Part 1. Office and Order
1
A few moments in an unnatural pose and with a stupid expression on his face. And - it's ready, the job is done, I took a picture for a pass. Naturally, I will not look like myself, if we talk about photos for documents - photos never look like their owners. No matter how it contradicts the laws of physics, many will agree with me. I don't like being photographed. The well-known phrase - “a bird will fly out now” - has confused me since childhood. I really imagined that a real bird...

Vincent's plane landed in Tenochtitlan, the capital of the newly revived Aztec Empire. A city that ranks first in the world in terms of the number of tourist resorts and brothels, drug trafficking and human sacrifice. However, last fact tourists do not scare away, but rather attracts. Only subjects of the empire are sacrificed here and exclusively voluntarily. And the spectacle of alien blood has always attracted people, whether they are semi-savage medieval commoners or residents ...

Part 2. The fall of the Order
1
Days, months passed. There was no need to be bored in the Office. The activity was so unusual and varied that it stubbornly did not want to turn into an everyday one. Over time, it not only revealed to me the unusual facets of our world, but also spread beyond its borders. It all started in a standard way - Grimnir invited me to his place. He was not alone in the office, he was accompanied by my new friend Frigga. It looked like their conversation was over, but Frigga didn't want to leave. She is comfortable...

Part 3 new power
1
Heinrich and I settled down in the office bar. We drink, songs of Christa Bell sound from the jukebox. The atmosphere is soulful.
- Recently, I realized what the bitterness of victory is. I feel sorry for the Order,” Heinrich admitted.
- What is there to regret, - I wonder, - a lot of idiots, besides destructive ones.
- Destructive, constructive, what's the difference? Well, if they destroyed a civilization, another would arise. Death is part of life, destruction is part of creation. Little loss.
You don't like our...

The first settlement on our planet, which, most likely, will pay attention to an alien expedition is the new Mongolian capital Har Bator. This unique creation of the hands of the inhabitants of the Earth is hard not to notice. The temple with an area of ​​​​about two hundred square kilometers, whose roof reaches the clouds, covers the whole city under it. A city whose streets never touched the rays of the sun. Built with an incomprehensible purpose by the mysterious giants who descended from the peaks of Tibet, and left after the construction was completed...

next week pleased him with unusual, languishing sensations. It all started with the fact that Lenochka began to act up to him on ICQ: “Musya, well, I want ...” As a result, their correspondence quickly boiled down to the fact that Johnny began to write to her, how he undresses her and what followed. He also noticed that Lenochka, according to her, likes it when her clothes are torn off, and not slowly pulled off. Then in the evening they repeated verbal sex again, but this time by phone. Johnny loved it...

Characters (they are also random passers-by)

PLATON DOBRSKI (poet)
RINA (prostitute, friend of Dobski)
VASKA GREEN (experienced alcoholic)
PHILON (middle manager)
NIKITA SHISKOVICH (artist, friend of Dobsky)
EDUARD MOTSAKHIN (musician, friend of Dobsky)
ALBERT PICHBEKTORSON (postgraduate student)

old, abandoned studio apartment; yellowed torn wallpaper on dirty walls; a skewed, clogged window, a cracked flooded ceiling; oiled furniture; creaky floor, on the floor...

Every topic naturally has its origins, its beginning. There are, of course, the topic

My research. I did not want to overly complicate the history of the issue and I decided to mention well-known

Facts, dividing and linking them differently, in a new way. At the very end of the 18th century, Goethe creates the tragedy "Faust" (I part). Before

His legend of Faust was embodied in literature by G. Lessing, J. Lenz, F. Klinger. In Goethe's tragedy, the brightest

The literary image of evil (Mephistopheles), which appeared ...

METAREALISM(metarealism)-
artistic and intellectual movement of the 1970s–1990s. in Russia, represented by poetry
and essays by Viktor Krivulin, Olga Sedakova, Alexei
Parshchikov, Ivan Zhdanov, Alexander Eremenko, Elena Schwartz,
Arkady Dragomoshchenko, Ilya Kutik, Vladimir Aristov, and others.
(sometimes a vague term is referred to this movement
"meta-metaphorism"). Philosophically metarealism- This
meta-physical realism, i.e. realism is not physical
given, but the superphysical nature of things. In terms of style
- This metaphorical realism passing from
conditional similarity of things to their real mutual involvement, i.e.
from metaphor to metabolism(cm.).

What is usually called "realism" in art is the realism of everything
only one of the realities, the socio-empirical.
Metarealism is the realism of many realities connected
continuity of metabolic transformations. There is a reality
open to the sight of an ant, and reality open to wandering
electron, and reality, folded into a mathematical formula, and
the reality about which it is said - and the heavenly flight of angels.
Image- metabola- the way in which all of these are interconnected
realities, the assertion of their growing unity.

