Третья речь В. С. Соловьева в память Ф. М. Достоевского через 130 лет
The famous V. Solov’ev’s article is considered as the diagnosis of the cultural crisis which has come in Russia after March events of 1881. The main question - about necessary conformity be-tween a problem of social transformation and a spiritual maturity of those who incurs this problem - remains unresolved 130 years later after its publication. Modern value of Solov’ev’s cultural forecast is in that it allows to consider present economic and political crisises as consequences of the cultural catastrophe consisting in devaluation of cultural values and their transformation into fiction-symulakrs. Some conceptual parallels between sociopolitical realities of the post-reform period in XIX century and the post-soviet period in the newest history of Russia are established.
In the article the author analyses Dඈඌඍඈඒൾඏඌඒ´s story “Bobok”, which concerns the idea of relationship between life and death. The text describes living of people who don´t die, or rather who are already dead in their lifetime. The story follows up the topic used in the prior prose “Notes from the Dead House”. Particularity of the story “Bobok” is based on the impossibility of a dialogue between “a body and a soul” in a sense of the medieval tradition – here souls are rotting together with bodies, their corporeal life continues after the death. It is a specifi c image of immortality (life after life) and one of the most dreadfull metaphor of the life in Russia. The author percieves his work also as a dialogue between Dඈඌඍඈඒൾඏඌඒ and Pඅൺඍඈ.
Present article is focused upon two samples of Early-Modern «civil sciences»: rhetorical inquiry dealing with contingency (so called «rhetorica primaria»), and mathesis politica, traditionally referring in intellectual context of the Early Enlightenment to Descartes. Special attention is paid to the famous «new sciences», which are considered in the secondary literature as antithetical: Giambattista Vico’s scienza nuova and Thomas Hobbes scientia civilis. Drawing upon almost unknown 17th century Dutch political writings, the study examines the ways of reception of Thomas Hobbes’ civil science conceived as a rhetorical inquiry. The author also explores G. Vico alternative to Hobbes’ constructionist theoretical style.
This paper is devoted to the problem of cultural crisis and those points of view on this problem that were maintained by russian and western philosophers. It was written a lot of books concerning this subject. At the beginning of XX century many philosophers within different philosophical tradition and schools began to reason about the crisis of culture. For some of them it was important to stress religious aspect of crisis: the mankind has lost the belief in God — this is the reason of crisis. For others it was importatt to understand the social aspect of cultural crisis.
Cultural crisis is the crisis of values: human and freedom. In the first half of the XXth century the culture has not found answers for two questions: what is freedom and what is human?
Nella cultura universale di tanto in tanto appaiono intelletti che in un modo o nell’altro predicono i futuri cataclismi storici. Quando tali cataclismi si avverano, e persino quando sono passati, l’interesse per il fenomeno della profezia non diminuisce, in quanto essa coglie, di norma, quei tratti essenziali del fenomeno che si stemperano nei dettagli reali del processo storico. Uno degli sconvolgimenti globali del XX secolo non è solo l’orrore dei sistemi e dei regimi totalitari e terroristici che ha interessato tutta l’Europa - Russia, Germania, Spagna, Portogallo, Bulgaria ecc., - ma è anche la crisi del cristianesimo che si è manifestata con forza inaudita nel fascismo e nel comunismo. Heidegger ha osservato (nel suo studio su Nietzsche) che la sentenza «Dio è morto» non c una tesi dell’ateismo, ma un’esperienza reale ed essenziale della storia occidentale. Aggiungiamo che tale fatto empirico non riguarda solo l’Europa Occidentale, ma anche quella Orientale, in primo luogo la Russia, e che, inoltre, le conseguenze di questo grandioso cataclisma storico non sono superate nemmeno oggi. Per superarle, per vivere nello spazio storico-temporale i motivi del cristianesimo dopo Auschwitzz, che lo vogliamo o no, ci rivolgiamo a due filosofi della tragedia - Dostoevskij c Nietzsche, che hanno saputo esprimere questa crisi del cristianesimo c le cui idee si sono intrecciate nella coscienza degli intellettuali del XX secolo.
"Semiotics of Scandal" is the third collection of the series "Mechanisms of culture". It presents the materials of an international conference held at the Center for Slavic studies (Sorbonne, Paris). The authors, using different methodologies, analyze different forms of scandal as one of the dominant categories of the literary process, history, and politics.
The article considers the Views of L. N. Tolstoy not only as a representative, but also as a accomplisher of the Enlightenment. A comparison of his philosophy with the ideas of Spinoza and Diderot made it possible to clarify some aspects of the transition to the unique Tolstoy’s religious and philosophical doctrine. The comparison of General and specific features of the three philosophers was subjected to a special analysis. Special attention is paid to the way of thinking, the relation to science and the specifics of the worldview by Tolstoy and Diderot. An important aspect is researched the contradiction between the way of thinking and the way of life of the three philosophers.
Tolstoy's transition from rational perception of life to its religious and existential bases is shown. Tolstoy gradually moves away from the idea of a natural man to the idea of a man, who living the commandments of Christ. Starting from the educational worldview, Tolstoy ended by creation of religious and philosophical doctrine, which were relevant for the 20th century.
This important new book offers the first full-length interpretation of the thought of Martin Heidegger with respect to irony. In a radical reading of Heidegger's major works (from Being and Time through the ‘Rector's Address' and the ‘Letter on Humanism' to ‘The Origin of the Work of Art' and the Spiegel interview), Andrew Haas does not claim that Heidegger is simply being ironic. Rather he argues that Heidegger's writings make such an interpretation possible - perhaps even necessary.
Heidegger begins Being and Time with a quote from Plato, a thinker famous for his insistence upon Socratic irony. The Irony of Heidegger takes seriously the apparently curious decision to introduce the threat of irony even as philosophy begins in earnest to raise the question of the meaning of being. Through a detailed and thorough reading of Heidegger's major texts and the fundamental questions they raise, Haas reveals that one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century can be read with as much irony as earnestness. The Irony of Heidegger attempts to show that the essence of this irony lies in uncertainty, and that the entire project of onto-heno-chrono-phenomenology, therefore needs to be called into question.
The article is concerned with the notions of technology in essays of Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger. The special problem of the connection between technology and freedom is discussed in the broader context of the criticism of culture and technocracy discussion in the German intellectual history of the first half of the 20th century.