Classical Philosophical Texts Research Articles

Exploring on the Poetic Pragmatic Structure in Chinese Classical Philosophical Texts

In Chinese classical philosophical texts, the use of poetic explications to convey concepts is a unique and fascinating phenomenon. Unlike Western philosophy, where conceptions are often explained by definition of connotation and extension. Classical Chinese philosophy relies on direct experiential understanding through poetry and metaphorical language. This pragmatic structure in Classical Chinese allows for a deeper connection between the reader and the text, even opening up the possibility of personal interpretation. By recalling or forming certain experiences, even mystical ones, readers can gain a more profound understanding of the concepts being discussed. This article explores the ontology of the unity of heaven and man() that is preset in these texts and makes this process (what people called tiwu()) possible. Taking the Five Elements as an example, this article reveals unique concepts born on the basis of this pragmatic structure that is different from Western philosophy.

Отрицание материнства как идеологическая основа андроцентристской традиции

Introduction. Androcentrism as an initial ideological attitude largely determines both the content of classical philosophical texts and the approaches of researchers to their interpretation. Theoretical analysis. It is noteworthy that androcentrism of "West" and "East" rests on the same ideological postulates. Their identification is the purpose of this work. The way to identify them is a consistent answer to the question of how, in principle, is androcentrism possible as an ideological position that displaces to the periphery of humanity that part of it that pays the price with its own health, pain, and sometimes even life itself for its physical reproduction? Conclusions. It was revealed that the basis of androcentric ideology is the patriarchal theory of birth postulating the importance of the «seed». It is based on the three interrelated postulates, which in terms of content are patriarchal ideas about a woman which are based on the denial of her as an integral and autonomous being. This negation also defines the structure of the "private" sphere, thus determining both the worldview of individuals and the structure of society as a whole. This work is recommended for consideration by those researchers who seek to comprehend society as such and patriarchal society as its modern form.

Einleitung

Abstract Many classical philosophical texts contain passages that are to be judged as discriminatory and degrading, and by today’s standards even as racist, sexist or anti-Semitic. How we should deal appropriately with this heritage – be it in teaching or in research – is by no means undisputed. Some researchers are of the opinion that the passages in question are terminological idiosyncrasies of the respective authors related to the time they lived in and therefore philosophically irrelevant: they can be disregarded. Others doubt that such a separation can actually be made. They are of the opinion that the philosophical parts of the respective work are always affected if racist, sexist or anti-Semitic ideas can be detected in passages. In analogy to the current discussion on how to deal with problematic works of art, memorials, street names or linguistic expressions, the question can also be addressed to philosophical works: what should be done with philosophical texts if they contain racist, sexist and anti-Semitic thoughts and their reception preserves so-called racist knowledge in our society? The contributions in the section ‘Philosophie aktuell’ take a stand on these questions from different perspectives and thereby show that one can also deal critically with this topic on the basis of philosophical methods.

Do We Need Hegel? (Reader’s Notes to the Ukrainian Translation of “The Phenomenology of Spirit”)

The article considers the Ukrainian translation of the latest edition of Hegel's work “The Phenomenology of Spirit” (2019). The analysis focuses on the conformity of this translation with the generally accepted world requirements and norms that put forward the translation and publication of classical philosophical texts. The historical circumstances of the appearance of “Phänomenologie des Geistes” (1807) are briefly considered, as well as the history of its editing and republishing in the 19-20th cent., and it is shown that without this history any translation cannot be considered as acceptable.Manuscript received 01.03.2020

ПОИСК ФИЛОСОФСКИХ ОСНОВ ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСКОГО СУЩЕСТВОВАНИЯ В РОМАНЕ Р. ГОЛДШТЕЙН «ПРОБЛЕМА СООТНОШЕНИЯ ДУШИ И ТЕЛА»

The research examines the main problems raised in Goldstein’s philosophical novel. The paper aims to reveal how the creation of the characters and the development of the plot in accordance with the philosophical theories of Descartes, Malebranche and Spinoza allow the writer to explore the metaphysical and ethical consequences of following their philosophical ideas in everyday life. Applying the comparative method of analysis to the novel and the classical philosophical texts, the author of the study interprets the text of the novel, rich in symbols and intentionally foregrounded details, and discloses the artistic means used for creating the opposition of the material and the spiritual. Primarily, the confrontation becomes apparent in the image of the central character and her persistent inner conflicts between the rational and the emotional, the publicly displayed and the internal, the objective and the subjective. The main character’s failure to achieve life harmony by a mechanical combination of heterogeneous principles is viewed as a crucial detail, with the help of which the writer strives to emphasize the inconsistency of the dualistic worldview in general. One of the possible ways to overcome philosophical dualism is found in Malebranche’s philosophy, in which the gap between the material and the spiritual is bridged by their unification in the idea of the primary rational source; however, the concept does not look impeccable, with too much emphasis given to the mind at the expense of the body. The main opportunity to achieve harmony and moral progress is finally associated with Spinoza’s philosophical guidelines, which not only assert the importance of the rational cognitive principles and common sense but also demonstrate practical ways to combine freedom and care for another person, emotions and reason.

