Pub Date : 2020-12-30DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.58-67
Kseniia Meita
This article reviews the problem of the otherness in contemporary Western philosophy . The peculiarities of the representation of the category of the otherness in the 21st-century anglophone continental philosophy were analyzed. A theoretical base of the research consists of the works by Richard Rorty, Bruno Latour, Richard Kearney, Nancy. Fraser, Dan Zahavi, Chad Kautzer, Eduardo Mendieta, and Slavoj Žižek. Within the frameworks of an Anglophone philosophy, we made a comparison of the 20th-century pragmatist approaches based on the exceptionalism and the exclusion of the Absolute Other from the intersubjective consensus and of the modern neopragmatist tendencies shaped on the principles of the generalized patience and extension of the framing of the subjectivity with the post-territorial regulation. The hermeneutical and phenomenological problems of the otherness typical for continental philosophy were covered with the analysis of the genealogy of the feeling leading to the victimization of the Other, its identification with Me, or its recognition with the preservation of the own identity. The author also analyzes ways to find a social consensus in the conditions of the antagonism between the emancipatory interests of different marginalized groups. Generally, the ways of adequate coexistence, which support the universal solidarity in a situation the global challenges humanity, had been demonstrated. That is why, finding out of a compromise in the analysis of the problem of the Otherness will be achieved with a realization of the following factors: all-affected principle, formed on the basis of the equal agency for all the subjects of communicative action for consensus with the help of a network activism, and a realization of the principles of a diacritical hermeneutics on the basis of the empathy to the Other and the termination of his/her marginalization. For this, it was offered to gain the equal rights for all the living forms for their own modes of existence to avoid antagonism between different social groups and to predict the impact of the obscurantist elites on the mass consciousness.Manuscript received 06.09.2020
{"title":"The Problem of the Otherness in Contemporary Western Philosophy","authors":"Kseniia Meita","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.58-67","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.58-67","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews the problem of the otherness in contemporary Western philosophy . The peculiarities of the representation of the category of the otherness in the 21st-century anglophone continental philosophy were analyzed. A theoretical base of the research consists of the works by Richard Rorty, Bruno Latour, Richard Kearney, Nancy. Fraser, Dan Zahavi, Chad Kautzer, Eduardo Mendieta, and Slavoj Žižek. Within the frameworks of an Anglophone philosophy, we made a comparison of the 20th-century pragmatist approaches based on the exceptionalism and the exclusion of the Absolute Other from the intersubjective consensus and of the modern neopragmatist tendencies shaped on the principles of the generalized patience and extension of the framing of the subjectivity with the post-territorial regulation. The hermeneutical and phenomenological problems of the otherness typical for continental philosophy were covered with the analysis of the genealogy of the feeling leading to the victimization of the Other, its identification with Me, or its recognition with the preservation of the own identity. The author also analyzes ways to find a social consensus in the conditions of the antagonism between the emancipatory interests of different marginalized groups. Generally, the ways of adequate coexistence, which support the universal solidarity in a situation the global challenges humanity, had been demonstrated. That is why, finding out of a compromise in the analysis of the problem of the Otherness will be achieved with a realization of the following factors: all-affected principle, formed on the basis of the equal agency for all the subjects of communicative action for consensus with the help of a network activism, and a realization of the principles of a diacritical hermeneutics on the basis of the empathy to the Other and the termination of his/her marginalization. For this, it was offered to gain the equal rights for all the living forms for their own modes of existence to avoid antagonism between different social groups and to predict the impact of the obscurantist elites on the mass consciousness.Manuscript received 06.09.2020","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79096309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-30DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.14-27
Taras Lyuty
The article focuses on the historical, psychological, anthropological, and sociocultural aspects of the phenomenon of a double. Compared with other beings, a human is constantly forming strategies for the realization of his or her freedom. Therefore, human beings do not adapt to the world but create unusual projections of themselves. As a result, there are specific models of entering into the Being, based on a symbolic construction. Symbolism as the main component of duplication is the central point of the study. The symbol allows us to intermediate various important formations of human existence, and to combine contradictory components. Reflection on the role of doubling in human existence is the main approach of this study. A human creates numerous symbolic images such as twins, a mask, a doll, the right and left hand, a mirror, a shadow. Since ancient times, people project themselves into other dimensions, go beyond the usual space and temporal coordinates, push their boundaries, and try to prolong their existence. Doubling helps individuals to assert themselves, find successful forms of life protection, get support in extreme situations, obtain new characteristics, exam the ideal modes of their prototypes. The appearance of a double does not necessarily mean a precise copy of oneself. Rather, it means exploration for a balance, a way to combine the opposites through continuous mediation, comparing oneself with the Other, and understanding one’s own alienation. Reduplication allows people to change, improve, overcome one- dimensionality, construct the identity, and achieve the fullness of their personality. This ability causes self-actualization, self-knowledge, self-awareness, and meaningful self-observation. Duality uncovers the physiological and mental asymmetry of the human being, helps to distinguish between real and virtual, facilitates social adaptation, promotes self-esteem, delineation, and localization of negative manifestations.Manuscript received 11.08.2020
