Article/Publication Details
Views: 3543

THE PROBLEMATIZATION OF THE “AESTHETICAL EXPERIENCE” IN HENRI MALDINEY’S PHENOMENOLOGY

Abstract
In this paper I undertook a study of Henri Maldiney’s problematization of the way which we aesthetically experience the world in. The notion of aisthesis unites the aesthetic, in its etymological meaning, as related to the sensory perception, and the aesthetic, as related to the theory of art. According to Maldiney, aisthesis, or sensing, cannot be described in Kantian terms of experience as being structured by intelligence; being pre-reflective and ante-predicative, sensing should be classified as épreuve, passive experience that puts one to the test. Sensing is not just the sensory perception: it is holistic and gives the access to the world as a whole; in sensing one senses not the qualities of individual objects but, rather, the world which is not got crystallized in objects yet. Sensing is also a basic level of communicative human experience: through sensing one obtains an access to the world as being shared with others. Sensing is aesthetically important inasmuch as it possesses its own rhythm. I have carried out the analysis of two metaphysical notions, i.e. transpassibility and transpossibility, introduced by Maldiney in order to overcome the classical dichotomies of passibility/impassibility and possibility/impossibility accordingly. Aesthetically, rhythm as opposed to schema, is transpossible; it also constitutes the work of art in a dynamic unity. The hypothesis I come to can be formulated as follows: there is a special synthetic function of rhythm that can be opposed to the synthetic function of intentionality. This synthetic function cannot be normalized and, thus, it paves a way to de-transcendentalized and de-normalized phenomenology. In the conclusion I contemplate the experience of depression as described by Matthew Ratcliffe. Ratcliffe deals with a methodological challenge of how to apply transcendental notions to the empirical. I argue that the language of transpassible and transpossible can be used as a replacement for the Husserian language of transcendental constitution.

Key words
Henri Maldiney, aesthetical experience, aesthetisation, rhythm, french phenomenology, event, eventness, normal and pathologic.

References

• Aristotel’. (1976). O dushe [On the Soul]. In Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh. T.1 [Collected Works in Four Volumes, Vol. 1]. Moscow: Mysl’. (in Russian).
• Barbaras, R., & Maldiney, H. (2014). Maldiney, une singulière presence. Paris: Encre marine.
• Benua, Zh. (2014). C toi storony granitsy [From the Other Side of the Border]. In S. Sholokhova & A. Yampol’skaya (Eds.), (Post)fenomenologiya: novaya fenomenologiya vo Frantsii i za ee predelami [(Post)ohenomenology: New Phenomenology in France and Beyond] (269-284). Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt. (in Russian).
• Canguilhem, G. (1966). Le Normal et le pathologique. Paris: P.U.F.
• Crowell, S. (2013). Normativity and Phenomenology in Husserl and Heidegger. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Escoubas, E. (2010). Henry Maldiney. In H. Sepp, E. S. Casey & L. Embree (Eds), Handbook of Phenomenological Aesthetics (193-196). Dordrecht; London: Springer.
• Fuchs, T. (2013). Depression, Intercorporeality, and Interaffectivity. Journal of Consciousness Studies: Controversies in Science & the Humanities, 20 (7/8), 219-238.
• Gobbs, T. (2017). Leviafan [Leviathan]. Moscow: Ripol-Klassik. (in Russian).
• Goddard, J.-C. (2008). Violence et subjectivé: Derrida, Deleuze, Maldiney. Paris: Vrin.
• Gromova, E. I. (2016). Bezumie i psikhicheskaya bolezn’ v svete filosofii E. Levinasa [Madness and Mental Illness in the Light of E. Levinas’ Philosophy]. Kontekst i refleksiya: filosofiya o mire i cheloveke, 4, 98-107. (in Russian).
• Heidegger, M. (1993). Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
• Housset, E. (2008). L’intériorité de l’exil. Le soi au risque de d’altérité. Paris: Cerf.
• Kant, I. (1966). Antropologiya s pragmaticheskoi tochki zreniya [Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View]. In Sochineniya v shesti tomakh. T. 6 [Works in Six Volumes, Vol. 6] (349-587). Moscow: Mysl’. (in Russian).
• Keats, J. (2009). Selected Letters of John Keats: Revised Edition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Klee, P. (1964). Das bildnerische Denken. Basel, Stuttgart: Schwabe.
• Leijenhorst, C. (2002). The Mechanisation of Aristotelianism: The Late Aristotelian Setting of Thomas Hobbes’ Natural Philosophy. Leiden: Brill.
• Lévinas, E. (1979). Le Temps et l’Autre. Montpellier: Fata Morgana.
• Lévinas, E (2004). Autrement qu’être ou au-délà de l’essence. Paris: Kluwer.
• Maldiney, H. (1991). Penser l’homme et la folie. Grenoble: Jérôme Million.
• Maldiney, H. (2000). Ouvrir le rien, l’art nu. La Versanne: Encre Marine.
• Maldiney, H. (2003). Rencontre et psychose. Cahiers de psychologie clinique, 2 (21), 9–21. doi: 10.3917/cpc.021.0009
• Maldiney, H. (2012). L’art, l’éclaire de l’être. Paris: Cerf.
• Maldiney, H. (2013). Regard Parole Espace. Paris: Cerf.
• Mal’dine, A. (2014). O sverkhstrastnosti [On Transpassibility]. In S. Sholokhova & A. Yampol’skaya (Eds.), (Post)fenomenologiya: novaya fenomenologiya vo Frantsii i za ee predelami [(Post)ohenomenology: New Phenomenology in France and Beyond] (151-203). Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt. (in Russian).
• Merleau-Ponty, М. (1945). Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard.
• Ratcliffe, M. (2015). Experiences of Depression: A Study in Phenomenology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Richir, M. (1992). Méditations phénoménologiques: Phénoménologie et phénoménologie du langage. Grenoble: Millon.
• Richir, M. (2015). L’écart et le rien. Conversations avec Sacha Carlson. Grenoble: Millon.
• Sholokhova, S. (2014). Predislovie k perevodu stat’i Anri Mal’dine «O sverkhstrastnosti» [Translator’s introduction to Henry Maldiney’s paper “On the Transpassibility”]. In S. Sholokhova & A. Yampol’skaya (Eds.), (Post)fenomenologiya: novaya fenomenologiya vo Frantsii i za ee predelami [(Post)ohenomenology: New Phenomenology in France and Beyond] (145-150). Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt. (in Russian).
• Straus, E. (1960). Psychologie der menschlichen Welt. Berlin: Springer.
• Straus, E. (1970). Phenomenology of Memory. In R.M. Griffith & E. Straus (Eds.), Phenomenology of Memory. The Third Lexington Conference on Pure and Applied Phenomenologу (45-66). Pittsburgh: Duquesne UP.
• Vlasova, O. (2010). Fenomenologicheskaya psikhiatriya i ekzistentsial’nyi analiz. Istoriya, mysliteli, problemy [Phenomenological Psychiatry and Existential Analysis. History, Thinkers, Problems]. Moscow: Territoriya budushchego. (in Russian).
• Weizsäcker, V. Von. (1946). Anonima. Bern: Francke.
• Yampol’skaya, A. (2018). Iskusstvo fenomenologii [The Art of Phenomenology]. Moscow: Ripol-Klassik. (in Russian).
• Zahavi D. (2003). Husserl’s Intersubjective Transformation of Transcendental Phenomenology. In D. Welton (Ed.), The New Husserl: A Critical Reader (223-254). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Article/Publication Details
Views: 3715

