?
Основные аргументы Контрпросвещения
Вестник Томского государственного университета. Философия. Социология. Политология. 2019. № 52. С. 65–75.
- The purpose of the article is to explicate the body of arguments of Counter-Enlightenment thinkers. At the same time, the corpus of arguments is understood as a set of philosophical ideas, and not just a social opposition to the French revolution outcomes on the part of conservative groups. The article is based on predominantly primary sources. These are texts of the classical Enlightenment thinkers (I. Kant, J. A. Condorcet, etc.) as well as texts of their opponents (D. Vico, I. G. Gaman, F. G. Jacobi, I. G. Herder, etc.). In addition to the primary sources, the article is based on historical and philosophical comments on the problem mentioned above, in particular, on the work of I. Berlin "Counter-Enlightenment". The research method is hermeneutic. The study is based on the identification of the essential core of the position of educators and, accordingly, a symmetrical pool of counterarguments of their opponents. Four ideas are fixed as such a core: the statement of a single reasonable principle of the world order, the understanding of thinking on the model of natural sciences, the fixation of the results of thought in a universal language and the possibility of building an ideal society on the basis of this knowledge. The pool of counter-arguments also comprises four ideas: the impossibility of a rational understanding of the world, the value other than estimating intelligence abilities for understanding the world, a statement of the impossibility of a universal language and, finally, fixing essential problems of revolution and reform in the quest for an ideal society. A significant result of the study is debate with I. Berlin on a number of statements. First of all, the author points out the incorrectness of the separation of the ideas of Enlightenment and Counter-Enlightenment on the "geographical" basis, as ideas, respectively, formed in France and Germany. Further, a more complex nature of debate on each point of divergence than that presented in the work of I. Berlin is shown. In particular, it is shown that the Vico - Herder line leads to the Genesis of the Humanities, and the Leibniz – Goethe – Schelling line leads to the Genesis of the biological Sciences, both of which, in fact, cannot be attributed to the anti – enlightenment character. Debate around the key cognitive abilities of man does not revolve around simple dilemmas of "mind-feeling", "mind-intuition", "mind-faith" and so on. Rather, in most concepts we find a complex relationship between thinking and intuition in cognition. Debate against a universal language also has its limits, which can be seen in the example of distinguishing the general and special meaning of a word in the hermeneutics of F. Schleiermacher or in the example of educational activities of V. von Humboldt, who, in fact, clearly thematised language as an expression of the individual. And finally, at the level of ideas, the debate between progressives and anti-progressives also does not look unambiguous. In the article, this fact is demonstrated through the tension between the statement of the infinite diversity of cultures and the normative development of humanity to Humanität by I. G. Herder.
Research target:
Philosophy, Ethics, and Religious Studies
Priority areas:
humanitarian
Language:
Russian