{"title":"Philosophical Symbolism of Multiple Duplication","authors":"Taras Lyuty","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.14-27","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.14-27","url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on the historical, psychological, anthropological, and sociocultural aspects of the phenomenon of a double. Compared with other beings, a human is constantly forming strategies for the realization of his or her freedom. Therefore, human beings do not adapt to the world but create unusual projections of themselves. As a result, there are specific models of entering into the Being, based on a symbolic construction. Symbolism as the main component of duplication is the central point of the study. The symbol allows us to intermediate various important formations of human existence, and to combine contradictory components. Reflection on the role of doubling in human existence is the main approach of this study. A human creates numerous symbolic images such as twins, a mask, a doll, the right and left hand, a mirror, a shadow. Since ancient times, people project themselves into other dimensions, go beyond the usual space and temporal coordinates, push their boundaries, and try to prolong their existence. Doubling helps individuals to assert themselves, find successful forms of life protection, get support in extreme situations, obtain new characteristics, exam the ideal modes of their prototypes. The appearance of a double does not necessarily mean a precise copy of oneself. Rather, it means exploration for a balance, a way to combine the opposites through continuous mediation, comparing oneself with the Other, and understanding one’s own alienation. Reduplication allows people to change, improve, overcome one- dimensionality, construct the identity, and achieve the fullness of their personality. This ability causes self-actualization, self-knowledge, self-awareness, and meaningful self-observation. Duality uncovers the physiological and mental asymmetry of the human being, helps to distinguish between real and virtual, facilitates social adaptation, promotes self-esteem, delineation, and localization of negative manifestations.Manuscript received 11.08.2020","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85182099","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-30DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.3-13
Vadym Menzhulin
{"title":"An Owl and a Rooster as Symbols of Philosophizing","authors":"Vadym Menzhulin","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.3-13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.3-13","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80087130","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-30DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.89-99
Serhii Holovashchenko
{"title":"Motives of Religious Studies in the Works of the Kyiv Theological Academy Professor Volodymyr Rybinskii (Based on the Work “Old Hebrew Sabbath”)","authors":"Serhii Holovashchenko","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.89-99","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.89-99","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"228 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77003517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-30DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.39-46
Denys Sultanhaliiev
This article offers an interpretation of Georg Simmel’s philosophy of culture as a theory that can be applied to a critical view of the cultural and political economy situation of our time. This interpretation allows us to somewhat re-actualize the legacy of the German philosopher in the context of contemporary critical thought. The interpretation was created on the basis of the analysis of two Simmel’s key concepts, namely: “tragedy of culture” and “conflict of culture”, as well as their relationship. In addition, the basis for such reading was Simmel’s understanding of the subject, which denies the absolute sovereignty and asserts his appearance only under the influence of cultural objects. This is complemented by the interpretation of the “tragedy of culture” as a theory that debunks the “sovereign subject” as discussed by Dina and Michael Weinstein in Postmodern(ized) Simmel. Interpretation of Simmel’s theory of culture as critical towards its object includes an analysis of various phenomena inherent in modern culture from the standpoint of this theory. First, such a phenomenon is the capitalist system, which, due to its self-regulation, is an absolutely alienated object and a stimulator of the quantitative distribution of cultural objects. Secondly, the imperious relationship of cultural objects and the level of influence of some objects on the development and distribution of others allows us to look at how certain cultural phenomena transform culture as a whole. The third point is the relativization of reality and values and the role of the phenomenon of money in this process. Finally, it is the transformation of the role of subjects in the process of creating cultural objects. This transformation arises as the effect of placing the “tragedy” and “conflict” of culture in the same plane of contemporaneity, as a result of which the impulse to reproduce an objective culture can no longer be provided by a subjective impulse; but there is no decline in the rate of growth of an objective culture, and therefore, the key objects of culture are taken the function of this impulse.Manuscript received 10.08.2020
