Arnold Schoenberg amidst the Struggle between Scientific Materialism and Spiritual Revival

Post-war historiography has downplayed the spiritual dimension of modernist artists in order to present their work more favorably in a culture overshadowed by scientific materialism. Drawing from several sources, this paper reconstructs an interpretation of the context with which Schoenberg as an individual artist had to contend with. The first section sets the stage for understanding the struggle between scientific materialism and movements of spiritual revival. The second section deals directly with Schoenberg's case and addresses not only the criticisms directed against his music, but also tries to shed light on his problematic relation to Adorno and Thomas Mann. The concluding section argues that although Schoenberg’s public perception is strongly technical, as a composer he was pursuing aims that can only be made sense of if one is sensitive to his religious and spiritual context.

Konsep Tuhan dan Agama Menurut Alfred North Whitehead

This article discusses the concept of God and religion according to Alfred North Whitehead's process philosophy. The main issue is how to describe Whitehead's concept of God and its implications for religious life. Whitehead's critique of scientific materialism is an entry point to understand the characteristics of his thought. This criticism leads to Whitehead's cosmology in which each actual entity is in the process of becoming. God is not excluded from this cosmological scheme. In this way of thinking, God is the source of eternal objects or values. God experiences every actual event that occurs in the temporal world. Thus, God can be understood from two perspectives: the former refers to a cosmological frame, while the latter refers to religious experience. In Whitehead's language, God has two distinct natures, a primordial nature, and a consequent nature. From the perspective of religious life, Whitehead's concept of God seems to put more emphasis on divine immanence.

Silicon: From the Invention of the Microprocessor to the New Science of Consciousness by Federico Faggin

I was a little apprehensive about reviewing this book because I know little about engineering or the inner workings of the computer, but in the interest of full disclosure, I wanted to know more about Federico Faggin. Twenty years ago, returning from an afternoon trip during the SSE conference in San Diego, I sat next to him on the bus and mentioned that since we last met I had lost the vision in my right eye, which I was still adjusting to physically and emotionally. He volunteered that he had lost the vision in his left eye when he was a youth in Italy and lightly commented that depth perception, which concerned me, was only an issue for six or seven feet. His admission and attitude were not only a revelation, but an inspiration for me: If this eminent gentleman had made world-changing inventions, was a successful businessman and had a happy social and family life despite monocular vision; I certainly could get on successfully with my life as well. Silicon is the fascinating story of Federico Faggin’s remarkable life, but it is also his personal journey from scientific materialism to an awakening to a deeper level of consciousness. He divides his narrative into his four “lives.” His first life took place in his native northern Italy where he was a brilliant student with a wide range of interests. He became interested in computers and transistors, which had been recently invented and read all he could independently, since it was not taught in his school. His fascination deepened and he got a job with Olivetti where he learned much more than he could have at school and which become pivotal to his subsequent career.

Participating in Paradox: An Integrative Framework

Drawing from Alan Watts’s philosophy of paradox, this essay aims to articulate an integrative framework of ontological paradox (i.e., that all aspects of existence feature distinct and integral dimensions). The metaphysical tenet of separation, which undergirds scientific materialism and denies humanity’s embedded place in the world, is merely one pattern of participating in such a paradox. What then are the different types of ways, beyond a materialistic ontology, in which individuals can relate to and participate in the ever-evolving whole of existence (and whole of themselves)? Spanning the fields of philosophy, science, psychology, religion, and mysticism, this integrative inquiry seeks to reconcile and synthesize a broad range of orientations to ontological paradox into a greater frame of reference. The result is the limb and pillar matrix. Providing an alienation-integration spectrum that applies to both internal/micro paradox (i.e., the relation of one’s self to oneself) and external/macro paradox (i.e., the relation of self to the cosmic whole), the limb and pillar matrix consists of five key questions or “pillars” and seven “limbs” or patterns of participating in paradox. The pillars of paradox relate to (a) the existence and (b) resolvability of ontological paradox, as well as (c) access, (d) progressive resolution, and (e) stabilization of resolution (i.e., full integration). The limbs of paradox establish seven multivalent participatory patterns: ignorance, denial, deferment, bypass, transcendence, resolution, and dissolution.

Review: Craig Lundy, Deleuze’s Bergsonism

A century ago Henri Bergson was a world-wide celebrity. However, after the world wars his philosophy had already fallen into disfavor, disdain and oblivion. Prominent molecular biologists claimed to have hammered the final nail in the coffin of vitalism. Francis Crick himself, with prophetic hubris, called any future vitalist a crank. Things were not much different amongst analytic philosophers who, more concerned with clarity than precision, saw in Bergson’s works hardly more than poetry and mysticism. In fact, ‘vitalism’ became a one-word argument against itself (just utter it and it would count as disproved). And yet, ironically, vitalism refused to die. Half a century ago, Gilles Deleuze wrote a seminal interpretation of Bergson’s philosophy. After providing a concrete articulation of Bergson’s method of intuition, Deleuze studied the progression of Bergson’s concepts of duration, memory, and the élan, and paired them with his own concepts of multiplicity, the virtual and differentiation. Now, in a lucid and crisp book, Craig Lundy unpacks (for the first time) Deleuze’s Bergsonism. Not only does the book afford a better grasp of Bergson’s genius, but it also allows us to trace the origin of some key notions in Deleuze’s philosophy. Moreover, Lundy’s effort is particularly opportune in the context of the current revival of Bergson’s thought. In a time when it is becoming increasingly strenuous to cash the promissory notes of scientific materialism, reductionism and mechanicism, Lundy’s Deleuze’s Bergsonism represents an invaluable opportunity to better understand the philosopher of time and life par excellence.

