, cultural patterns, and political processes. The journal fosters methodological pluralism, equally valuing theoretical examinations, empirical research, comparative analyses, hermeneutic studies, and critical reviews that bridge the boundaries between philosophy, religious studies, and the social sciences. Through a rigorous double-blind peer review process, the journal strives for the highest standards of academic excellence and contributes to the deepening of scientific discourse on fundamental questions of human existence, social order, spiritual tradition, and intellectual heritage. More information about the journal, the editorial board, and author guidelines is available on the Critical Reflections page.

ISSN (štampano): 3126-3879 ISSN (online): 3126-3887
book-cover
Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciencesinbox-iconArhiva

Journal Title: Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences
ISSN (Print): 3126-3879
ISSN (Online): 3126-3887
Publisher: Society for Ancient Philosophy, Cosmology, Religion, Anthropology and Astrobiology - SAPCRAA
Contact: info@sapcraa.com Phone: +38765471075
Adress: Banja Luka, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Publication Frequency: The journal publishes two regular issues per year (June and December). In addition, special thematic issues devoted to specific topics in military sciences may be published throughout the year, subject to editorial approval.
Language: English, Serbian.
Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Dr. Snežana Ivanković, University “MB”, Republic of Serbia


AIMS & SCOPE

Aims

Critical Reflections: Journal for Philosophy and Social Sciences aims to foster the critical and theoretical analysis of society, culture, and thought. Published by SAPCRAA, the journal seeks to provide an international, double-blind peer-reviewed forum where classical philosophical traditions and contemporary social-scientific debates meet, and where conceptual rigor is brought to bear on the relationships between ideas, social structures, and institutions. It is committed to the highest standards of academic excellence and publication ethics and to making scholarship accessible to a global audience.

Scope

The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and critical essays in philosophy and the social sciences. Its core areas are philosophy (including ethics, social and political philosophy, aesthetics, metaphysics and epistemology), sociology, political science, and anthropology, together with closely related work in the study of religion, cultural studies, and the history of ideas where it advances social-theoretical or philosophical inquiry. The journal welcomes theoretical, hermeneutic, comparative, and empirically grounded studies that illuminate the relationships between ideas, social structures, and institutions. All articles are published in English and Serbian with full abstracts.


Types of Contributions

The journal welcomes the following types of submissions

  • Original research articles,

  • Review articles and theoretical essays,

  • Case studies and comparative analyses,

  • Research notes and commentaries,

  • Book reviews.

All submissions except book reviews undergo double-blind peer review.

PUBLICATION ETHICS

This journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. Please see our [Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement] for more information.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

All manuscripts submitted to Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the highest standards of academic quality and integrity. Each submission is initially assessed by the Editor-in-Chief for scope and quality before being sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. For complete details on our review procedures, criteria, and timelines, please refer to our [Peer Review Process].

AUTHOR GUIDELINES

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences welcomes submissions from researchers, academics, and practitioners in the field of military sciences and related disciplines. Before submitting a manuscript, authors are kindly requested to carefully review our formatting requirements, citation style, and submission procedures. Complete instructions for preparing and submitting your manuscript are available in our [Author Guidelines].

ARCHIVE AND ACCESS

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences is committed to the principles of open scholarship. As a fully open-access journal, we provide immediate and unrestricted access to all published research. Full-text versions of all issues are available in our [Archive]. To ensure permanence and citability, each article is assigned a unique Digital Object Identifier (DOI). All content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are properly credited.

INDEXING AND ABSTRACTING

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences is committed to ensuring global visibility and accessibility of published research. The journal is currently indexed in the following databases: COBISS.

COPYRIGHT POLICY

Authors who publish in Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences retain full copyright of their work. By submitting a manuscript, authors grant the journal the right of first publication. All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This means that anyone may freely read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, provided that proper attribution is given to the original authors and source.

Authors are permitted to:

  • Share and distribute their published work through any medium,

  • Deposit their work in institutional or subject repositories,

  • Reuse their work in subsequent publications,

  • Retain patent and trademark rights,

  • Gender and diversity in armed forces,

No formal copyright transfer is required.

PLAGIARISM POLICY

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity. All submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism and originality using iThenticate prior to peer review. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarised content, including self-plagiarism, will be rejected immediately. If plagiarism is detected after publication, the journal will follow the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and may retract the article. Authors are expected to ensure that their work is entirely original and that any use of others' ideas, words, or data is properly cited.