{"title":"Critical Potentials of Georg Simmel’s Philosophy of Culture","authors":"Denys Sultanhaliiev","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.39-46","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2020.6.39-46","url":null,"abstract":"This article offers an interpretation of Georg Simmel’s philosophy of culture as a theory that can be applied to a critical view of the cultural and political economy situation of our time. This interpretation allows us to somewhat re-actualize the legacy of the German philosopher in the context of contemporary critical thought. The interpretation was created on the basis of the analysis of two Simmel’s key concepts, namely: “tragedy of culture” and “conflict of culture”, as well as their relationship. In addition, the basis for such reading was Simmel’s understanding of the subject, which denies the absolute sovereignty and asserts his appearance only under the influence of cultural objects. This is complemented by the interpretation of the “tragedy of culture” as a theory that debunks the “sovereign subject” as discussed by Dina and Michael Weinstein in Postmodern(ized) Simmel. Interpretation of Simmel’s theory of culture as critical towards its object includes an analysis of various phenomena inherent in modern culture from the standpoint of this theory. First, such a phenomenon is the capitalist system, which, due to its self-regulation, is an absolutely alienated object and a stimulator of the quantitative distribution of cultural objects. Secondly, the imperious relationship of cultural objects and the level of influence of some objects on the development and distribution of others allows us to look at how certain cultural phenomena transform culture as a whole. The third point is the relativization of reality and values and the role of the phenomenon of money in this process. Finally, it is the transformation of the role of subjects in the process of creating cultural objects. This transformation arises as the effect of placing the “tragedy” and “conflict” of culture in the same plane of contemporaneity, as a result of which the impulse to reproduce an objective culture can no longer be provided by a subjective impulse; but there is no decline in the rate of growth of an objective culture, and therefore, the key objects of culture are taken the function of this impulse.Manuscript received 10.08.2020","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77654381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-28DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2020.5.26-59
Yurii Svatko
{"title":"Cultural-Symbolic World Picture of the Latin Christian Middle Ages: The Ontological Dimension","authors":"Yurii Svatko","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2020.5.26-59","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2020.5.26-59","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83192412","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-28DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2020.5.103-105
V. Terletsky, V. Kozlovskyi
The review introduces the main topics of the reports of the seminar participants of the Kant Society in Ukraine, held at the National University “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy” in December 2019. The speakers focused on the interpretation of I. Kant’s note on the “great light” in various historical and systematic contexts: from the evolution of the doctrine of space through the problem of metaphysical cognition and the new theory of judgment down to the concepts of normativity and conceptuality of human cognition.
{"title":"“The Year of [17]69 Gave Me a Great Light” (Seminar of the Kant Society in Ukraine)","authors":"V. Terletsky, V. Kozlovskyi","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2020.5.103-105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2020.5.103-105","url":null,"abstract":"The review introduces the main topics of the reports of the seminar participants of the Kant Society in Ukraine, held at the National University “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy” in December 2019. The speakers focused on the interpretation of I. Kant’s note on the “great light” in various historical and systematic contexts: from the evolution of the doctrine of space through the problem of metaphysical cognition and the new theory of judgment down to the concepts of normativity and conceptuality of human cognition.","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86108566","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-12-09DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2019.4.73-78
Sofiia-Olga Kungurtseva
This article outlines the basic traits of a responsive phenomenology of Bernhard Waldenfels by focusing on the issue of the Alien. For the reason that we are commonly confronted with the Alien (or the Foreign) in everyday life, it is of crucial importance for us to understand and describe such experience without neglecting its special features. This is shown concerning the phenomenological issues of intentionality, by emphasizing the dimension of pathos. More precisely, pathos describes such a kind of affection which starts “somewhere” and cannot be reduced to previous horizons. The Alienness is characterized as a hyperphenomenon which we experience in a paradoxical way only. In this respect, all our efforts to grasp the Alien transform into universalist pretensions that worsen the intercultural communication. To defend the modern politics from overwhelming eurocentrism, Waldenfels offers a method of a responsive epoche: the latter unveils the contingency of each order and the partiality of every universal claim. Moreover, this article covers the role of responsivity while interacting with the Alien, as well as the possible connections in the ethical perspective. In order to deepen the understanding of responsivity and its functioning, the author outlines the distinction between an answer as a merely typical reaction and a response as a part of creative discourse. All in all, the responsive phenomenology is believed to ground upon such concepts and principles which, if methodically developed, will enable more a sufficient and accurate international dialogue, as well as deepen the self-awareness. The main purposes of such phenomenology of the Alien are to demonstrate the “preceding” of the outer Demand and to introduce a special logic of responding that provides this dialogue with the peculiar dynamism. Article received 08.08.2019