Metareal the image does not simply reflect one of these
realities (mirror realism), not just compares, likens
(metaphorism), does not simply refer from one to another
through hints, allegories (symbolism), but reveals them
true involvement, mutual transformation - reliability and
the inevitability of a miracle. “... I know something about miracles: they are like
sentries on the clock ”(O. Sedakova). Miracles observe the laws of another
reality within this, the image becomes a chain of metamorphoses,
embracing Reality as a whole, in her dreams and awakenings, in her
drop-down and connecting links. The prefix "meta" adds to
"realism" what he himself subtracts from the comprehensive
Realities.

At the same time, words rush to the limit of cultural all-responsiveness,
archetypal and kenotypic(cm.
kenotype) ambiguity, take root in the depths of the language
memory. Metarealism- poetry of underlined words, each
of which tends to the maximum of significance and
ambiguity. As a self-characterization of this poetry, the lines of Ivan
Zhdanov:

Either the letters are incomprehensible, or their scope is unbearable for the eye - the red wind remains in the field, the name of the rose on his lips.

The value reaches such intensity that the difference between
signifier and signified. From the letters that make up the name of the rose,
the wind remains, painted in the color of the flower itself: to name -
means to acquire the properties of the named. In that
superreality, which poets explore - metarealists, No
human conditional opposition of things and words: they
exchange their signs, the world is read like a book,
written in letters of unbearable scope.

figurative base metarealism- the history of world culture, in
its encyclopedic contractions and extractions.
Metareal image is a small dictionary entry,
microencyclopedia of culture, compressed by all
genres and levels, translating itself from language to language. From here
the absence of a pronounced lyrical hero, which is replaced by
the sum of visions, the locus of points of view,
equidistant from the "I", or, what is the same, expanding it to
"super-ego", consisting of many eyes.

Metarealism should not be elevated to symbolism, which
subdivided reality into "lower" and "higher", "imaginary" and
"genuine", thus preparing the uprising of this "lower"
reality and the subsequent triumph of flat realism.
Metabola differs from a symbol in that it implies
interpenetration of realities, and not a reference from one, official,
to another, genuine. The privileges have been destroyed. IN
metareal art, each phenomenon is perceived as
goal in yourself and not a means to comprehension or
display something else. moral imperative,
intended by Kant only for humans, extends
metarealism throughout the world of phenomena.

Metarealism has little to do with surrealism, because
does not appeal to the subconscious, but to the superconscious, does not intoxicate,
but sobering up the creative mind. "With surreal
with images, the situation is the same as with images inspired by
opium..." (A. Breton, "Manifesto of Surrealism"). Surrealists
repelled from the excessively sober and dry bourgeois
reality. Metarealism repels rather from the drunken gloom and
haze enveloping the historical horizon of communism, and
each way calls to awakening, to the exit from the hypnotic
intoxication with one, "this" reality, to the multidimensional
perception of the world.

Poets and artists metarealists, despite the difference
individual manners, united by a metaphysical sense
space through which each thing borders on something else,
"oversteps" itself. Phenomena here are not fixed at the level
individual "objects" or "symbols" - discreteness
overcome by the continuity of lines of force, the aesthetics of which distinguishes
metarealism both from "life-like" and from
abstract art. In painting - with Evgeny Dybsky, Igor
Gonikovsky - metarealism appears as withdrawal
opposition between "abstract" and "objective": depicted
structure, and not the empirical surface of things, but at the same time
the structure reveals its own thingness. Average
between geometrically conditional abstraction and realistic
outlined thing is space itself representing
an abstraction from separate things and at the same time
material fullness and extension of the abstractions themselves. On
metareal the picture from the space is torn off the outer
layer, the "skin" (which is closely examined by hyperrealists),
but the geometric scheme is not exposed, the anatomical "backbone"
(as in abstractionism). The cut is somewhere in the middle
between the skin and the skeleton: among the muscle layers,
fibrous plexuses, lymph nodes and blood vessels -
all that soft and conductive organic tissue, through
which is the exchange of substances between things, metabolism
spatial environment. space in his
layering, resilience, the ability to extend out of itself and beyond itself, into
of his visible meta-physicality, is the protagonist of the metareal
art.