RETRACTION POLICY

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences follows the retraction guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Articles may be retracted in the following circumstances:

Clear evidence of unreliable findings due to misconduct or honest error,

  • Plagiarism or redundant publication,

  • Fabrication or falsification of data,

  • Failure to disclose major conflicts of interest,

  • Ethical violations involving human or animal subjects,

  • Copyright infringement.

Retraction notices will be published and linked to the original article, which will remain accessible but clearly marked as retracted. Retractions may be initiated by the authors, the Editor-in-Chief, or the publisher upon verified evidence of misconduct.

APPEALS AND COMPLAINTS

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences is committed to fair and transparent editorial processes. Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision or file a complaint may do so by following the procedures outlined below.

Appeals: Authors may submit an appeal if they believe a rejection decision was made in error. Appeals must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of the decision and should include a detailed response to the reviewers' comments and a clear justification for reconsideration. Appeals will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, if necessary, by an independent member of the Editorial Board. The decision on the appeal is final.

Complaints: Complaints regarding editorial conduct, peer review process, or publication ethics should be addressed in writing to the Editor-in-Chief at editor.cr@sapcraa.com All complaints will be investigated promptly and handled in accordance with COPE guidelines.

AI POLICY

Critical Reflections follows current guidelines of COPE, WAME, and ICMJE concerning the use of artificial intelligence in scholarly publishing. AI tools, including large language models and generative systems such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Copilot, cannot be listed as authors, since authorship entails intellectual accountability that AI systems cannot bear. Full responsibility for every aspect of a submitted manuscript — including any content produced, drafted, edited, translated, or otherwise assisted by AI — rests entirely with the human authors, who remain accountable for the accuracy of all claims, the integrity of all citations, and the originality of all arguments. Authors must disclose any substantive use of AI tools in the methods section or in a dedicated acknowledgments statement, identifying the tool, its version, and the function performed (text generation, idea development, literature search, code or statistical analysis, image generation, translation, and similar). Routine language polishing does not require detailed itemisation but should be acknowledged in general terms. The fabrication of citations, quotations, or data — whether by AI or otherwise — constitutes a serious breach of research integrity and will result in rejection, retraction, and, in cases of bad faith, notification of the authors' institutions. Reviewers and editors are prohibited from uploading submitted manuscripts to public or third-party AI systems, as this violates the confidentiality of peer review. AI-generated images and figures must be clearly labelled as such and may not represent empirical, archival, or ethnographic material without explicit methodological justification. The Editorial Board reserves the right to request further information about AI use at any stage, to require revision, and to reject or retract work where AI use has not been properly disclosed. The policy is reviewed periodically and updated to reflect evolving standards in scholarly publishing.

PRIVACY POLICY

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences is committed to protecting the privacy of all users, authors, reviewers and readers.

Data Collection: We collect personal information (such as names, email addresses, and institutional affiliations) only when voluntarily provided during manuscript submission, registration, or correspondence. This information is used solely for editorial and publishing purposes.

Data Usage: Personal data is used to manage the submission and peer review process, communicate with authors and reviewers, and improve our services. We do not share personal information with third parties except as necessary for publishing operations or when required by law.

Cookies: Our website may use cookies to enhance user experience and analyse site traffic. Users may disable cookies through their browser settings.

Data Security: We implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to protect personal data against unauthorised access, alteration, or disclosure.

Rights: Users have the right to access, correct, or request deletion of their personal data. For any privacy-related inquiries, please contact us at [email].

This policy is compliant with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

 

ARTICLE PROCESSING CHARGES

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences is primarily funded through donations, institutional support, and the resources of the Society for Ancient Philosophy, Cosmology, Religion, Anthropology and Astrobiology. As a result, the journal strives to minimise financial barriers for authors and does not routinely charge Article Processing Charges (APCs). Submission and peer review are always free of charge. However, in exceptional circumstances, a modest APC may be applied to support the costs of publication. Authors will be informed of any applicable charges upon acceptance of their manuscript. For further information, please contact the editorial office at info@sapcraa.com

SUBMISSION

Critical Reflections: Journal of Philosophy and Social Sciences welcomes original submissions from researchers, academics, and practitioners worldwide. Manuscripts may be submitted through one of the following methods:

Option 1: Submit via our online submission form [here].

Option 2: Submit via email to info@sapcraa.com with “Manuscript Submission” in the subject line. Authors will receive confirmation of receipt within 5 business days. Before submitting, please ensure that your manuscript complies with the formatting and style requirements outlined in our [Author Guidelines].

