安德烈·斯米尔诺夫:作为文化逻辑的感觉逻辑

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 Q4 Arts and Humanities
V. Konev
{"title":"安德烈·斯米尔诺夫:作为文化逻辑的感觉逻辑","authors":"V. Konev","doi":"10.1080/10611967.2020.1868259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyzes the philosophical views of the Russian philosopher Andrey V. Smirnov. Smirnov has advanced and substantiated the idea that there exist at least two distinct ways of linking the subject and the predicate in a statement—one of these he calls the substance logic (S-logic) and the other, the process logic (P-logic). S-logic reveals the characteristics (predicates) proper to the subject of the statement, whereas P-logic demonstrates the relationship between the Agent and the Patient—a process in which the predicates become actualized. Each of these logics, according to Smirnov, forms a sense-positing field of a specific culture. Viewing consciousness as the actualization of the intuition of svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ * * The Russian term svyaznost’ is usually rendered in English as ‘cohesion.’ However, this English term does not reveal the specific connotations associated with svyaznost’. A similar semantic difficulty arises with the Russian term tselostnost’ that is often translated into English by using such words as ‘entirety,’ ‘integrity,’ or ‘wholeness,’ neither of which is able to convey an accurate meaning of the word in the original language. Since both terms, svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ are central to understanding of Smirnov’s thought, instead of translating these terms, we decided to use their transliterated forms. – Ed. , Smirnov suggests a novel treatment of the classical problem of philosophy posed long ago by Immanuel Kant: the problem of unity of cogito and the ability to form judgments (the transcendental unity of apperception). The article shows that when we regard the logic of sense as a way of comprehension and action in a world defined by oneness of consciousness and culture, we discover another subject plane in Smirnov’s reasoning—a plane of historical reality. Addressing the task of analyzing globalization processes, the philosopher compares and contrasts the two views of the historical meaning of globalization as represented by the categories of the obshchechelovecheskoe and the vsechelovecheskoe ** ** The vsechelovecheskoe and the obshchechelovecheskoe are the two Russian words that can hardly be rendered into English without distorting their meaning. They both point to the universality of the human mind, human culture, and human civilization, but there is a fundamental difference in logical vehicles used to arrive at the universal. The vsechelovecheskoe presupposes “gathering” logically diverse models without imposing any general restriction on them, while the obshchechelovecheskoe is an understanding of the universal as grounded in the generic or general, which is well-known to the Western reader. Since the obshchechelovecheskoe and the vsechelovecheskoe form a pair of concepts fundamental to Smirnov and to the understanding of his philosophical view, to avoid any misconception, they are used in this and all other articles included in the present special issue in their transliterated form. –For more details about these two terms and their key connotations central to Smirnov’s own discussion, see his essay “Classical Eurasianism as a Post-Revolutionary Philosophy” included in the present issue. The abstract to this essay provides a concise and well-articulated summary of the terms. - Ed. , which have been introduced by Russian thinkers Nikolai Danilevsky and Fyodor Dostoevsky. As opposed to the obshchechelovecheskoe, the meaning of the vsechelovecheskoe in globalization lies in the idea that any culture is fully entitled to existence and cannot be supplanted by some universal, “uniformly human” culture. This work compares the concepts of the logic of sense by Gilles Deleuze and Andrey Smirnov as two diverging views on the event of thought.","PeriodicalId":42094,"journal":{"name":"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY","volume":"58 1","pages":"439 - 456"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10611967.2020.1868259","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Andrey Smirnov: The Logic of Sense as a Logic of Culture\",\"authors\":\"V. Konev\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10611967.2020.1868259\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article analyzes the philosophical views of the Russian philosopher Andrey V. Smirnov. Smirnov has advanced and substantiated the idea that there exist at least two distinct ways of linking the subject and the predicate in a statement—one of these he calls the substance logic (S-logic) and the other, the process logic (P-logic). S-logic reveals the characteristics (predicates) proper to the subject of the statement, whereas P-logic demonstrates the relationship between the Agent and the Patient—a process in which the predicates become actualized. Each of these logics, according to Smirnov, forms a sense-positing field of a specific culture. Viewing consciousness as the actualization of the intuition of svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ * * The Russian term svyaznost’ is usually rendered in English as ‘cohesion.’ However, this English term does not reveal the specific connotations associated with svyaznost’. A similar semantic difficulty arises with the Russian term tselostnost’ that is often translated into English by using such words as ‘entirety,’ ‘integrity,’ or ‘wholeness,’ neither of which is able to convey an accurate meaning of the word in the original language. Since both terms, svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ are central to understanding of Smirnov’s thought, instead of translating these terms, we decided to use their transliterated forms. – Ed. , Smirnov suggests a novel treatment of the classical problem of philosophy posed long ago by Immanuel Kant: the problem of unity of cogito and the ability to form judgments (the transcendental unity of apperception). The article shows that when we regard the logic of sense as a way of comprehension and action in a world defined by oneness of consciousness and culture, we discover another subject plane in Smirnov’s reasoning—a plane of historical reality. Addressing the task of analyzing globalization processes, the philosopher compares and contrasts the two views of the historical meaning of globalization as represented by the categories of the obshchechelovecheskoe and the vsechelovecheskoe ** ** The vsechelovecheskoe and the obshchechelovecheskoe are the two Russian words that can hardly be rendered into English without distorting their meaning. They both point to the universality of the human mind, human culture, and human civilization, but there is a fundamental difference in logical vehicles used to arrive at the universal. The vsechelovecheskoe presupposes “gathering” logically diverse models without imposing any general restriction on them, while the obshchechelovecheskoe is an understanding of the universal as grounded in the generic or general, which is well-known to the Western reader. Since the obshchechelovecheskoe and the vsechelovecheskoe form a pair of concepts fundamental to Smirnov and to the understanding of his philosophical view, to avoid any misconception, they are used in this and all other articles included in the present special issue in their transliterated form. –For more details about these two terms and their key connotations central to Smirnov’s own discussion, see his essay “Classical Eurasianism as a Post-Revolutionary Philosophy” included in the present issue. The abstract to this essay provides a concise and well-articulated summary of the terms. - Ed. , which have been introduced by Russian thinkers Nikolai Danilevsky and Fyodor Dostoevsky. As opposed to the obshchechelovecheskoe, the meaning of the vsechelovecheskoe in globalization lies in the idea that any culture is fully entitled to existence and cannot be supplanted by some universal, “uniformly human” culture. This work compares the concepts of the logic of sense by Gilles Deleuze and Andrey Smirnov as two diverging views on the event of thought.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"439 - 456\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10611967.2020.1868259\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10611967.2020.1868259\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10611967.2020.1868259","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要本文分析了俄罗斯哲学家斯米尔诺夫的哲学思想。斯米尔诺夫提出并证实了这样一种观点,即在一个陈述中,至少存在两种不同的连接主语和谓语的方式——其中一种被他称为物质逻辑(S-logic),另一种被称为过程逻辑(P-logic)。S逻辑揭示了陈述主题的固有特征(谓词),而P逻辑则展示了代理人和患者之间的关系——谓词在这个过程中得以实现。斯米尔诺夫认为,每一种逻辑都构成了一种特定文化的意义场。将意识视为svyaznost和tselostnost的直觉的实现**俄语术语svyaznost'在英语中通常被表示为“内聚”然而,这个英语术语并没有揭示与svyaznost相关的具体含义。俄语术语tselostnost也出现了类似的语义困难,通常通过使用“整体”、“完整性”或“整体性”等词将其翻译成英语,这两个词都无法在原始语言中传达该词的准确含义。由于svyaznost和tselostnost这两个术语都是理解斯米尔诺夫思想的核心,我们决定使用它们的音译形式,而不是翻译这些术语Ed.,Smirnov提出了对伊曼纽尔·康德很久以前提出的经典哲学问题的新颖处理:认知的统一性和形成判断的能力(统觉的先验统一性)的问题。这篇文章表明,当我们把意义逻辑视为一种在意识和文化合一的世界中理解和行动的方式时,我们发现了斯米尔诺夫推理中的另一个主题平面——历史现实的平面。针对分析全球化进程的任务,哲学家比较和对比了以obshchechelovecheskoe和vsechelovecheskoe这两个类别为代表的全球化历史意义的两种观点。它们都指向了人类思想、人类文化和人类文明的普遍性,但用于实现普遍性的逻辑工具存在根本差异。vsechelovecheskoe以“收集”逻辑多样的模型为前提,而不对其施加任何一般性限制,而obshchechelovecheskoe则是对基于一般或一般的普遍性的理解,这是西方读者所熟知的。由于obshchechelovecheskoe和vsechelovecheskoe构成了斯米尔诺夫及其哲学观点理解的一对基本概念,为了避免任何误解,它们以音译的形式出现在本期特刊的这篇文章和所有其他文章中。——关于这两个术语及其关键内涵的更多细节,请参阅本期特辑中的文章《作为后革命哲学的古典欧亚主义》。这篇文章的摘要对这些术语进行了简明扼要的概括由俄罗斯思想家尼古拉·达尼列夫斯基和费奥多尔·陀思妥耶夫斯基介绍。与obshchechelovecheskoe相反,全球化中的vsechelovecheskoe的意义在于,任何文化都有权存在,不能被某种普遍的、“统一的人类”文化取代。这部作品比较了德勒兹和斯米尔诺夫对思维事件的两种不同观点的感觉逻辑概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Andrey Smirnov: The Logic of Sense as a Logic of Culture
