ABSTRACT This article analyzes the philosophical views of the Russian philosopher Andrey V. Smirnov. Smirnov has advanced and substantiated the idea that there exist at least two distinct ways of linking the subject and the predicate in a statement—one of these he calls the substance logic (S-logic) and the other, the process logic (P-logic). S-logic reveals the characteristics (predicates) proper to the subject of the statement, whereas P-logic demonstrates the relationship between the Agent and the Patient—a process in which the predicates become actualized. Each of these logics, according to Smirnov, forms a sense-positing field of a specific culture. Viewing consciousness as the actualization of the intuition of svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ * * The Russian term svyaznost’ is usually rendered in English as ‘cohesion.’ However, this English term does not reveal the specific connotations associated with svyaznost’. A similar semantic difficulty arises with the Russian term tselostnost’ that is often translated into English by using such words as ‘entirety,’ ‘integrity,’ or ‘wholeness,’ neither of which is able to convey an accurate meaning of the word in the original language. Since both terms, svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ are central to understanding of Smirnov’s thought, instead of translating these terms, we decided to use their transliterated forms. – Ed. , Smirnov suggests a novel treatment of the classical problem of philosophy posed long ago by Immanuel Kant: the problem of unity of cogito and the ability to form judgments (the transcendental unity of apperception). The article shows that when we regard the logic of sense as a way of comprehension and action in a world defined by oneness of consciousness and culture, we discover another subject plane in Smirnov’s reasoning—a plane of historical reality. Addressing the task of analyzing globalization processes, the philosopher compares and contrasts the two views of the historical meaning of globalization as represented by the categories of the obshchechelovecheskoe and the vsechelovecheskoe ** ** The vsechelovecheskoe and the obshchechelovecheskoe are the two Russian words that can hardly be rendered into English without distorting their meaning. They both point to the universality of the human mind, human culture, and human civilization, but there is a fundamental difference in logical vehicles used to arrive at the universal. The vsechelovecheskoe presupposes “gathering” logically diverse models without imposing any general restriction on them, while the obshchechelovecheskoe is an understanding of the universal as grounded in the generic or general, which is well-known to the Western reader. Since the obshchechelovecheskoe and the vsechelovecheskoe form a pair of concepts fundamental to Smirnov and to the understanding of his philosophical view, to avoid any misconception, they are used in this and all other articles included in the present special issue in their transliterated form. –For more details about these two terms and their key connotations central to Smirnov’s own discussion, see his essay “Classical Eurasianism as a Post-Revolutionary Philosophy” included in the present issue. The abstract to this essay provides a concise and well-articulated summary of the terms. - Ed. , which have been introduced by Russian thinkers Nikolai Danilevsky and Fyodor Dostoevsky. As opposed to the obshchechelovecheskoe, the meaning of the vsechelovecheskoe in globalization lies in the idea that any culture is fully entitled to existence and cannot be supplanted by some universal, “uniformly human” culture. This work compares the concepts of the logic of sense by Gilles Deleuze and Andrey Smirnov as two diverging views on the event of thought.
Read full abstract