Uređivački odbor

  1. Goran StojanovićUniversity Union - Nikola TeslaExpert in economic analysis and theory(Republic of Serbia)
  2. Marija Kostadinović IlievskaUniversity "MB"Expert in management and AI application(Republic of Serbia)
  3. Slaven KneževićUniversity of Banja LukaExpert in philosophy of religion, metaphysics, cosmology and cosmogony(Bosnia and Herzegovina)
  4. Snežana IvankovićUniversity of BelgradeExpert in philosophy of economics(Republic of Serbia)
Najnoviji broj
Br. 1·29. јун 2025.

Volume: 3 Issue: 1 (2025) Serial Number: 3

930
Sic mundus creatus est: hermetička sinteza, ezoterijski monizam I morfologija prauzroka u filozofskom djelu slavena kneževića
Članak razvija sistemsko-analitičku interpretaciju filozofskog djela Slavena Kneževića Prauzrok: nacrt za uvod u morfologiju kosmologije, evolucije i teogonije (2024), sa fokusom na rekonstrukciju metafizičke arhitekture koju autor gradi na sjecištu istočnjačke i zapadnjačke filozofske tradicije, hermetičke ezoterijske misli, vedantske ontologije, neoplatonske emanacionističke šeme, klasične patristike i savremene procesne metafizike. Centralna interpretativna teza rada jeste da Kneževićev sistem ne predstavlja eklektičko spajanje različitih tradicija nego strukturno koherentan ezoterijski monizam s elementima procesne metafizike koji se može razložiti kroz pet međusobno povezanih ontoloških osa: (1) os apsoluta i manifestacije, kroz koju se kreće dvostruko kosmičko kretanje od beskrajno idealnog plana ka konačnom vidljivom ispoljavanju i od noumenalnog ka fenomenalnom; (2) os spoznaje, koja distingvira intelektualno razumijevanje, kontemplativnu spoznaju i direktno mističko iskustvo unio mystica; (3) os polariteta, koja artikuliše transcendentno-imanentni odnos kroz hermetičko načelo “kao gore, tako i dolje”; (4) os emanacije, koja se odvija kroz primordijalnu trijadu NE-BOGA, prelazak u “JA JESAM” kao prvu samosvjesnu aktualizaciju, te dalje kroz BEZDAN i deset emanacija do Svijeta kao desete emanacije; te (5) os modaliteta etra, kroz koju etar funkcionira na tri nivoa — kao kvantno polje, kao astralna svjetlost hermetičke tradicije, te kao akasha univerzalne memorije. Drugi originalni doprinos članka je interpretativno ograničavanje Kneževićevog koncepta “višeg impulsa” kao filozofski najoriginalnijeg elementa sistema: viši impuls nije ni božanska zamisao ni pramaterija, nego sam prauzrok — operator koji pretvara potencijalnost u aktualnost i kod Kneževića poprima matematičku formu kroz koeficijent x stvaralačkih sila. Treći doprinos je smještanje sistema u savremene rasprave o panpsihizmu, procesnoj metafizici i obnovljenoj filozofiji religije, gdje se Kneževićev ezoterijski monizam čita kao integracija savremenih razvoja u tradicijski okvir koji odbija i redukcionistički naturalizam i klasičnu ontoteologiju.
3145
Tijelo kao mjesto otpora: somatska dimenzija ideologije I trijadni model inskripcije
Članak razvija konceptualni okvir koji opisuje načine na koje savremene političke i ekonomske strukture upisuju vlastite zahtjeve direktno u tijelo radnika, potrošača i građanina. Polazna teza glasi da je ideologija u kasnom kapitalizmu prestala biti primarno stvar svijesti i postala pitanje somatike: ona ne ubjeđuje, nego umara, mršavi, podiže puls, smanjuje san i povećava intenzitet bola u kičmi. Iz te dijagnoze proizlazi originalni doprinos rada — trijadni model somatske inskripcije ideologije, koji razlikuje tri komplementarna modaliteta upisivanja (disciplinarni, afektivni i performativni) i tri korespondentna oblika tjelesnog otpora. Disciplinarna inskripcija djeluje kroz radne procese, ergonomske režime i institucionalne rasporede vremena; afektivna inskripcija djeluje kroz proizvodnju anksioznosti, izgaranja i okrutnog optimizma; performativna inskripcija djeluje kroz samokvantifikaciju, fitnessaplikacije i estetičke norme platformske kulture. Metodološki pristup je mješovit: kombinuje konceptualnu sintezu klasičnih i savremenih teorijskih okvira biopolitike, afektne teorije i kulturalnih studija s sekundarnom analizom empirijskih nalaza institucionalnih izvora — Eurofounda, Evropske agencije za sigurnost i zdravlje na radu, Svjetske zdravstvene organizacije i Gallupa. Glavni nalaz je da se tjelesni otpor u svakom modalitetu suočava s vlastitim mehanizmom kooptacije, što praksu otpora čini istovremeno moguća i nužno asimetričnom. Rad zaključuje da je analitička prednost trijadnog modela što omogućava istraživaču da bilo koji somatski fenomen savremenog društva — od bolova u leđima do anksioznosti — locira na trostranom polju i identifikuje odgovarajuću ravan kritičke intervencije.