SPECULATIVE REASONING IN E. FINK’S MEONTIC PHENOMENOLOGY

Abstract
This study deals with the role a language plays in the phenomenologizing, focusing on the problem of the phenomenological language posed by E. Fink. The function of a language cannot be reduced to expressing the achievements of phenomenologizing. It gives appearance of transcendental realm both as the “illusion” and the “semblance”. The problem of the phenomenological language matters for the theory of phenomenological method as such: E. Fink emphasizes the meontic nature of transcendental realm in the 6th Cartesian Meditation. Though, in order to describe this realm phenomenologists have to use natural language, preformed within the natural attitude. The new way of description is required in order to prevent phenomenology from being “mundanized”: allowing the transcendental realm to appear and yet maintaining its particular ontological characteristic. It may be achieved through the metaphor-based speculative projection (Entwurf). This study considers the relevant correlation between Fink’s theory of the method and classical German philosophy: it juxtaposes Kant’s transcendental dialectics and the doctrine of the method with Fink’s “transcendental theory of the method” and Hegel’s Absolute spirit with Fink’s concept of Absolute. The ambiguous and vague natural word, that may be redefined, has a productive capacity for being used in the speculative projection. The right way of description transforms it into a speculative concept, which both raises a problem and maintains its problematic nature. The speculative projection provokes philosophical astonishment and requires readers to get into phenomenologizing.

Key words
Eugen Fink, meontic, transcendental phenomenology, speculation, concepts, language of phenomenology, philosophical astonishment.