{"title":"The Alien as a Subject of Bernhard Waldenfels’ Responsive Phenomenology","authors":"Sofiia-Olga Kungurtseva","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2019.4.73-78","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2019.4.73-78","url":null,"abstract":"This article outlines the basic traits of a responsive phenomenology of Bernhard Waldenfels by focusing on the issue of the Alien. For the reason that we are commonly confronted with the Alien (or the Foreign) in everyday life, it is of crucial importance for us to understand and describe such experience without neglecting its special features. This is shown concerning the phenomenological issues of intentionality, by emphasizing the dimension of pathos. More precisely, pathos describes such a kind of affection which starts “somewhere” and cannot be reduced to previous horizons. The Alienness is characterized as a hyperphenomenon which we experience in a paradoxical way only. In this respect, all our efforts to grasp the Alien transform into universalist pretensions that worsen the intercultural communication. To defend the modern politics from overwhelming eurocentrism, Waldenfels offers a method of a responsive epoche: the latter unveils the contingency of each order and the partiality of every universal claim. Moreover, this article covers the role of responsivity while interacting with the Alien, as well as the possible connections in the ethical perspective. In order to deepen the understanding of responsivity and its functioning, the author outlines the distinction between an answer as a merely typical reaction and a response as a part of creative discourse. All in all, the responsive phenomenology is believed to ground upon such concepts and principles which, if methodically developed, will enable more a sufficient and accurate international dialogue, as well as deepen the self-awareness. The main purposes of such phenomenology of the Alien are to demonstrate the “preceding” of the outer Demand and to introduce a special logic of responding that provides this dialogue with the peculiar dynamism. Article received 08.08.2019","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75461145","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-22DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2019.3.76-84
Oleksandr Siedin
The article aims to create a thorough alternative to educative and positivist views regarding the historical and anthropological position of the myth. The purpose of the article is to present how a new way of addressing the myth was introduced in the history of the philosophical thought of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which views the myth as an integral part of human rationality. The author suggests that the rehabilitation of myth is a part of a general inclusive approach which continues in the philosophy of modern times and involves a substantial expansion of the limits of what can be considered as rational. The study is based on the ideas of such influential thinkers and researchers of the myth as Friedrich Schelling, Max Muller, Ernst Cassirer, Susanne Langer, and Hans Blumenberg. The article demonstrates the importance of a linguistic turn in the study of myth, conducted by M. Muller, and it is shown that his idea of myth as “a disease of language” is strongly connected to the rethinking of the essence and purpose of the philosophy initiated by Ludwig Wittgenstein and the representatives of the Vienna Circle. The author asserts that the supplementation of a linguistic dimension by anthropological approach, suggested by E. Cassirer and his follower S. Langer, as well as a consideration of myth as a selfsufficient symbolic form, leads to the rejection of the contradiction between mythological and rational thinking and facilitates the understanding of the close connection between myth and language. Despite the fact that E. Cassirer developed his philosophy of symbolic forms and remained in general within the tradition of transcendental idealism, while S. Langer, on the contrary, rejected idealism, they both reached similar conclusions in the view of myth. Based on the work of H. Blumenberg and other researchers, is the author presents that the rehabilitation of myth and its incorporation into rational limits are closely linked to the rehabilitation of metaphor as another form of non-discursive expression. It is shown that the recognition of myth as inevitable part of world perception contributes to a deeper understanding of the nature of human thinking. Article received 05.02.2019
{"title":"On Rehabilitation of Myth and Extension of Limits of the Rationality in Philosophical Thought of 19th – 20th Century","authors":"Oleksandr Siedin","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2019.3.76-84","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2019.3.76-84","url":null,"abstract":"The article aims to create a thorough alternative to educative and positivist views regarding the historical and anthropological position of the myth. The purpose of the article is to present how a new way of addressing the myth was introduced in the history of the philosophical thought of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which views the myth as an integral part of human rationality. The author suggests that the rehabilitation of myth is a part of a general inclusive approach which continues in the philosophy of modern times and involves a substantial expansion of the limits of what can be considered as rational. The study is based on the ideas of such influential thinkers and researchers of the myth as Friedrich Schelling, Max Muller, Ernst Cassirer, Susanne Langer, and Hans Blumenberg. The article demonstrates the importance of a linguistic turn in the study of myth, conducted by M. Muller, and it is shown that his idea of myth as “a disease of language” is strongly connected to the rethinking of the essence and purpose of the philosophy initiated by Ludwig Wittgenstein and the representatives of the Vienna Circle. The author