Features of metarealism are often characterized by contrast with other
artistic and intellectual current of this era -
conceptualism(cm.). Conceptualism- This
poetics pure concepts, self-sufficient signs,
abstracted from the reality that they seem to be called
designate, the poetics of schemes and stereotypes, showing the falling away
forms from substances, words from things. Metarealism -
This poetics of multidimensional reality in all latitude
its possibilities and transformations. The convention of the metaphor is here
overcome in unconditionality metabolites(cm.),
revealing the mutual involvement (and not just similarity) of different
worlds. Within the same cultural situation, conceptualism
and metarealism fulfill two necessary and mutually
additional tasks: peel off habitual, false,
established meanings and give words a new ambiguity and
meaningfulness.

Controversy between metarealism and conceptualism in my own way
logical essence reproduces a long-standing and hopeless dispute in
medieval philosophy between realism and
nominalism, a moderate variety of which was so called -
"conceptualism". Do general ideas (for example,
"love", "good", "beauty") the fullness of reality or they
limited only by the sphere of words (nominations) and concepts (concepts)?
Difficult to resolve logically, this dispute is resolved in different ways and
in modern poetic practice: one side
ideas and reality are merged, the other is disunited. Aspiration to
wholeness is carried out to the end in metarealism, to splitting - in
conceptualism. In one case, creative
potency of reality, capable of merging with the idea, in another -
inferiority of ideas, schematized up to detachment from
reality. Modern culture would be incomplete if it
one of the principles was supplanted: analytical-reflexive,
conceptual, or synthetic-mythological, meta-real.

Cm. Conceptualism, Metabola, Universica.

METABOL(metabole, from the Greek. metabole, transfer,
rotation, transition, movement, change) - a type of artistic
an image that conveys mutual involvement, mutual transformation
phenomena; one of the varieties of the trope, along with metaphor and
metonymy. Metabola how the reception is typical for
modern artistic movement of metarealism (see). Osip
Mandelstam called this technique "Heraclitus metaphor...,
emphasizing the fluidity of the phenomenon, ”and found it at the basis
Dante's poetics: "...Try to point out where the second is here, where
the first member of the comparison, what is compared with what, where is the main thing here
and where is the secondary, explaining it "

In chemistry and biology, metabolism is called metabolism, in
architecture - the use of dynamic urban models with
replaceable elements (floating city, etc.). In area
aesthetics, poetics, rhetoric, stylistics metabolome
it is expedient to name such a type of trail, which reveals
the process of transferring values, its intermediate links, then
hidden foundation on which convergence and
assimilation of objects. difference metabolites from the metaphor
shows the definition of the latter in General Rhetoric:

“We can describe the metaphorical process as follows:

where I is the original word, P is the resulting word, and the transition from
the first to the second is carried out through the intermediate concept P,
which n i k o g d a in
d i s c u r s e n e
p r i s u t s t v u e t ...
(highlighted by me - M. E.) "

Metabola- this is precisely the introduction into the discourse of the intermediate
the concept of P, which becomes central, unites
remote subject areas and creates a continuous transition between
them. Metabolic formula: AND <> P <>
R, where the Source and Result are mutually inverted through
output to text Intermediate.

The sea, which is clamped in the beaks of birds, is rain. The sky, placed in a star, is night. Wood impossible gesture - whirlwind. Ivan Zhdanov

The sea is not like rain, and the sky is not like the night, here one does not serve
a reference to another - but one becomes
to others, forming parts of an expanding reality. sky and night
are introduced among themselves not into the metaphorical, but into the metabolic
relation - through the P, manifested in the discourse, the “star”, which
equally belongs to both converging areas: sky and night.

Metaphor example: How domes gild in building light scaffolding - an orange mountain stands in desert forests A. Voznesensky. Autumn in Dilijan Example metabolites: In dense metallurgical forests, where the process of creating chlorophyll was going on, a leaf fell off. Autumn has come in the dense metallurgical forests. A. Eremenko

Metaphor clearly divides the world into what is compared and what compares, into
displayed reality and display method: autumn forest in
Dilijan similar on the scaffolding around
churches. Metabola is a holistic image, indivisible
in two, but revealing several dimensions in itself. nature and
factory are turning through each other
wooded structures that grow on their own
incomprehensible laws - technology has its own organics: and together they
constitute one reality in which it is recognizable and eerie
intertwined metallurgical and woody features. into place
transfer by similarity becomes complicity different worlds,
equal in their authenticity.

Extreme members metabolites- such in the given examples
"rain" and "sea", "sky" and "night", "tree" and "whirlwind", "factory"
and "forest" are called metabolites. between them is not
transfer of meaning by similarity or contiguity, not a process
transformations in time, and timeless involvement through
intermediate links that can be called
mediators: the beaks of birds that spray the sea drop by drop and make
his rain; the star that thickens the darkness around the light and
through the sky reveals the night; a gesture like a tree rushing for its own
limit and becomes a whirlwind; scaffolding. prototype
metabolas in the mythological art of antiquity -
metamorphosis. Metabola- this is a new stage of integration
heterogeneous phenomena, a kind of trop-synthesis,
reproducing some features of the trope-syncresis, i.e. metamorphosis,
but arising already on the basis of its division in the classical
artistic forms of transfer: metaphors and metonymy.