References

• Bertolini, S. (2015). Einige Bemerkungen über Finks Interpretation der „Phänomenologie des Geistes“ und Hegels Einfluss auf die Weltphilosophie. Horizon, 4 (2), 203–217. doi: 10.18199/2226-5260-2015-4-2-203-217
• Bruzina, R. (1986). The Enworlding (Verweltlichung) of Transcendental Phenomenological Reflection: A Study of Eugen Fink’s “Sixth Cartesian Meditation”. Husserl Studies, 3, 3–29.
• Bruzina, R. (2002). Eugen Fink and Maurice Merleau-Ponty: The Philosophical Lineage in Phenomenology. In T. Toadvine & L. Embree (Eds.), Merleau-Ponty’s Reading of Husserl (173–200). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
• Bruzina, R. (2004). Edmund Husserl and Eugen Fink: Beginnings and Ends in Phenomenology, 1928–1938. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Fink, E. (1985). Einleitung in die Philosophie. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
• Fink, E. (1988). VI. Cartesianische Meditation. Teil 1. Die Idee einer transzendentalen Methodenlehre (Husserliana-Dokumente Bd. II/I). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
• Fink, E. (2008a). Phänomenologische Werkstatt. Band 2: Die Bernauer Zeitmanuscripte, Cartesianische Meditationen und System der phänomenologiscen Philosophie. Freiburg, München: Karl Alber.
• Fink, О. (2008b). Operativnye ponyatiya fenomenologii Gusserlya [Operative Concepts in Husserl’s Phenomenology]. Ezhegodnik po fenomenologicheskoi filosofii, 1, 361–380. Moscow: RGGU. (in Russian).
• Fink, О. (2016a). Problema fenomenologii Edmunda Gusserlya [The Problem of the Phenomenology of Edmund Husserl]. Logos, 1, 5–46. (in Russian).
• Fink, E. (2016b). Elementy kritiki Gusserlya [Critiquing Husserl: Elements]. Logos, 1, 47–60. (in Russian).
• Gegel’, G. (1970). Nauka logiki. Т. 1 [Science of Logic, Vol.1]. Moscow: Mysl’. (in Russian).
• Gusserl’, E. (2009). Idei k chistoi fenomenologii i fenomenologicheskoi filosofii. Kniga pervaja [Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy I]. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt. (in Russian).
• Ikeda, Y. (2014). Transzendentaler Schein und phänomenologische Ursprünglichkeit. Welterfahrung bei Husserl und Fink. Horizon, 3 (1), 60–92.
• Ikeda, Y. (2015). Eugen Finks Kant-Interpretation. Horizon, 4 (2), 154–185.
• Kant, I. (1964). Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow: Mysl’. (in Russian).
• Luft, S. (2003). Phänomenologie der Phänomenologie. Dordrecht.
• Noor, A. (1997). La question du langage dans la Sixéte méditation cartésienne. In N. Depraz & M. Richir (Eds.), Eugen Fink: actes du Colloque de Cerisy-la-salle, 23–30 juillet 1994 (215–230). Amsterdam, Atlanta: Rodopi.
• Sepp, H. R. (1998). Medialität und Meontik — Eugen Finks spekulativer Entwurf. Internationale Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 1, 85–93.
• Smyth, Br. (2014). Merleau-Ponty’s Existential Phenomenology and the Realization of Philosophy. London, New York: Bloomsbury.

Article/Publication Details
Views: 3289

POLITICAL DIMENSION OF E. HUSSERL’S PHENOMENOLOGY IN THE LIGHT OF F. FELLMANN’S, H. ARENDT’S AND J. HABERMAS’ CRITIQUE

Abstract
The article analyzes the nature of the presence of the political aspect in Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology. Reconsidering the critique, expressed in Friedrich Fellmann’s, Hannah Arendt’s and Jürgen Habermas’ works, an author detects the strengths and weaknesses of such critique, as well as reveals the conceptual foundations and content of the political dimension in Husserl’s phenomenology. Herewith, the focus is made on the theory of intersubjectivity and theory of lifeworld, which constitute the conceptual core of Husserl’s phenomenological research on social, ethical and political issues. The reconsideration of Fellmann’s critique is based on considering the nature of the presence of the political dimension in Husserl’s intellectual and biographical legacy. Analyzing Arendt’s critique, an author argues that there are two theories of intersubjectivity existing in Husserl’s phenomenology: a theory of constitution of the alter ego in the “primordial world” through “analogizing transfer” and a theory based on the doctrine of “the primary Self”, mutual constitution and on the analyses of passive genesis. The problematization of Habermas’ critique is based on rethinking given the place of practical philosophy in Husserl’s phenomenology and its importance, as well as on defining the heuristic potential the concept of the lifeworld has for constructing the social and political theory. Relying on the philosophy of the state, reconstructed by Karl Schuhmann adapted from Husserl’s legacy, an author explicates the key prerequisites, ideas and terms, constitutive for the political dimension of Husserl’s phenomenology and essential for its understanding in historic-philosophical and modern contexts. The results of the analysis contribute to more adequate understanding of the nature of the political problematic in Huserl’s phenomenology.

Key words
Political, practical philosophy, theory of intersubjectivity, primordial world, analogizing transfer, the primary Self, theory of the lifeworld, community of monads, philosophy of the state.

