{"title":"Kant: on the Way to Understanding the Spiritual Nature of Man","authors":"A. Osypov","doi":"10.15802/ampr.v0i24.295490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose. The main purpose of the study is to examine Kant’s first experience in creating a methodology for determining the holistic, spiritual nature of man, firstly, in terms of identifying the range of phenomena that should be included in the analysis of the spiritual essence of man, and secondly, this experience may be indicative for identifying dead ends in the research of spirituality of modern philosophers. Theoretical basis. The study is based on the methodology of philosophical anthropology formulated by M. Scheler, which, on the one hand, integrates the achievements of philosophy of life, phenomenology, existentialism and philosophical hermeneutics, and on the other hand, is based on the premise of the initial direct unity of the opposition of mental and physiological processes of human life. The basis for further expansion of the theoretical framework is the experience of spiritual practices of the Ancient East and religious practices of the Christian Middle Ages. Particularly noteworthy is the experience of modern psychotherapeutic practices, which, for all their diversity, have their roots in the depths of primitive beliefs and mysteries of ancient civilisations, and the tips of their branches reaching to the ideas of modern transpersonal psychology. Originality. Firstly, the author uses M. Scheler’s ideas about the spiritual nature of man and the unity of his essential forces: corporeality, senses, feelings, thinking, values of worldview principles and the Absolute to analyse Kant’s anthropological concept. Secondly, Kant’s position on the way of describing human nature reveals contradictions. These contradictions are caused, on the one hand, by the prevailing mechanistic picture of the world, and, on the other hand, by the philosopher’s intuitive assumptions that did not follow from the provisions of his dualistic position (the concepts of mind and soul as used in Kant’s work \"Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View\"). Thirdly, the author identifies those fragments of the said work where Kant assumes the presence of corporeality, but does not clearly formulate its role in building the integral nature of the spiritual man. Conclusions. Immanuel Kant was one of the first to raise the issue of the primary study of human nature in comparison with issues of ontology, epistemology, morality, etc. However, the philosopher failed to create a concept of holistic human nature, the essence of which would be its spiritual core. Kant based his methodology of studying human nature on the dualistic opposition of the essential forces of man. This methodology was conditioned by the dominant mechanistic picture of the world. Kant’s researches in the field of morality, aesthetics, and science were carried out in the cognitive-theoretical plane, so they were unable to reach a true synthesis of the essential forces of man by their methodology. Such a synthesis is possible on the basis of spiritual practice. The results of the study of the experience of the achievements and mistakes of the outstanding philosopher in the study of human nature open up the possibility of further refinement and development of philosophical and anthropological methodology in understanding the spiritual nature of man as a whole through comprehension of the mechanism of spiritual practice and, on this basis, understanding of the phenomenon of spirituality in all historical forms of its manifestation.","PeriodicalId":42650,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research","volume":"64 s294","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-29","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.v0i24.295490","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