Metabola can also be seen as a combination of two
or several metonyms, double synecdoche. Synecdoche -
an image in which the whole is revealed through its part, the greater -
through a smaller one, for example, "all the flags will visit us", where
"flag" is a synecdoche of a country, a state. Metabola V
in this case, the construction of two synecdoches with one common
element, so that two different integers are equal or
turn into each other due to the common part. The star is part of the sky, and
the star is part of the night, hence "the sky placed in the star -
night".

If at the mytho-syncretic stage phenomena turn into each other
(completely identified), and at the artistic stage
differentiations are likened to each other purely conditionally, “as if”,
then at the synthetic stage they discover
complicity, i.e. convertibility while maintaining separation,
integration based on differentiation. Phenomena are separated
mediator- and at the same time connected to them.
Metabolites do not turn into each other (as in
metamorphosis - a young man and a flower, "Narcissus"), do not resemble each other
(as in a metaphor, for example, "birch chintz", where between
birch and chintz there is no real connection or intermediary, only
visual similarity of black and white patterns). Metabolites
(“sky” and “night”) partly coincide (in the mediator - “star”),
part remain separate, i.e. join each other
while maintaining its own identity.

Metabola is similar to what Deleuze and Guattari understand by
"rhizome", a special "amorphous form" in which everything
directions are reversible. Rhizome (rhizome, mycelium) refers to
tree models like metabola refers to metaphor.

“Unlike trees or their roots, a rhizome connects any point with
any other... In contrast to the structure, which is given by
series of points and positions, with binary relationships between points and
one-to-one relationships between positions (cf. metaphor,
where the opposition of the compared and
comparing, literal and figurative meanings - M. E.), rhizome
consists only of lines: lines of segmentation and stratification and
lines of flight or transition (deterritorialization) as
maximum dimension beyond which multiplicity undergoes
metamorphosis, changes its nature... The rhizome is
non-centered, non-hierarchical, non-labeling system... defined by
only by the circulation of states...”

Using this terminology, one can define metabolite How
trop-rhizome, the components of which do not obey
tree-like hierarchy of literal and figurative meanings,
but represents free circulation and
reciprocity of these values.

Notes

  1. O. Mandelstam. Conversation about Dante, ch. 5. Inc. op. in 3 vols., New York, 1971, v. 2, ss. 386, 387.
  2. J. Dubois, F. Edelin and others. General rhetoric. M., Progress, 1986, p. 56.
  3. Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. A Thousand Plateaus. Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. by Brian Massumi. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press, 1987, p. 21.

Literature

  • M. Epstein. paradoxes of novelty. ABOUT literary developmentХ1Х-ХХ centuries. M., Soviet writer, 1988, pp. 139–176.
  • M. Epstein. Postmodern in Russia: Literature and Theory. Moscow, LIA R. Elinina, 2000, ss. 106–140.
  • M. Epstein. "Theses on Metarealism and Conceptualism". "What is metarealism?", in the book. Literary manifestos from symbolism to the present day. Comp. and foreword. S. B. Dzhimbinova. M. XXI century - Consent, 2000, ss. 514–527.

First of all, the very definition of "metaphysics" should be clarified. For the first time the concept of "metaphysics" was defined by Aristotle. To designate metaphysics, he used the term "first philosophy", separating it from physics as the "second philosophy". The first philosophy, according to Aristotle, is the designation of an attempt of thought to go beyond the limits of the empirical world, the exit of reason into non-empirical reality. Aristotle gives metaphysics the following definitions: the study of causes, firsts, or higher principles; knowledge of "being, inasmuch as it is being"; knowledge about the substance; knowledge about God and supersensible substance. Also interesting is the definition of M. Heidegger: "Metaphysics is a questioning, in which we try to cover with our questions the totality of being and ask about it in such a way that the questioners themselves are called into question."

Here is what Yuri Mamleev, the founder of metaphysical realism, writes about this: “The word “metaphysics” refers to the world of principles, the world of pure spiritual essences, that is, to the supracosmic, divine sphere.

Metaphysical principles permeate all times and worlds, especially the "invisible" ones, and these principles underlie all worlds. And those" eternal questions"which the human mind often asks the silent Origin - no matter how naive they are from an absolute point of view, can relate to metaphysical questions."