References

• Arendt, H. (1990). Was ist Existenzphilosohie? In Sechs Essays, Schriften der Wandlung 3. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Anton Hain.
• Arendt, Kh. (2000). Vita activa, ili o deyatel’noi zhizni [The Human Condition]. St Petersburg: Aleteiya. (in Russian).
• Aristotel’. (1983). Politika [Politics]. In Sochinenija v 4 tomah, T. 4 [Works in 4 Volumes, Vol. 4] (376-644). Moskwa: Mislj. (in Russian).
• Borisov, E. (2006). Problema intersub’ektivnosti v fenomenologii E. Gusserlya [The Problem of Intersubjectivity in Husserl’s Phenomenology]. In V. Anashvili & A. Pogorel’skii (Eds.), Zhurnal Logos 1991–2005. Izbrannoe: v 2 tomakh. T. 2 [Journal Logos 1991-2005. Selected Issues: in 2 Volumes, Vol. 2] (151-177). Moscow: Territoria budushchego. (in Russian).
• Claesges, U. (1972). Zweideutigkeit in Husserls Lebenswelt-Begriff. In U. Glaesges & K. Held (Eds.), Perspektiven transzendentalphänomenologischer Forschung (85-101). Netherlands: Springer.
• Fellmann, F. (1983). Gelebte Philosophie in Deutschland. Denkformen der Lebensweltphänomenologie und der kritischen Theorie. Freiburg, München: Alber Verlag.
• Gusserl’, E. (2004). Krizis evropeiskikh nauk i transtsendental’naya fenomenologiya. Vvedenie v fenomenologicheskuyu filosofiyu [The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Philosophy. An Introduction to Phenomenology]. St Petersburg: Vladimir Dal’. (in Russian).
• Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
• Habermas, J. (1985). Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
• Held, K. (2010). Phänomenologie der politischen Welt. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
• Husserl, E. (1952) Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie. Zweites Buch: Phänomenologische Untersuchungen zur Konstitution (Hua IV). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Husserl, E. (1966). Analysen zur passiven Synthesis. Aus Vorlesungs- und Forschungsmanuskripten, 1918-1926 (Hua XI). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Husserl, E. (1973a). Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität. Texte aus dem Nachlass. Erster Teil. 1905-1920 (Hua XIII). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Husserl, E. (1973b). Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität. Texte aus dem Nachlass. Zweiter Teil. 1921-28 (Hua XIV). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Husserl, E. (1973c). Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität. Texte aus dem Nachlass. Dritter Teil: 1929-1935 (Hua XV). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Husserl, E. (1973d). Cartesianische Meditationen und Pariser Vorträge (Hua I). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Husserl, E. (1976). Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie. Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologische Philosophie (Hua VI). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Husserl, E. (1988). Aufsätze und Vorträge. 1922-1937 (Hua XXVII). The Hague: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Husserl, E. (1993). Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie. Ergänzungsband: Texte aus dem Nachlass 1934–1937 (Hua XXIX). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Husserl, E. (1994). Briefwechsel. In K. Schuhmann (Ed.), Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Dokumente 3/1-10, Band IX. The Hague: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Husserl, E. (1999). Erfahrung und Urteil. Leipzig: Meiner Verlag.
• Kapustin, B. (2010). Kritika politicheskoi filosofii [Critique of Political Philosophy]. Moscow: Territoriya budushchego. (in Russian).
• Landgrebe, L. (1969). Über einige Grundfragen der Philosophie der Politik. Köln: Westdeutscher Verlag.
• Laurukhin, A. (2009). Ponyatie zhiznennogo mira v fenomenologii Edmunda Gusserlya [Concept of the Lifeworld in Edmund Husserl’s Phenomenology]. In T. Shchittsova & V. Furs (Eds.), Faktichnost’ i sobytie mysli [Factuality and Event of a Thought] (200-217). Vilnius: EHU. (in Russian).
• Laurukhin, A. (2010). Prakticheskaya filosofiya E. Gusserlya: proekt obnovleniya kul’turnogo chelovechestva Evropy [Practical Philosophy by E. Husserl: the Renewal Project of Cultural European Mankind]. Ezhegodnik po fenomenologicheskoi filosofii, II, 100-108. (in Russian).
• Laurukhin, A. (2015). Husserl’s Phenomenology of Practical Reason. Problemos, 87, 133-141.
• Rans’er, J. (2013). Nesoglasie: politika i filosofiya [Disagreement: Politics and Philosophy]. St Petersburg: Machina. (in Russian).
• Richir, M. (1989). Du sublime en politique. In Phénoménologie et politique (445 — 478). Bruxelles: Mars.
• Ringer, F. K. (1987). Die Gelehrten. Der Niedergang der deutschen Mandarine. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Suhrkamp Taschenbuch.
• Savin, A. (2008). Kontseptsiya istorichnosti zhiznennogo mira v transtsendental’noi fenomenologii Edmunda Gusserlya [The Сoncept of Historicity of the Lifeworld in Edmund Husserl’s Transcendental Phenomenology]. Voprosy Filosofii, 5, 127-139. (in Russian).
• Savin, A. (2009). Genezis transtsendental’noi monadologii rabotakh «pozdnego» Gusserlya [Genesis of Transcendental Monadology in the Works of “late” Husserl]. Voprosy Filosofii, 8, 113-123. (in Russian).
• Sepp, H. R. (1997). Praxis und Theoria. Husserls transzendentalphänomenologische Rekonstruktion des Lebens. Freiburg, München: Karl Alber.
• Schnell, M. (1995). Phänomenologie des Politischen. Padeborn: Wilhelm Fink.
• Schuhmann, K. (1981) Husserl-Chronik. Denk-und Lebensweg Edmund Husserls. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Schuhman, K. (1988). Husserls Staatsphilosophie. Freiburg, München: Alber Verlag.
• Spahn, Ch. (1996). Phänomenologische Handlungstheorie: Edmund Husserls Untersuchungen zur Ethik. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann Verla.
• Voegelin, E. (2004). Die Neue Wissenschaft der Politik: Eine Einführung. München: Wilhelm Fink.
• Waldenfels, B. (2006). Grundmotive einer Phänomenologie des Fremden. Frankfurt a. Main: Suhrkamp.