The Orthodox Church and Religion in Revolutionary Russia, 1894–1924

This chapter examines the fate of the Russian Orthodox Church—as an institution and community—during Russia’s years of revolution, from the reign of Nicholas II through the 1917 February Revolution and subsequent Bolshevik coup. It argues that Orthodoxy’s legal status as a ‘primary and predominant’ faith, and the state ascription of the ‘Russian people’ to Orthodoxy from birth under imperial rule, were in large part responsible for Orthodoxy’s institutional turmoil during these years. Further, the chapter challenges the use of the term ‘secularization’ with respect to the Bolshevik regime’s anti-religious policies. In the span of weeks, the Bolshevik regime not only homogenized Orthodoxy into the mix of ‘traditional faiths’—all pinpointed for eradication—but also relegated Orthodoxy to the position of least desired and most hazardous within that mix. Accordingly, this work argues that, from any observant believer’s perspective, Bolshevik efforts to cultivate the New Soviet Person—which included initiatives targeting the disestablishment, denigration of ‘liquidation’ of religious leaders, and the nationalization, destruction, and museumification of sacred objects, as well as widespread ‘re-education’ in ‘scientific materialism’—are better understood as a form of ‘internal’, spiritual colonization, and a qualitatively new chapter of Russia’s history.

N. I. BUKHARIN’S SOVIET MARXIST PHILOSOPHY IN 1917–1928

Анализируются мировоззренческие взгляды видного представителя советской номенклатуры Николая Ивановича Бухарина, который, наряду с В. И. Лениным, И. В. Сталиным, Л. Д. Троцким, Л. Б. Каменевым, Г. Е. Зиновьевым и А. В. Луначарским, входил в так называемый круг большевистских вождей. В отличие от многих высокопоставленных советских чиновников его отличали философская эрудиция и талант публициста. Его мировоззрение существенным образом повлияло на проведение внутренней и внешней политики Советского государства в 1917–1928 годах. В работах Бухарина в полной мере отражены его аксиологические, гносеологические и этические позиции. Так, для Бухарина главной политической ценностью является пролетарская диктатура, основным в гносеологии объявляется диалектический материализм, а этика большевистской власти вполне допускает «пролетарское принуждение», в том числе и расстрелы. Проведенное исследование позволило выявить, что Бухарин, как и все другие советские государственные деятели, являлся ортодоксальным марксистом, для которого авторитет Ленина был непререкаем. Вместе с тем его философское мировоззрение достаточно оригинально, о чем свидетельствуют его попытки классифицировать «фальсификации» марксизма, разделяя их на «фаталистический и примиренческий» марксизм, предложить четыре фазы смены капитализма социализмом как революции (идеологическая, политическая, экономическая и техническая) и ввести теорию равновесия в исторический процесс. Являясь главным теоретиком отечественного марксизма после смерти Ленина Бухарин объявляет идеализм всего лишь формой религии, который успешно преодолевается наукой и материализмом. Будучи руководителем Коммунистического интернационала, он пропагандировал, в частности в докладе 1928 года на VI конгрессе Коминтерна, глобалистскую идею коммунистов всех стран о необходимости установления мировой диктатуры пролетариата путем проведения пролетарских революций и мировой революции. The article analyzes the worldview of an outstanding Soviet philosopher Nikolay Ivanovich Bukharin, who was one of the Bolshevik leaders together with V. I. Lenin, I. V. Stalin, L. D. Trotsky, L. B. Kamenev, G. E. Zinoviev, and A. V. Lunacharsky. Unlike many other high-ranking officials, Nikolay Ivanovich Bukharin was renowned for his philosophical erudition and genuine journalistic talent. His worldview greatly influenced the Soviet Union’s domestic and foreign policy in 1917–1928. N. I. Bukharin’s works reflected the philosopher’s axiological, gnoseological and ethical views. Proletarian dictatorship was N. I. Bukharin’s major political value. Dialectical Marxism determined his gnoseological views. The ethics of Bolshevism evinced a high tolerance for proletarian violence. The present research shows that N. I. Bukharin was not unlike other Soviet officials in his adherence to orthodox Marxism and his worship of Lenin. However, N. I. Bukharin’s philosophical approach was rather unique. Thus, he attempted to classify some falsifications of Marxism, distinguished between fatalistic Marxism and conciliatory Marxism, spoke about four phases of the transition from capitalism to socialism (ideological, political, economic, and technical), and introduced the theory of historical balance. Being a leading theoretician of Soviet Marxism, Bukharin stated that idealism was a mere form of religion and, therefore, was to be replaced with scientific materialism. Delivering a report to the 6th Congress of the Communist International in 1928, he underlined the necessity of fighting for global proletarian dictatorship by means of proletarian revolutions and world revolutions.