scholarly journals From historiosophy to the philosophy of history: the evolution of views on history in the domestic philosophical thought

2017 ◽  
pp. 119-132
Author(s):  
Nikolay Bezlepkin ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 46 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 59-68
Author(s):  
Radomir Djordjevic

The paper reviews phaenomenological influences on Russian philosophical thought. Before the bolyshevique revolution of 1917, Husserl's ideas had attracted the attention of many Russian theoreticians, and during the last two decades effects of this impact are closely investigated. First of all there were several philosophers under very direct influence of phenomenology: N. O. Lossky, the author of numerous books, in his work on logic; S. L. Frank, who had developed an intuitionistic theory of knowledge Gustav Spet, logician, aesthetician, linguist etc, who accepted Husserl's conceptions in his books on interpretation, philosophy of history and philosophy of language; Alexiy Lossev, who wrote some thirty books, and in his early period (works on ancient dialectics, philosophy of language and logics) was phenomenologically oriented; etc. Husserl's philosophy has traced or affected the ideas of several other Russian thinkers, so in USSR as in exile throughout Europe (for instance, Georges Gurvitch).


Author(s):  
Oxana M. Sedykh ◽  

The article examines some probable lines of refraction of N. Fyodorov’s ideas in the work of Russian greatest Silver age poet O. Mandelstam (1891–1938). Rus­sian thought was a special subject of attention for the poet, his philosophical reading included mainly works by Russian authors such as P. Chaadaev, the Slavophiles, K. Leontiev, V. Rozanov, V. Solovyov, P. Florensky, V. Ivanov, M. Gershenzon and others. It is proposed to analyze O. Mandelstam’s poetic cy­cle Poem on the Unknown Soldier (1937) containing direct references to N. Fe­dorov’s The Philosophy of the Common Task. Taking into account the poet’s con­sistent interest in Russian philosophical thought this allows a possibility of his acquaintance with writings of “Moscow Socrates”. The explication of Mandel­stam’s philosophical views is complicated by the modernist specificity of his po­etic text, which is saturated with a variety of ideological and semantic plans, open to various, often contradictory interpretations, while the correlation with a specific philosophical concept requires a certain unambiguity. On the other hand, the same peculiarity of Mandelstam’s poetics allows us to catch in the se­ries of meanings generated by it Fedorov’s intonations that filled the ideological atmosphere of time, to the “noise” of which the poet was exceptionally sensitive. The field of philosophy of history, time and memory is the predominant area of ideological intersections in the philosopher’s and poet’s heritage. Among other things their views are brought together by their adherence to a specific time con­cept, which was crystallized on the basis of Silver Age religious and philosophi­cal mentality and defined in current research by such concepts as “teleological causality”, “reverse causality”, “enantiodromia”


1978 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 390
Author(s):  
Taras D. Zakydalsky ◽  
Louis J. Shein

Author(s):  
Sergei Aleksandrovich Gashkov

The subject of this research is the historical-philosophical and polemical context of philosophical reasoning on the history of French philosopher of Greek descent Cornelius Castoriadis (1922-1997). The philosopher builds a complicated polemical model that vividly responses to all attempts to determines society, being, history, and a human. Even such prominent philosophers of the XX century, such as M. Heidegger, J. Habermas. And P. Ricoeur, who do not show prejudice attitude towards philosophical knowledge, become subjected to critical analysis. The scientific novelty consists in attracting the new to the Russian audience historical-philosophical material, as well as a distinct attempt to reproduce of such polemics and debated that took place within the French intellectual environment of the late XX century. However, the author did not pursue the task of historical and biobibliographical description; the emphasis was made on the so-called return to the origins of the philosophy of history, revival of philosophical reasoning on history based on the examined material, demonstration of the complicated, aporetic, heterogeneous and heuristic nature of relationship between philosophy, humanities and social disciplines. The conclusion is made that the work of Castoriadis mostly represents philosophical criticism of theoretical grounds of humanities and social disciplines, rather than a poststructuralist philosophy of history; but this criticism, studied in the context of philosophical thought, acquires an independent scientific meaning.


2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 498-517
Author(s):  
Yuk Hui ◽  
Louis Morelle

This article aims to clarify the question of speed and intensity in the thoughts of Simondon and Deleuze, in order to shed light on the recent debates regarding accelerationism and its politics. Instead of starting with speed, we propose to look into the notion of intensity and how it serves as a new ontological ground in Simondon's and Deleuze's philosophy and politics. Simondon mobilises the concept of intensity to criticise hylomorphism and substantialism; Deleuze, taking up Simondon's conceptual framework, repurposes it for his ontology of difference, elevating intensity to the rank of generic concept of being, thus bypassing notions of negativity and individuals as base, in favour of the productive and universal character of difference. In Deleuze, the correlation between intensity and speed is fraught with ambiguities, with each term threatening to subsume the other; this rampant tension becomes explicitly antagonistic when taken up by the diverse strands of contemporary accelerationism, resulting in two extreme cases in the posthuman discourse: either a pure becoming, achieved through destruction, or through abstraction that does away with intensity altogether; or an intensity without movement or speed, that remains a pure jouissance. Both cases appear to stumble over the problem of individuation, if not disindividuation. Hence, we wish to raise the following question: in what way can one think of an accelerationist politics with intensity, or an intensive politics without the fetishisation of speed? We consider this question central to the interrogation of the limits of acceleration and posthuman discourse, thus requiring a new philosophical thought on intensity and speed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document