Article/Publication Details
Views: 3604

HEIDEGGER OF THE FUTURE AND THE FUTURE OF HEIDEGGER

Abstract
Martin Heidegger’s philosophy had a profound influence on the late Soviet and post-Soviet philosophical landscape. Nevertheless, there is no general picture of perception and critique of Heidegger’s philosophy in Russia. This article deals with Heidegger’s entry into the Russian philosophical scene as a philosopher of the future – a conservative critic of late modernity, a thinker of Being, and a “post” philosopher. On the one hand, by virtue of the influence French post-modernism had on late Soviet and post-Soviet philosophy, Russia has developed a special interest in Heidegger’s deconstruction theory. On the other hand, the reception of critique given by Heidegger to European nihilism, totalitarianism and machine technology, as the manifestations of modernity, has prompted significantly the interest in “political ontology”. The specifics of reception of Heidegger in Russia can also be traced to a refusal to make a strict division between the pure “core” of Heidegger’s philosophy and “accidental” circumstances associated with social and political aspects of his work in 1930s. The ongoing discussion about recently published Black Notebooks manifests not just the fact that there is a separate language of description and analysis existing in Russian philosophical field but also the original tendency for holistic consideration of Heidegger’s thinking, which includes not just his existential and historical reflections but also political passages and critique of civilizational discourse. Besides the reviews of Black Notebooks made by N. V. Motroshilova, V. V. Mironov and D. Mironova in the last year’s issues of Voprosy Filosofii (a philosophical journal), the attention is focused on the earlier works by N. V. Motroshilova, V. V. Bibikhin, A. V. Gulyga, V. A. Podoroga and A. G. Dugin, related to Heidegger’s overcoming of the Western metaphysical tradition and his concept of a new beginning beyond Machenschaft. The article is also devoted to considertion given to a new book by J. Love (2017) examining the philosophical influence Heidegger exerts in Eastern Europe and Russia.

Key words
Martin Heidegger, Black Notebooks, thinking of the history of Being, the other beginning, reception of Heidegger’s thought in the late Soviet and post-Soviet philosophy in Russia, Vladimir Bibikhin, Nelli Motroshilova, Arseniy Gulyga, Alexander Dugin.