Purpose. The main purpose of the study is to examine Kant’s first experience in creating a methodology for determining the holistic, spiritual nature of man, firstly, in terms of identifying the range of phenomena that should be included in the analysis of the spiritual essence of man, and secondly, this experience may be indicative for identifying dead ends in the research of spirituality of modern philosophers. Theoretical basis. The study is based on the methodology of philosophical anthropology formulated by M. Scheler, which, on the one hand, integrates the achievements of philosophy of life, phenomenology, existentialism and philosophical hermeneutics, and on the other hand, is based on the premise of the initial direct unity of the opposition of mental and physiological processes of human life. The basis for further expansion of the theoretical framework is the experience of spiritual practices of the Ancient East and religious practices of the Christian Middle Ages. Particularly noteworthy is the experience of modern psychotherapeutic practices, which, for all their diversity, have their roots in the depths of primitive beliefs and mysteries of ancient civilisations, and the tips of their branches reaching to the ideas of modern transpersonal psychology. Originality. Firstly, the author uses M. Scheler’s ideas about the spiritual nature of man and the unity of his essential forces: corporeality, senses, feelings, thinking, values of worldview principles and the Absolute to analyse Kant’s anthropological concept. Secondly, Kant’s position on the way of describing human nature reveals contradictions. These contradictions are caused, on the one hand, by the prevailing mechanistic picture of the world, and, on the other hand, by the philosopher’s intuitive assumptions that did not follow from the provisions of his dualistic position (the concepts of mind and soul as used in Kant’s work "Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View"). Thirdly, the author identifies those fragments of the said work where Kant assumes the presence of corporeality, but does not clearly formulate its role in building the integral nature of the spiritual man. Conclusions. Immanuel Kant was one of the first to raise the issue of the primary study of human nature in comparison with issues of ontology, epistemology, morality, etc. However, the philosopher failed to create a concept of holistic human nature, the essence of which would be its spiritual core. Kant based his methodology of studying human nature on the dualistic opposition of the essential forces of man. This methodology was conditioned by the dominant mechanistic picture of the world. Kant’s researches in the field of morality, aesthetics, and science were carried out in the cognitive-theoretical plane, so they were unable to reach a true synthesis of the essential forces of man by their methodology. Such a synthesis is possible on the basis of spiritual practice. The results of the study of the experience of the achievements and mistakes of the outstanding philosopher in the study of human nature open up the possibility of further refinement and development of philosophical and anthropological methodology in understanding the spiritual nature of man as a whole through comprehension of the mechanism of spiritual practice and, on this basis, understanding of the phenomenon of spirituality in all historical forms of its manifestation.
目的。本研究的主要目的是考察康德在创建确定人的整体性精神本质的方法论方面的第一条经验,首先是确定在分析人的精神本质时应包括的现象范围,其次是这条经验可能对确定现代哲学家精神研究的死胡同具有指示意义。理论基础。本研究以 M. Scheler 提出的哲学人类学方法论为基础,该方法论一方面综合了生命哲学、现象学、存在主义和哲学诠释学的成果,另一方面又以人类生命的心理过程和生理过程对立的最初直接统一性为前提。进一步扩展理论框架的基础是古代东方的精神实践经验和基督教中世纪的宗教实践经验。尤其值得注意的是现代心理治疗实践的经验,尽管这些实践多种多样,但其根源都来自原始信仰和古代文明神秘的深处,而其分支的顶端则达到了现代超个人心理学的思想。独创性。首先,作者利用舍勒先生关于人的精神本质及其基本力量(肉体、感官、情感、思维、世界观原则的价值和绝对)的统一性的思想来分析康德的人类学概念。其次,康德对人性描述方式的立场揭示了矛盾。造成这些矛盾的原因,一方面是当时流行的机械主义世界观,另一方面是这位哲学家的直觉假设,而这些假设并不符合其二元论立场的规定(康德著作《从实用主义观点看人类学》中使用的心灵和灵魂概念)。第三,作者指出了康德在上述著作中假定存在肉体性,但没有明确阐述肉体性在构建精神人的整体性中的作用的片段。结论伊曼努尔-康德是最早提出将人性作为本体论、认识论、道德论等问题的主要研究对象的人之一。然而,这位哲学家未能创立一个整体人性的概念,其本质是人性的精神内核。康德研究人性的方法论基于人的本质力量的二元对立。这种方法论受制于占主导地位的机械论世界图景。康德在道德、美学和科学领域的研究是在认知理论层面上进行的,因此他们的方法论无法达到对人的本质力量的真正综合。在精神实践的基础上,这种综合是可能的。对这位杰出哲学家在人性研究方面的成就和失误的经验进行研究的结果,为进一步完善和发展哲学和人类学方法论提供了可能性,即通过理解精神实践的机制来理解人的整体精神本质,并在此基础上理解精神现象的各种历史表现形式。