ABSTRACT This article analyzes the philosophical views of the Russian philosopher Andrey V. Smirnov. Smirnov has advanced and substantiated the idea that there exist at least two distinct ways of linking the subject and the predicate in a statement—one of these he calls the substance logic (S-logic) and the other, the process logic (P-logic). S-logic reveals the characteristics (predicates) proper to the subject of the statement, whereas P-logic demonstrates the relationship between the Agent and the Patient—a process in which the predicates become actualized. Each of these logics, according to Smirnov, forms a sense-positing field of a specific culture. Viewing consciousness as the actualization of the intuition of svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ * * The Russian term svyaznost’ is usually rendered in English as ‘cohesion.’ However, this English term does not reveal the specific connotations associated with svyaznost’. A similar semantic difficulty arises with the Russian term tselostnost’ that is often translated into English by using such words as ‘entirety,’ ‘integrity,’ or ‘wholeness,’ neither of which is able to convey an accurate meaning of the word in the original language. Since both terms, svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ are central to understanding of Smirnov’s thought, instead of translating these terms, we decided to use their transliterated forms. – Ed. , Smirnov suggests a novel treatment of the classical problem of philosophy posed long ago by Immanuel Kant: the problem of unity of cogito and the ability to form judgments (the transcendental unity of apperception). The article shows that when we regard the logic of sense as a way of comprehension and action in a world defined by oneness of consciousness and culture, we discover another subject plane in Smirnov’s reasoning—a plane of historical reality. Addressing the task of analyzing globalization processes, the philosopher compares and contrasts the two views of the historical meaning of globalization as represented by the categories of the obshchechelovecheskoe and the vsechelovecheskoe ** ** The vsechelovecheskoe and the obshchechelovecheskoe are the two Russian words that can hardly be rendered into English without distorting their meaning. They both point to the universality of the human mind, human culture, and human civilization, but there is a fundamental difference in logical vehicles used to arrive at the universal. The vsechelovecheskoe presupposes “gathering” logically diverse models without imposing any general restriction on them, while the obshchechelovecheskoe is an understanding of the universal as grounded in the generic or general, which is well-known to the Western reader. Since the obshchechelovecheskoe and the vsechelovecheskoe form a pair of concepts fundamental to Smirnov and to the understanding of his philosophical view, to avoid any misconception, they are used in this and all other articles included in the present special issue in their transliterated form. –For more details about these two terms and their key connotations central to Smirnov’s own discussion, see his essay “Classical Eurasianism as a Post-Revolutionary Philosophy” included in the present issue. The abstract to this essay provides a concise and well-articulated summary of the terms. - Ed. , which have been introduced by Russian thinkers Nikolai Danilevsky and Fyodor Dostoevsky. As opposed to the obshchechelovecheskoe, the meaning of the vsechelovecheskoe in globalization lies in the idea that any culture is fully entitled to existence and cannot be supplanted by some universal, “uniformly human” culture. This work compares the concepts of the logic of sense by Gilles Deleuze and Andrey Smirnov as two diverging views on the event of thought.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Russian Studies in Philosophy publishes thematic issues featuring selected scholarly papers from conferences and joint research projects as well as from the leading Russian-language journals in philosophy. Thematic coverage ranges over significant theoretical topics as well as topics in the history of philosophy, both European and Russian, including issues focused on institutions, schools, and figures such as Bakhtin, Fedorov, Leontev, Losev, Rozanov, Solovev, and Zinovev.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信