References

• Anashvili, V., & Pogorel’skii, A. (2006). Zhurnal Logos 1991–2005. Izbrannoe: v 2 tomakh. T. 2 [Journal Logos 1991-2005. Selected Issues: in 2 Volumes, Vol. 2]. Moscow: Territoria budushchego. (in Russian).
• Arendt, H., & Khaidegger, M. (2015). Pis’ma 1925–1975 i drugie svidetel’stva [Letters 1925–1975 and Оther Documents]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Instituta Gaidara. (in Russian).
• Bibikhin, V. (1991). Delo Khaideggera [Heidegger’s Case]. In N. V. Motroshilova (Ed.), Filosofiya Martina Khaideggera i sovremennost’. Materialy konferencii [Martin Heidegger’s Philosophy and Modernity. Proceedings of the Conference] (166–171). Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Bibikhin, V. (1993). Delo Khaideggera [Heidegger’s Case]. In M. Khaidegger & V. Bibikhin, Vremya i bytie. Stat’i i vystupleniya [Time and Being. Articles and Addresses] (3–14). Moscow: Respublica. (in Russian).
• Bibikhin, V. (2002). Sila mysli [The Power of Thought]. In R. Safranski, Khaidegger. Germanskii master i ego vremya [Heidegger. The German Master and his Time] (5–17). Мoscow: Molodaya gvardiya. (in Russian).
• Bibikhin, V. (2003). Drugoe nachalo [The Other Beginning]. St Petersburg: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Bibikhin, V. (2006). Iz tvorcheskogo naslediya [The Papers and Collections]. Moscow: INION. (in Russian).
• Bibikhin, V. (2009). Rannii Khaidegger: materialy k seminaru [The Early Heidegger: Seminar Matherials]. Moscow: Institut filosofii, teologii i istorii Svyatogo Fomy. (in Russian).
• Blume, G. (2014). Martin Heidegger. Er ist der falsche Verdächtige. Ein Gespräch mit dem französischen Philosophen François Fédier über den Antisemitismus Heideggers und die „Schwarzen Hefte“. Die Zeit, 3. Retrieved from http://www.zeit.de/2014/03/francois-fedier-ueber-martin-heidegger
• Dugin, A. (2010). Martin Khaidegger: filosofiya drugogo nachala [Martin Heidegger: Philosophy of the Other Beginning]. Мoscow: Akademicheskii proekt. (in Russian).
• Dugin, A. (2011). Martin Khaidegger: Vozmozhnost’ russkoi filosofii [Martin Heidegger: the Possibility of the Russian Philosophy]. Мoscow: Akademicheskii proekt. (in Russian).
• Dugin, A. (2014). Martin Khaidegger. Poslednii bog [Martin Heidegger. The Last God]. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt. (in Russian).
• Dugin, A. (2017). Plural Anthropology (the Fundamental-Ontological Analysis of Peoples). In J. Love (Ed.), Heidegger in Russia and Eastern Europe (273–294). London, New-York: Rawman and Littlefield.
• Falev, E. (2016). «Chernye tetradi» i novyi vitok sudov nad Khaideggerom [“Black Notebooks” and New Turn in the Heidegger Controversy]. Filosofskoje obrazovanie, 2 (34), 35–45. (in Russian).
• Gabriel, M. (2015). Natsist iz zasady [The Nazi from an Ambush]. Voprosy filosofii, 4, 163–164. (in Russian).
• Gal’tseva, R. (Еd.). (1981). Raboty Khaideggera po kul’turologii i teorii ideologii [Heidegger’s Works on Cultural Studies and Theory of Ideology]. Moscow: INION. (in Russian).
• Gulyga, A. (1988a). Delo Khaideggera [Heidegger’s Case]. Literaturnaya gazeta, 30. (in Russian).
• Gulyga, A. (1988b). Chto takoe postsovremennost’? [What is Postmodernity?]. Voprosy filosofii, 12, 153–159. (in Russian).
• Gulyga, A. (1990). О postmodernizme [On Postmodernism]. Dialog, 12, 96–98. (in Russian).
• Heidegger, M. (1965). Unterwegs zur Sprache. Pfullingen: Neske.
• Heidegger, M. (1998). Die Geschichte des Seyns (GA 69). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (2014a). Überlegungen II–VI (Schwarze Hefte 1931–1938) (GA 94). Frankfurt a. M.: Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (2014b). Überlegungen VII–XI (Schwarze Hefte 1938–39) (GA 95). Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (2014c). Überlegungen XII–XV (Schwarze Hefte 1939–1941) (GA 96). Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (2015). Anmerkungen I–V (Schwarze Hefte 1942–1948) (GA 97). Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.
• Homolka, W., & Heidegger, A. (Eds.). (2016). Heidegger und der Antisemitismus. Positionen im Widerstreit. Freiburg i. B.: Herder.
• Khaidegger, M., & Yaspers, К. (2001). Perepiska 1920–1963 [Correspondence 1920–1963]. Мoscow: Ad Marginem. (in Russian).
• Khaidegger, M. (2016). Razmyshlenia II–VI (Chernye tetradi 1931–1938) [Considerations II–VI (Black Notebooks 1931–1938)]. Мoscow: Izdatel’stvo instituta Gaidara. (in Russian).
• Khaidegger, M. (2018). Razmyshlenia VII–XI (Chernye tetradi 1938–1939) [Considerations VII–XI (Black Notebooks 1938–1939)]. Мoscow: Izdatel’stvo instituta Gaidara. (in Russian).
• Karpets, V. (2016). Vokrug «Сhernykh tetradei» [Around “Black Notebooks”]. Katechon, 16/12. Retrieved from http://katehon.com/ru/article/vokrug-chernyh-tetradey
• Love, J. (2017). The Post-Soviet Heidegger. In J. Love (Ed.), Heidegger in Russia and Eastern Europe (249–272). London, New-York: Rawman and Littlefield.
• Mehring, R. (2016). Postmortaler Suizid. Zur Selbstdemontage des Autors der Gesamtausgabe. In W. Homolka & A. Heidegger (Eds.), Heidegger und der Antisemitismus. Positionen im Widerstreit (289–299). Freiburg i. B.: Herder.
• Meng, M. (2017). Russia in the Age of Machenschaft. In J. Love (Ed.), Heidegger in Russia and Eastern Europe (3–30). London, New-York: Rawman and Littlefield.
• Mikhailovskii, A. (2016). Rannyaya mysl’ M. Khaideggera o tekhnike: mezhdu kritikoi kul’tury i geroicheskim realizmom [M. Heidegger’s Early Theory of Technology: Between Cultural Criticism and Heroic Realism]. Izv. Saratov Univ. (N.S.), Ser. Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 16(4), 387–393. (in Russian).
• Mikhailovskii, A. (2017). O nekotorykh osobennostyakh rossiiskoi retseptsii filosofii Martina Khaideggera v svyazi s diskussiei vokrug «Chernykh tetradei» [Some Remarks on the Characteristics of the Reception of Heidegger’s Thought in Russia Regarding the Debate on “Black Notebooks”]. Vestnik Samarskoj gumanitarnoj akademii. Serija «Filosofija. Filologija», 21(1), 54–71. (in Russian).
• Mironov, V., & Mironova, D. (2016). Filosof i vlast’: sluchai Khaideggera [Philosopher and Power: Casus Heidegger]. Voprosy filosofii, 7, 21–36. (in Russian).
• Motroshilova, N. (Ed.). (1991). Filosofiya Martina Khaideggera i sovremennost’. Materialy konferentsii [Martin Heidegger’s Philosophy and Modernity. Proceedings of the Conference]. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Motroshilova, N. (2015). «Chernye tetradi» M. Khaideggera: po sledam publikatsii [M. Heidegger’s “Black Notebooks”: Following up the Publication]. Voprosy filosofii, 4, 121–162. (in Russian).
• Motroshilova, N. (2016). I snova o «Chernykh tetradyakh» Martina Khaideggera (k debatam leta — oseni 2015 g.) [Once more on Martin Heidegger’s “Black Notebooks” (to the Dispute in Summer — Autumn of 2015)]. Voprosy filosofii, 7, 39–54. (in Russian).
• Naranovich, S. (2016). Kolossal’nyi opyt i schast’e, chto fyurer probudil novuyu deistvitel’nost’ [The Colossal Experience and Happiness that the Fuehrer Awakened New Reality]. Gorky, 03/10. Retrieved from https://gorky.media/context/kolossalnyj-opyt-i-schaste-chto-fyurer-probudil-novuyu-dejstvitelnost/
• Osipov, V. (2012). Vozrozhdenie russkoi ideologii [The Rebirth of Russian Ideology]. Moscow: Algoritm, Institut russkoi tsivilizatsii. (in Russian).
• Podoroga, V. (1986). «Fundamental’naya antropologiya» M. Khaideggera [Fundamental Anthropology of M. Heidegger]. In B. Grigor’yan (Ed.), Burzhuaznaya filosofskaya antropologiya XX veka [The Bourgeois Philosophical Anthropology of the 20^th Century] (34–48). Мoscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Podoroga, V. (1991). Erectio. Geo-logiya yazyka i filosofstvovanie M. Khaideggera [Erectio. Geo-logy of Language and M. Heidegger’s Philosophizing]. In N. Motroshilova (Ed.), Filosofiya Martina Khaideggera i sovremennost’. Materialy konferentsii [Martin Heidegger’s Philosophy and Modernity. Proceedings of the Conference] (102–120). Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Podoroga, V. (1993). Metafizika landshafta. Kommunikativnye strategii v filosofskoi kul’ture XIX — XX vv. [Metaphysics of Landscape. Communicative Strategies in the Philosophical Culture of XIX — XX Centuries]. Мoscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Podoroga, V. (2013). Metafizika landshafta [Metaphysics of Landscape]. Moscow: Kanon+. (in Russian).
• Ryasov, А. (2016). Khaidegger i «sudebnaya» rech’. K polemike vokrug «Chernykh tetradei» [Heidegger and the “Courtroom” Speech. On the Controversy Surrounding of “Black Notebooks”]. Gefter, 16/11. Retrieved from http://gefter.ru/ archive/20043