4666
Phenomenology of loneliness in the hyperconnected age: being-with without encounter among university students
The contemporary paradox of recording the highest-ever density of digital contacts alongside the steepest reported rates of subjective loneliness among emerging adults marks a phenomenon that purely epidemiological accounts struggle to render intelligible. This article advances an empirical-phenomenological inquiry into the experience of loneliness in the hyperconnected age, focusing on university students for whom always-on digital co-presence has become an ambient condition of life rather than an episodic activity. Drawing on a phenomenological tradition shaped by Heidegger's account of Befindlichkeit and Mitsein and on Merleau-Ponty's analysis of the lived body, and integrating these resources with contemporary work on situated and extended affectivity, the study develops a distinct phenomenological category termed presence-loneliness — the experience of being lonely while being incessantly co-present to others through screens. Methodologically, the inquiry combines a structured review of recent peer-reviewed literature on loneliness, social media, and phenomenology with a hypothetical-illustrative qualitative dataset of twenty-four semi-structured interviews with undergraduate students aged 19 to 24, analysed through Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. The analysis identifies three constitutive structures of presence-loneliness — perceptual saturation without recognition, a disrupted bodily attunement to the other, and a temporal collapse between availability and intimacy — and proposes a working operationalisation that distinguishes presence-loneliness from emotional, social and existential loneliness. The findings indicate that the dominant policy framing, which equates digital connection with social connection, misreads what the experience of being-with means under hyperconnective conditions. The original contribution lies in proposing presence-loneliness as a fourth, phenomenologically grounded category of loneliness, theorised through classical phenomenology and operationalised through qualitative criteria suitable for further empirical research, situated explicitly within ongoing debates about the social and ethical consequences of pervasive digital mediation. The work is offered as a contribution to philosophical psychology, critical theory of communication, and applied phenomenology, with implications for educators and mental-health practitioners working with students who report feeling, in their own words, “surrounded but unseen”.
6787
Psihologija „Pravedne cijene” u doba dinamičkog cjenovnog određivanja: kada potrošač osjeća da je prevaren?
Procjena cijene kao pravedne ili nepravedne ne pripada periferiji kupovne odluke nego se konstituiše kao njena moralna jezgra: u trenutku kada potrošač uoči da je platio više od onoga što smatra zasluženim, aktivira se cijeli registar negativnih emocija i ponašajnih reakcija — od ljutnje i ogorčenja do osvete u obliku negativne usmene predaje, bojkota i napuštanja prodavca. Ovaj rad razvija integrativnu konceptualno-empirijsku analizu osjećaja prevarenosti u uslovima dinamičkog i algoritamskog cjenovnog određivanja, fokusirajući se na pet glavnih okidača: odstupanje od interne referentne cijene, opaženu netransparentnost procedure, kategoriju proizvoda i njegovu egzistencijalnu nužnost, atribuciju namjere prodavca i prisustvo personaliziranja na osnovu ličnih podataka. Metodološki, rad kombinuje strukturisani pregled recentne recenzirane literature iz oblasti psihologije potrošača, marketinga i poslovne etike, sa ilustrativnim kvantitativno-eksperimentalnim materijalom iz simulirane studije scenarija u kojoj 312 ispitanika starosti 19–46 godina ocjenjuje opažanu pravičnost različitih dinamičkih cjenovnih konfiguracija. Analiza pokazuje da osjećaj prevarenosti nije linearna funkcija veličine porasta cijene nego složena interakcija između dual entitlement obrasca, atribucije profitnog motiva i opaženog moralnog štetnog dejstva proizvoda. Originalni doprinos rada leži u predlaganju radnog Indeksa opažene prevarenosti (Perceived Deception Index, PDI) sastavljenog od pet ponderisanih komponenti, sa kvalitativnim kriterijima pogodnim za daljnja empirijska istraživanja i normativnim implikacijama za regulaciju algoritamskog cjenovnog određivanja u maloprodajnom i uslužnom sektoru. Posebna pažnja posvećena je situacijama u kojima dinamičko određivanje cijena prelazi prag percipirane manipulacije i prelazi u domen onoga što potrošači doživljavaju kao izdaju.
