Abstract

The article analyzes various methodological approaches to solving the problem of the dialogue of cultures. Based on A. Torchinov's work, the article discusses criticism of Eurocentrism and Orientalism, stereotypes in the assessment of Eastern cultures and prob-lems that arise when externally comparing the teachings of the East, in particular Buddhism and some Western philosophical con-cepts (Berkeley, Hume, Husserl). The author specially analyzes the comparative method developed by M.K. Mamardashvili, based on the metatheory of consciousness under the influence of Vijnanavada. The ontologism of consciousness underlying all cultures allows reaching a universal understanding of culture as an all-human phenomenon. For Mamarashvili, it is consciousness that is a culture-forming phenomenon. The possibility of entering the communicative space of the dialogue of cultures through conscious-ness is connected with its transcending nature. This transcendence leads beyond the limits of the mental states of both the specific "I" and cultural characteristics, revealing the immanent depths of universal human culture. Mamardashvili considered himself a Kantian and saw in transcendental philosophy an ontological basis for the dialogue of cultures. The author expresses the conviction that based on the universalism of spiritual cognition as a product of the "Axial age" it is pos-sible not only to build a dialogue of cultures, but also a deep mutual understanding between them. Spiritual cognition also embraces the work with consciousness, on which Mamardashvili insisted, and is able to find common ground between theistic (Christianity, Islam) and non-theistic (East: Taoism, Confucianism, Buddhism) cultures on the basis of transcending, revealing the immanent basis – the spiritual archetype of humanity, uniting Truth, Goodness and Beauty.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call