{"title":"Дискуссия","authors":"Научная дискуссия","doi":"10.1159/000428574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":". The authors argue with their opponents (Prof. Vladimir Mendelevich and Dr. Joseph Zislin), paying attention to the debatable nature of the use of terminology inherent in various areas of scientific knowledge. In their earlier articles, the authors attempted to analyze published archival documents related to the activities of Helena Ivanovna Roerich and characterized the public reaction to the publication of these documents. The article that became the subject of this discussion generally aimed to clarify the fact of Natalia and Ivan Rokotov’s existence rather than to assess the state of Helena Roerich’s health, which was given in probabilistic form. The authors note that the published documents make it possible to clarify what formed Helena Roerich’s mystical experience. The comparison of the texts of the contactee with both her personal characteristics (level of education, circle of interests) and the state of the philosophical and scientific thought at the time she received the teaching is of great importance. A fragment of the autobiography of A.F. Yalovenko, who observed Helena Roerich and noticed the presence of the so-called “epileptic aura” in her, is given.","PeriodicalId":344919,"journal":{"name":"ТНЕ ERA OF ТНЕ RUSSIAN CIVIL WAR: Life in а Time of Social Experimentation and Violence 1917-1922. Proceedings of St. Petersburg International Colloquium","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ТНЕ ERA OF ТНЕ RUSSIAN CIVIL WAR: Life in а Time of Social Experimentation and Violence 1917-1922. Proceedings of St. Petersburg International Colloquium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000428574","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
. 作者与他们的反对者(Vladimir mendeleich教授和Joseph Zislin博士)争论,注意到在科学知识的各个领域中固有的术语使用的可争议性。在他们早期的文章中,作者试图分析与海伦娜·伊万诺夫娜·罗里希的活动有关的已发表的档案文件,并描述了公众对这些文件发表的反应。这篇文章成为这次讨论的主题,其目的一般是澄清纳塔莉亚和伊万·罗科托夫存在的事实,而不是评估海伦娜·罗里奇的健康状况,后者是以概率形式给出的。作者指出,公布的文件使得澄清海伦娜·罗伊里奇神秘经历的原因成为可能。将接触者的文本与她的个人特征(教育水平、兴趣圈)以及她接受教学时的哲学和科学思想状况进行比较具有重要意义。A. f .亚罗文科的自传片段,他观察了海伦娜·罗里奇,并注意到她身上存在所谓的“癫痫先兆”。
. The authors argue with their opponents (Prof. Vladimir Mendelevich and Dr. Joseph Zislin), paying attention to the debatable nature of the use of terminology inherent in various areas of scientific knowledge. In their earlier articles, the authors attempted to analyze published archival documents related to the activities of Helena Ivanovna Roerich and characterized the public reaction to the publication of these documents. The article that became the subject of this discussion generally aimed to clarify the fact of Natalia and Ivan Rokotov’s existence rather than to assess the state of Helena Roerich’s health, which was given in probabilistic form. The authors note that the published documents make it possible to clarify what formed Helena Roerich’s mystical experience. The comparison of the texts of the contactee with both her personal characteristics (level of education, circle of interests) and the state of the philosophical and scientific thought at the time she received the teaching is of great importance. A fragment of the autobiography of A.F. Yalovenko, who observed Helena Roerich and noticed the presence of the so-called “epileptic aura” in her, is given.