尼采:俄国帝国疆土上的病理学英雄

Vadym Menzhulin
{"title":"尼采:俄国帝国疆土上的病理学英雄","authors":"Vadym Menzhulin","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2021.7.17-29","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"At the beginning of the twentieth century, when psychoanalysis was just emerging and the tradition of writing psychoanalytic biographies (psychobiographies) did not yet exist, the genre of pathography was widespread among psychiatrists, who considered the life of a prominent figure through the prism of his or her disease. One of the heroes of the number of pathological investigations was Friedrich Nietzsche, whose figure and philosophical views instigated wide interest. This tendency was manifested among the psychiatrists working in the Russian Empire, including the territory of contemporary Ukraine. The analysis of Nietzsche’s illness and creativity, proposed by a psychiatrist from Odessa Ivan Khmelevskyi, helps to clarify the historical boundaries between the pathography and psychobiography. The current article for the first time attempts to reproduce the basic data on the life and research activities of this now almost forgotten psychiatrist. The specificity of I. Khmelevskyi’s views on F. Nietzsche becomes more obvious due to the consideration of the position of Vladimir Chyzh, another Russian psychiatrist who was also interested in the figure and ideas of the German philosopher. It is shown that the pathographies of F. Nietzsche, proposed by I. Khmelevskyi and V. Chyzh, reflected both some features of the development of the genre and general trends in understanding of Nietzsche’s figure and teachings within the Russian context. It is shown that V. Chyzh and I. Khmelevskyi, like many scientists of their time, shared some ideas about evolution and degeneration, which are now considered outdated. At the same time, it has been shown that both psychiatrists confronted with the philosophy and figure of F. Nietzsche were forced to limit the explanatory ambitions of psychiatry and avoid the usual for pathographers of that time tendency to consider genius as a pathology. It is also noted that the fact of Nietzsche’s illness, if not overemphasized, can be accepted to the philosophical discourse of the present time.","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Friedrich Nietzsche as a Hero of Pathographies Written on the Territory of Russian Empire\",\"authors\":\"Vadym Menzhulin\",\"doi\":\"10.18523/2617-1678.2021.7.17-29\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"At the beginning of the twentieth century, when psychoanalysis was just emerging and the tradition of writing psychoanalytic biographies (psychobiographies) did not yet exist, the genre of pathography was widespread among psychiatrists, who considered the life of a prominent figure through the prism of his or her disease. One of the heroes of the number of pathological investigations was Friedrich Nietzsche, whose figure and philosophical views instigated wide interest. This tendency was manifested among the psychiatrists working in the Russian Empire, including the territory of contemporary Ukraine. The analysis of Nietzsche’s illness and creativity, proposed by a psychiatrist from Odessa Ivan Khmelevskyi, helps to clarify the historical boundaries between the pathography and psychobiography. The current article for the first time attempts to reproduce the basic data on the life and research activities of this now almost forgotten psychiatrist. The specificity of I. Khmelevskyi’s views on F. Nietzsche becomes more obvious due to the consideration of the position of Vladimir Chyzh, another Russian psychiatrist who was also interested in the figure and ideas of the German philosopher. It is shown that the pathographies of F. Nietzsche, proposed by I. Khmelevskyi and V. Chyzh, reflected both some features of the development of the genre and general trends in understanding of Nietzsche’s figure and teachings within the Russian context. It is shown that V. Chyzh and I. Khmelevskyi, like many scientists of their time, shared some ideas about evolution and degeneration, which are now considered outdated. At the same time, it has been shown that both psychiatrists confronted with the philosophy and figure of F. Nietzsche were forced to limit the explanatory ambitions of psychiatry and avoid the usual for pathographers of that time tendency to consider genius as a pathology. It is also noted that the fact of Nietzsche’s illness, if not overemphasized, can be accepted to the philosophical discourse of the present time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34696,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2021.7.17-29\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2021.7.17-29","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在二十世纪初,当精神分析刚刚兴起,写精神分析传记(精神传记)的传统还不存在时,病理学的流派在精神科医生中广泛存在,他们通过他或她的疾病的棱镜来考虑一个杰出人物的生活。弗里德里希·尼采是众多病理学研究的英雄之一,他的形象和哲学观点引起了广泛的兴趣。这种倾向在俄罗斯帝国(包括当代乌克兰领土)工作的精神科医生中表现出来。来自敖德萨的精神病学家Ivan Khmelevskyi对尼采的疾病和创造力的分析,有助于澄清病理学和精神传记之间的历史界限。这篇文章首次试图重现这位现在几乎被遗忘的精神病学家的生活和研究活动的基本数据。由于考虑到另一位对这位德国哲学家的形象和思想感兴趣的俄罗斯精神病学家弗拉基米尔·奇日(Vladimir Chyzh)的立场,赫梅列夫斯基(I. Khmelevskyi)对尼采的看法的特殊性变得更加明显。本文表明,赫梅列夫斯基和奇日提出的尼采病态论既反映了尼采体裁发展的某些特征,也反映了在俄罗斯语境下对尼采形象和教义的理解的总体趋势。这表明,V. Chyzh和I. Khmelevskyi,像他们那个时代的许多科学家一样,分享了一些关于进化和退化的观点,这些观点现在被认为是过时的。与此同时,有证据表明,面对尼采的哲学和形象,两位精神科医生都被迫限制精神病学的解释野心,并避免当时的病理学家通常倾向于将天才视为一种病理学。同样值得注意的是,尼采生病的事实,如果不被过分强调,可以被接受为当代的哲学话语。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Friedrich Nietzsche as a Hero of Pathographies Written on the Territory of Russian Empire
At the beginning of the twentieth century, when psychoanalysis was just emerging and the tradition of writing psychoanalytic biographies (psychobiographies) did not yet exist, the genre of pathography was widespread among psychiatrists, who considered the life of a prominent figure through the prism of his or her disease. One of the heroes of the number of pathological investigations was Friedrich Nietzsche, whose figure and philosophical views instigated wide interest. This tendency was manifested among the psychiatrists working in the Russian Empire, including the territory of contemporary Ukraine. The analysis of Nietzsche’s illness and creativity, proposed by a psychiatrist from Odessa Ivan Khmelevskyi, helps to clarify the historical boundaries between the pathography and psychobiography. The current article for the first time attempts to reproduce the basic data on the life and research activities of this now almost forgotten psychiatrist. The specificity of I. Khmelevskyi’s views on F. Nietzsche becomes more obvious due to the consideration of the position of Vladimir Chyzh, another Russian psychiatrist who was also interested in the figure and ideas of the German philosopher. It is shown that the pathographies of F. Nietzsche, proposed by I. Khmelevskyi and V. Chyzh, reflected both some features of the development of the genre and general trends in understanding of Nietzsche’s figure and teachings within the Russian context. It is shown that V. Chyzh and I. Khmelevskyi, like many scientists of their time, shared some ideas about evolution and degeneration, which are now considered outdated. At the same time, it has been shown that both psychiatrists confronted with the philosophy and figure of F. Nietzsche were forced to limit the explanatory ambitions of psychiatry and avoid the usual for pathographers of that time tendency to consider genius as a pathology. It is also noted that the fact of Nietzsche’s illness, if not overemphasized, can be accepted to the philosophical discourse of the present time.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 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