Article/Publication Details
Views: 2832

VISION OF GOD AND THINKING OF BEING: VLADIMIR LOSSKY AND MARTIN HEIDEGGER

Abstract
The paper is devoted to the dialogue between Orthodox theology of the latter half of the 20th century and Heidegger’s philosophy. We focus on the interpretation of the apophasis in the works of Vladimir Lossky. Our research tasks are not so much the description of the direct influence of Heidegger’s philosophy on the Lossky’s theological reflections, but, rather, a demonstration of the parallels between Heidegger’s existential and historical thinking and Lossky’s negative theology. In the first part we highlight the points common to early Heidegger’s interpretation of the mystical theory of cognition and Lossky’s understanding of the mystical theology of the Eastern Church: the correlation between theology and mystical experiencing, overcoming the conceptual frameworks, the knowledge of God as a transformative practice, which is aimed at the radical unity with God. There are also common features in both in Heidegger’s and Lossky’s critical interpretations of the identity of the concepts of God and being in Meister Eckhart’s mystical theology. Lossky opposes Eckhart’s God as Esse absconditum with the apophaticism of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite who has thought out God beyond being. Heidegger insists on the theological differentiation distinguishing between God and being. We also compare the concept of detachment given in the works of Eckhart, Lossky and later Heidegger. Lossky’s explanation of the human personality is focused on irreducibility of a person to nature; he referred to the ecstatic character of existence of Dasein, but his anthropology is constituted on doctrine of a human being seen as the image and likeness of God. Further development of Orthodox apophaticism (Chr. Yannaras, D. B. Hart and J. P. Manoussakis) demonstrates a critical attitude towards Heidegger’s philosophy. Such attitude originates in their attempts to develop the ontology of personal being. We argue that Orthodox thinkers correlate with Heidegger in their search for a renewal of theological method, for the identical-differential mode of thinking moving from subject-object speculation to the ecstatic transformations of subject. The difference is in the emphasis on the personal character of the mystical ecstasy, founded on the trinitarian provisions inherent to the Eastern Church.

Key words
Аpophaticism, mystical experience, Heidegger, Lossky, ontology, detachment, language, difference, person.