The Shock of a Radical Novelty: The Early Deleuze and the Gaps of Sense

The article analyzes the evolution of Gilles Deleuze’s early philosophy by bringing into focus his recently republished journalistic articles from the late 1940s, which are unfamiliar to the Russian reader, as well as his first studies during the 1950s of the history of philosophy. The paper provides a context for his philosophy within the political and aesthetic debates of the post-War period and also alongside the academic philosophy of the time. Particular attention is devoted to the influence of Jean-Paul Sartre and Deleuze’s rupture with existentialism, which the young Deleuze wanted to replace with a new version of philosophical anti-humanism. During those years Deleuze was delving into the history of philosophy through such thinkers as David Hume and Henri Bergson, who were unusual choices at that time. In them Deleuze saw the potential for an extensive project, the “higher empiricism” which would play an important role in Deleuze’s mature work over the next three decades. In his analysis of this hypothetical empiricism, Deleuze found common traits between both of those philosophers that led him to propose a new reading. That interpretation ran counter to the critical consensus of the day that pigeon-holed Hume as a radical sceptic and Bergson as a spiritualist. The author concludes that Deleuze in his early work on the history of European thought had already elaborated his own particular way of working with classical philosophical texts and concepts by turning their creators into conceptual characters who were part of his own philosophical undertaking

A Discourse on the Ontology of Violence

The sophistication and reoccurrence of violence has continued to gain increasing attention in contemporary discourse. Scholars that take interest in the study of violence have made efforts only in understanding and addressing the causes, forms, and the management mechanism. Such intellectual efforts have proved not to be sufficiently adequate as evident by the recurring decimal of violence in limitless proportion, even in places where it has been under-studied. This inadequacy has made the need for renewed interest in the study of the nature and dynamics of violence imperative. Concerned about the lack of consideration for the ontological root of violence in previous studies, this paper seeks to critically explore the ontology of violence. It aims at examining classical philosophical texts on human nature with a view to expose the ontological origin of violence and shows how such consideration is apt in the understanding, addressing, and management of violence; that is, this paper makes a case for the study of the ontology of violence as a way of addressing the lacuna currently existing in the studies on violence. Thus, it argues that this ontological study entails as a matter of necessity an understanding of human nature in relation to the subject-matter of violence. The methodology used in achieving the aim of this paper is the analytic and phenomenological approaches, that is, analysis and phenomenological examination of textual materials are employed by the study.

The Question of the Scene: On the Philosophical Foundations of Theatrical Anthropocentrism

The article consists of two interrelated arguments: First, all theoretical or everyday talk on theatre implies a certain scenic understanding, related to the phenomenon of human action and speech. Second, this understanding has been concealed by an anthropomorphic conception of the human phenomenon, based on the givenness of the human figure. The article tries to deconstruct this figure by analysing classical philosophical texts where the link between the human appearance and the theatrical mode of representation is theoretically established. By questioning this link, new ways to exercise the critique of theatrical anthropocentricism, both in theory and in practice, are established.

The Attitude of Ashkenazi Society to the New Science in the Sixteenth Century

In 1903 Rabbi Philipp Bloch, of Posen (Poznan), published a unique Ashkenazic sixteenth-century polemical pamphlet which attested, so it seemed, to a heated controversy in yeshivah circles in the larger cities of the Ashkenazi cultural sphere in the late 1550s (Bloch 1903). Revolving around the place of philosophy in Judaism, the dispute reached one of its peaks in Prague some time before April 1559, probably in a public debate before a yeshivah audience, basically similar to the Disputationes then popular in European universities. The disputants were two young scholars, one of whom, the writer of the pamphlet, enthusiastically supported the teaching of classical philosophical texts in Ashkenazi yeshivot, while the other fiercely opposed what he called “philosophy.” He accused Maimonides of heresy and unbelief, as he did anything that he associated with either “philosophy” or Maimonides. The resolution adopted by the yeshivah audience — at least, so we read in the pamphlet, our only source for the event — was unequivocal: the opponent of Maimonides and philosophy was forbidden, from that time on, to broadcast his views.