88103
Algorithmic rationality and the crisis of epistemic authority: towards a concept of the plausibility regime
This article addresses a structural shift in the conditions of epistemic acceptance under generative artificial intelligence. The argument is that the displacement of human judgement by large language models is not adequately captured by the language of disinformation or hallucination, both of which presuppose that an underlying regime of verification remains intact and is merely violated. The article advances a different diagnosis: a regime change is underway, in which the operative criterion of epistemic acceptance shifts from justification grounded in evidence and traceable sources to statistical fluency and conversational uptake. The original contribution lies in the development of a single concept — the plausibility regime — together with three operational indicators that allow the regime shift to be identified empirically. The plausibility regime is defined by four properties: a fluency-based criterion of acceptance, an interface-based site of authority, the discharge of justificatory work to opaque computational systems, and an inverted default disposition in which acceptance precedes rather than follows verification. The three indicators are the discharge index, the fluency-trust coupling, and the source-opacity ratio. The methodology is conceptual and integrative, drawing on Habermasian communicative rationality, Floridi's philosophy of information, and Lyotard's analysis of postmodern performativity, and is combined with a synthetic reading of recent findings on hallucination rates, automation bias, and platform-mediated discourse. The article concludes that the plausibility regime is not external to but parasitic upon the verification regime, and that any normative response must therefore operate at the level of institutional design rather than individual epistemic virtue.
104122
Epistemologija postistine I kolaps zajedničkog kognitivnog horizonta: filozofski temelji savremenih kriza demokratije
Članak razvija filozofsku analizu načina na koji se savremene krize demokratije mogu razumjeti kao posljedice kolapsa zajedničkog kognitivnog horizonta — strukturnog uslova pod kojim građani jednog političkog poretka mogu da dijele dovoljno epistemičkog tla da vode racionalnu javnu raspravu o zajedničkim pitanjima. Istraživanje primjenjuje mješoviti kritičko-analitički pristup koji integriše strukturiranu sintezu recenzirane literature objavljene u periodu 2014-2023, komparativnu dokumentarnu analizu empirijskih studija o širenju dezinformacija i polarizacije, te konceptualnu dekompoziciju filozofskih okvira u oblasti socijalne epistemologije, političke epistemologije i teorije deliberativne demokratije. Centralni nalaz jeste da fenomen postistine ne predstavlja kontingentnu epohu posebne neistinitosti niti tehnološku posljedicu nastanka društvenih mreža, nego strukturni kolaps tri međusobno spregnute dimenzije zajedničkog kognitivnog horizonta — epistemičke dimenzije zajedničkih metodoloških standarda, diskurzivne dimenzije zajedničke javne sfere i institucionalne dimenzije zajedničkih epistemičkih autoriteta — i da nijedna dimenzija ne može biti supstancijalno obnovljena u izolaciji od preostale dvije. Empirijski obrazac dokumentovan u pregledanoj literaturi — od podataka o ekstremno asimetričnom širenju lažnih vijesti na društvenim mrežama, preko studija o efektima izloženosti suprotstavljenim mišljenjima na pojačavanje polarizacije, do analiza kontestacije epistemičkih autoriteta u savremenim populističkim pokretima — potvrđuje da reformske inicijative usmjerene samo na jednu dimenziju sistemski podbacuju jer neizmijenjene dimenzije kompenzuju lokalnu promjenu. Originalan doprinos rada jeste uvođenje analitičkog okvira tripartitnog kolapsa kognitivnog horizonta, koji rastavlja krizu postistine na tri komponente i specifikuje povratne sprege kojima svaka komponenta intenzivira preostale dvije. Rad zaključuje implikacijama za savremenu teoriju demokratije i predlaže kriterijume sistemske adekvatnosti za buduće reformske intervencije. Metodološka ograničenja uključuju oslanjanje na engleskojezičku akademsku literaturu i nužnu apstraktnost konceptualne sinteze.
pdf-iconVolume: 3 Issue: 1 (2025) Serial Number: 3preuzmiotvori