References

• Buren, J. Van. (1994). The Young Heidegger. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
• Caputo, J. D. (1978). The Mystical Element in Heidegger’s Thought. Athens: Ohio University Press.
• Coriando, P.- L. (1998). Der letzte Gott als Anfang: zur ab-gründigen Zeit-Räumlichkeit des Übergangs in Heideggers „Beiträgen zur Philosophie (Vom Ereignis)“. München: Fink.
• Danner, H. (1971). Das Gottliche und der Gott bei Heidegger. Meisenheim a.Glan: Hain.
• Gadamer, H.-G. (1983). Heideggers Wege. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).
• Gethmann-Siefert, A. (1974). Das Verhältnis von Philosophie und Theologie im Denken Martin Heideggers. Freiburg, München: Alber.
• Hart, D. B. (2003). The Beauty of the Infinite: The Aesthetics of Christian Truth. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
• Heidegger, M. (1985a). Aus einem Gespräch von der Sprache. In Unterwegs zur Sprache (GA12) (79–146). Frankfurt a.M.: Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1985b). Die Sprache. In Unterwegs zur Sprache (GA12) (7–30). Frankfurt a.M.: Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1989). Beiträge zur Philosophie. (Vom Ereignis) (1936-1939) (GA 65). Frankfurt a. M.: Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1995). Die philosophischen Grundlagen der mittelalterlichen Mystik. In Phänomenologie des religiösen Lebens (GA 60) (303–339). Frankfurt a.M.: Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (2006). Die Ontotheologische Verfassung der Metaphysik. In Identität und Differenz (GA 11) (59-60). Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (2013). Zum Ereignis-Denken (GA 73). Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Jung, M. (1990). Das Denken des Seins und der Glaube an Gott: Zum Verhältnis von Philosophie und Theologie bei Heidegger. Würzburg: Königshausen u. Neumann.
• Khaidegger, M. (1993). Vremya i Bytie [Time and Being]. In Vremya i Bytie [Time and Being] (391-406). Moscow: Respublika. (in Russian).
• Khaidegger, M. (1998). Prolegomeny k istorii ponyatiya vremeni [History of the Concept of Time]. Tomsk: Vodolej. (in Russian).
• Konacheva, S. (2015). Sovpadenie krasoty i beskonechnosti kak osnovanie khristianskoi ontologii [The Identity of Beauty and Infinite as Source of Christian Ontology]. Ezhegodnik po fenomenologicheskoj filosofii [Annual for Phenomenological Philosophy], 4, 73-86. Moscow: RGGU. (in Russian).
• Losskii, V. (1991). Ocherk misticheskogo bogosloviya Vostochnoj cerkvi [Essay on the Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church]. In Misticheskoe bogoslovie [The Mystical Theology]. Kiev: Put’ k istine. (in Russian).
• Losskii, V. (1995). Po obrazu i podobiyu [Image and Likeness]. Moscow: Svyato-Vladimirskoe bratstvo. (in Russian).
• Losskii, V. (2003). Otritsatel’noe bogoslovie i poznanie Boga u Meistera Ekkharta [Negative Theology and Knowledge of God by Meister Eckhart]. Bogoslovskie Trudy, 38, 147-236. (in Russian).
• Losskii, V. (2005). Otritsatel’noe bogoslovie i poznanie Boga u Meistera Ekkharta [Negative Theology and Knowledge of God by Meister Eckhart]. Bogoslovskie Trudy, 40, 38-46. (in Russian).
• Löwith, K. (1953). Heidegger: Denker in Dürftiger Zeit. Frankfurt a.M.: S. Fischer.
• Manoussakis, J. P. (2006). Toward a Fourth Reduction? In J. P. Manoussakis (Ed.), After God: Richard Kearney and Religious Turn in Continental Philosophy (21-39). New York: Fordham University Press.
• Manoussakis, J. P. (2007). God after Metaphysics: a Theological Aesthetic. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
• Möller, J. (1952). Existenzialphilosophie und katholische Theologie. Baden-Baden: Verlag für Kunst und Wissenschaft.
• Pöggeler, O. (2009). Philosophie und hermeneutische Theologie: Heidegger, Bultmann und die Folgen. München: Fink.
• Safranski, R. (2002). Khaidegger: germanskij master i ego vremya [Heidegger: German Master and his Time]. Moscow: Molodaya gvardiya. (in Russian).
• Schäffler, R. (1978). Frömmigkeit des Denkens? Martin Heidegger und die katolische Theologie. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
• Węcławsky, T. (1985). Zwischen Sprache und Schweigen: Eine Erörterung der theologischen Apophase im Gespräch mit Vladimir N. Lossky und Martin Heidegger. München: Minerva-Publikation
• Yannaras, C. (2005). Lichnost’ i eros [Person and Eros]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. (in Russian).
• Zaborowski, H. (2004) „Herkunft aber bleibt stets Zukunft“. In Heidegger-Jahrbuch 1: Heidegger und die Anfänge seines Denkens (123–158). Freiburg, München: Verlag Karl Alber.