Gogol on the man’s calling in European philosophy and Russian messianism

IF 0.5 0 PHILOSOPHY
A. Malivskyi, D. Y. Snitko
{"title":"Gogol on the man’s calling in European philosophy and Russian messianism","authors":"A. Malivskyi, D. Y. Snitko","doi":"10.15802/ampr.v0i21.260480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose is to study that period of evolution of Gogol’s position, in which his ideas of russian messianism are most clearly outlined (\"Selected Passages\" and \"The Author’s Confession\"). To delineate the forms of determining the influence of messianism on his negative assessments of the anthropology of the Early New Age and the Enlightenment. Realization of the specified purpose presupposes, first, the analysis of his way of interpreting humanism in the European classical philosophy, and, secondly, to clarify the nature of his connection with the way of substantiating the idea of the Russian messianism. Theoretical basis. Our view of Gogol’s heritage is based on the conceptual positions of phenomenology, existentialism, and hermeneutics. Originality. It is revealed, that period of evolution of Gogol’s position, which most clearly outlines his ideas of russian messianism (\"Selected Passages\" and \"The Author’s Confession\"), his position on human nature and its calling is fundamentally different from the position of philosophy of Early New Age and the Enlightenment. If in the first case, it is a question of service to the russian empire, in the last one, it is a question of self-development of the person. Gogol’s dehumanization of those perceptions about the man that have occurred in European classical philosophy is a precondition in justification of russian messianism for him. One of its key factors is a narrow understanding of insight the ideas concerning the spiritual foundation of the world, namely – its reduction to the russian empire. Conclusions. Gogol’s philosophical doctrine of man is only partially described as belonging to the \"philosophy of the heart\". The disadvantage of this qualification is the impossibility of explaining the question of the origins in Gogol’s attempt to substantiate russian messianism. The article demonstrates that the deformation of the basic idea about the connectivity of man with the spiritual arche of the world is its substantive precondition for the philosophy of the Early New Age and the Enlightenment. Gogol narrows it down to the Russian Empire, which makes it impossible to positively delineate the orientations of the russian people. Therefore, his oeuvre during the work on \"Selected Passages\" and \"The Author’s Confession\" for future generations is a warning about the futility of a single russian path of development, isolated from European civilization. As the further development of russian thought and history proves, Gogol’s warning as a Ukrainian thinker really has not been heard. A vivid manifestation of this is the cave nationalism that we see today during the russian-Ukrainian war.","PeriodicalId":42650,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i21.260480","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose is to study that period of evolution of Gogol’s position, in which his ideas of russian messianism are most clearly outlined ("Selected Passages" and "The Author’s Confession"). To delineate the forms of determining the influence of messianism on his negative assessments of the anthropology of the Early New Age and the Enlightenment. Realization of the specified purpose presupposes, first, the analysis of his way of interpreting humanism in the European classical philosophy, and, secondly, to clarify the nature of his connection with the way of substantiating the idea of the Russian messianism. Theoretical basis. Our view of Gogol’s heritage is based on the conceptual positions of phenomenology, existentialism, and hermeneutics. Originality. It is revealed, that period of evolution of Gogol’s position, which most clearly outlines his ideas of russian messianism ("Selected Passages" and "The Author’s Confession"), his position on human nature and its calling is fundamentally different from the position of philosophy of Early New Age and the Enlightenment. If in the first case, it is a question of service to the russian empire, in the last one, it is a question of self-development of the person. Gogol’s dehumanization of those perceptions about the man that have occurred in European classical philosophy is a precondition in justification of russian messianism for him. One of its key factors is a narrow understanding of insight the ideas concerning the spiritual foundation of the world, namely – its reduction to the russian empire. Conclusions. Gogol’s philosophical doctrine of man is only partially described as belonging to the "philosophy of the heart". The disadvantage of this qualification is the impossibility of explaining the question of the origins in Gogol’s attempt to substantiate russian messianism. The article demonstrates that the deformation of the basic idea about the connectivity of man with the spiritual arche of the world is its substantive precondition for the philosophy of the Early New Age and the Enlightenment. Gogol narrows it down to the Russian Empire, which makes it impossible to positively delineate the orientations of the russian people. Therefore, his oeuvre during the work on "Selected Passages" and "The Author’s Confession" for future generations is a warning about the futility of a single russian path of development, isolated from European civilization. As the further development of russian thought and history proves, Gogol’s warning as a Ukrainian thinker really has not been heard. A vivid manifestation of this is the cave nationalism that we see today during the russian-Ukrainian war.
果戈理论他在欧洲哲学和俄国弥赛亚主义中的使命
目的是研究果戈理立场的演变时期,在这一时期,他对俄罗斯弥赛亚主义的观点最为清晰地概述了(《选段》和《作者自白》)。描述弥赛亚主义对他对早期新时代和启蒙运动人类学的负面评价的影响的确定形式。要实现这一特定目的,首先要分析他对欧洲古典哲学人文主义的解读方式,其次要澄清他与俄国弥赛亚主义思想实体化方式的本质联系。理论基础。我们对果戈理遗产的看法是基于现象学、存在主义和解释学的概念立场。创意。结果表明,果戈理立场的演变时期(《选段》和《作者自白》)最清楚地概括了他的俄罗斯弥赛亚主义思想,他对人性及其召唤的立场与新时代早期和启蒙运动的哲学立场有着根本的不同。如果说前一种情况是为俄罗斯帝国服务的问题,那么后一种情况则是个人自我发展的问题。果戈理对那些在欧洲古典哲学中出现的关于人的认知的非人化,是他为俄罗斯弥赛亚主义辩护的先决条件。其关键因素之一是对洞察力的狭隘理解,即对世界精神基础的看法,即将其还原为俄罗斯帝国。结论。果戈理关于人的哲学学说只是部分地被描述为属于“心灵哲学”。这种限定的缺点是不可能解释果戈理试图证实俄国弥赛亚主义的起源问题。文章论证了“人与世界的精神渊源”这一基本观念的变形是新时期早期和启蒙运动哲学产生的实质前提。果戈理将其范围缩小到俄罗斯帝国,这使得我们无法积极地描绘俄罗斯人民的取向。因此,他的作品《文选》和《作者的自白》是对俄罗斯孤立于欧洲文明之外的单一发展道路的警告。随着俄罗斯思想和历史的进一步发展,果戈理作为乌克兰思想家的警告确实没有被听到。我们今天在俄乌战争期间看到的洞穴民族主义就是一个生动的表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
66.70%
发文量
13
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信