asserts that the supplementation of a linguistic dimension by anthropological approach, suggested by E. Cassirer and his follower S. Langer, as well as a consideration of myth as a selfsufficient symbolic form, leads to the rejection of the contradiction between mythological and rational thinking and facilitates the understanding of the close connection between myth and language. Despite the fact that E. Cassirer developed his philosophy of symbolic forms and remained in general within the tradition of transcendental idealism, while S. Langer, on the contrary, rejected idealism, they both reached similar conclusions in the view of myth. Based on the work of H. Blumenberg and other researchers, is the author presents that the rehabilitation of myth and its incorporation into rational limits are closely linked to the rehabilitation of metaphor as another form of non-discursive expression. It is shown that the recognition of myth as inevitable part of world perception contributes to a deeper understanding of the nature of human thinking. Article received 05.02.2019","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80493838","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-22DOI: 10.18523/2617-1678.2019.3.85-99
Тaras Lyuty
This article is an attempt to examine the differences between mass and popular culture in the historical and sociocultural dimensions. The author traces the relations of these two phenomena to the general sphere of culture and its main principles. The key point of the article is that culture is a kind of arrangement, cultivation, education, and perfection. On the other hand, manifestations of mass culture are associated with the decline of its sublime foundations. Therefore, there is a necessity to compare the ‘high’ and ‘low’ levels of culture. The rise of commercial activity and the common consumption became the turn point of the emergence of a non-elite level of culture. Industrialization and urbanization accelerated the development of mass media, which helped bring the goods of civilization to the majority of people. Due to market mechanisms, the spread of wealth took place under the dictates of commercial success. Artistic and aesthetic parameters of culture did not fit into the pragmatic requirements, and marketing programs of mass production weakened those parameters. Wide-ranging conformism, infantilism, and consumerism were increasing. These trends are well known as mass culture. The indicator of this condition of culture is simplification of tastes. At the same time, there was a popular traditional lower culture, the main features of which were accessibility and commonness, and it had an unofficial and peripheral status. However, these two formations (elite and popular culture) did not enter into rigid antagonism. The author is analyzing the development of a popular culture from the ancient to the modern times. It is concluded that culture not only creates high ideals but also may be limited to simpler meanings. The author shows that the popular culture also opposes mass culture due to creation of alternative forms of resistance. It means that popular culture has not completely collapsed into conformism but kept the protest intention. Thanks to this alternative particularity, pop-culture has gradually become significantly different from masscult. It allows for grasping distinctions between these two kinds of culture. Finally, popular culture remains the domain of the formation of ideas in which social players express the values of their everyday life. Article received 14.02.2019
{"title":"Mass and Popular Culture: Problem of Demarcation","authors":"Тaras Lyuty","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2019.3.85-99","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2019.3.85-99","url":null,"abstract":"This article is an attempt to examine the differences between mass and popular culture in the historical and sociocultural dimensions. The author traces the relations of these two phenomena to the general sphere of culture and its main principles. The key point of the article is that culture is a kind of arrangement, cultivation, education, and perfection. On the other hand, manifestations of mass culture are associated with the decline of its sublime foundations. Therefore, there is a necessity to compare the ‘high’ and ‘low’ levels of culture. The rise of commercial activity and the common consumption became the turn point of the emergence of a non-elite level of culture. Industrialization and urbanization accelerated the development of mass media, which helped bring the goods of civilization to the majority of people. Due to market mechanisms, the spread of wealth took place under the dictates of commercial success. Artistic and aesthetic parameters of culture did not fit into the pragmatic requirements, and marketing programs of mass production weakened those parameters. Wide-ranging conformism, infantilism, and consumerism were increasing. These trends are well known as mass culture. The indicator of this condition of culture is simplification of tastes. At the same time, there was a popular traditional lower culture, the main features of which were accessibility and commonness, and it had an unofficial and peripheral status. However, these two formations (elite and popular culture) did not enter into rigid antagonism. The author is analyzing the development of a popular culture from the ancient to the modern times. It is concluded that culture not only creates high ideals but also may be limited to simpler meanings. The author shows that the popular culture also opposes mass culture due to creation of alternative forms of resistance. It means that popular culture has not completely collapsed into conformism but kept the protest intention. Thanks to this alternative particularity, pop-culture has gradually become significantly different from masscult. It allows for grasping distinctions between these two kinds of culture. Finally, popular culture remains the domain of the formation of ideas in which social players express the values of their everyday life. Article received 14.02.2019","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76992813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：