Yuri Mamleev defines the genre of his works as "metaphysical realism", that is, in the form of a traditional realistic story, the fabric of his works includes metaphorical, metaphysical, symbolic. His characters are metaphorical personalities. But they live here, and their whole life is based on realities. Mamleev does not use the genre of myth, but the genre of ordinary, traditional prose, but in the realities of this prose, he contains this metaphorical fabric.

Metaphysical realism, sometimes called "literature of other dimensions", introduces into works not only features of visible life, but also features of a more formidable reality of the second plan: from the image of the inner "invisible" person, or those hidden sides of his soul that are associated with a different reality, up to the introduction into the fabric of the work of such purely philosophical and metaphysical realities as Nothing, the thing in itself, the transcendent "I" and so on, which, however, turned into the object of a work of art, and not a philosophical treatise.

The most important element is the depiction of man as a metaphysical being. Man as a social and psychological phenomenon is not of interest here. Knowledge of the invisible hidden person"Goes beyond the deepest psychology. Metaphysical realism, thus depicting the external person, sees behind him the realities of a secret, transcendent person. These hidden beginnings can be revealed in different ways.

Metaphysical realism in the full sense of the word implies a complete transformation of the text, subtext and their direction. It should be noted that the listed criteria for metaphysically colored literature refer primarily to prose.

Thus, the metaphysical nature of Mamleev's method is due to the fact that, in addition to describing ordinary reality, it addresses the unknown - whether it is the unknown in the depths of the human soul or intruding from the outside. However, this is precisely realism, and not only because its basis is everyday reality, the point is that the unknown appears not in terms of fantasy, but as an intelligible intuitive reality, including dreams, consciousness, self-knowledge. This is not a game of imagination, but a desire to expand the possibilities of narrow materialism and gain a more voluminous view of being.

The metaphysical depth of Mamleev's stories is achieved in different ways. The main artistic technique is the grotesque.

Mamleev penetrates into the "night side" of the human soul, his grotesque brings to public view the evil that lurks in man, that man does not know about himself. It should be noted that from the problem of "ethical evil" he turns directly to the problem of "metaphysical evil". When ethical evil is portrayed, they mean a person who is more sinful than normal people. Prior to this, literature spoke of sinful souls, of souls seduced, but somehow alive. And here we are talking about the townsfolk, giving the impression of something ossified, dead and completely dropped out of the real world spirit.

However, despite the monstrous nature of many of Mamleev's characters, his characters do not at all express the psychology and philosophy of the "end of the world." They are metaphysical vagabonds seeking to transcend what is given to the human mind. These heroes are not monsters, they seem to take on the shell of monsters when they break into the region of transcendental spheres. And intrusion there means for a person the danger of madness or some other transformation.

Putting well-known metaphysical questions in paradoxical terms, solving the problems of human souls in the bodily plane, Mamleev makes it clear that he is interested in the struggle or the relationship between spirit and flesh, since humanity is constantly confronted with this issue.

One of the central themes of most of Mamleev's works is the theme of death. Victor Erofeev in his book "Russian Flowers of Evil" writes: "The main character of Mamleev is death. This is an all-consuming obsession, the delight of discovering a taboo plot (for Marxism, the problem of death did not exist), a black hole into which any thoughts are sucked."

The point is that in traditional society there was a connection between the temporal and the eternal. A person felt even at the subconscious level that this life and that one, the other, are one. In today's world, there is a gap. Death has become a gate beyond which is either nothing or the unknown. But this moment sharpened the metaphysical abyss between the ridiculous brevity of earthly life and the obvious presence in man of some kind of eternal immortal principle. Without it, man would instinctively come to terms with the short duration of his existence. Modern man found himself in this gap, his consciousness is completely concentrated on this prison, the prison of this life, the only real one for him.

In the works of Mamleev, the theme of death appears constantly, for example, in many of his stories the first phrase is about death. For example, the novel "Empire of the Spirit" begins with the words "It's good to commit suicide, somewhere in a forest clearing, for example, on one condition: if you know for sure that after you the desired place is prepared in another world, especially in a better one" . Further, Mamleev, using the example of the protagonist's sister, shows a different attitude to death: "Poor Sonya, unhappy, blind like all people, a child! What could she know! She only sobbed, with such madness, with such trembling for her life, that I myself began doubt…" This all-consuming fear of death arises in Mamleev's characters as a kind of reaction, as a desire for immortality. They are deeply attached to being and, in general, to the idea of ​​immortality, because if there is no idea of ​​the infinite, then death has nothing to fear. And this fear allows them to understand something new, unknown: “Suddenly, with some swiftness, parallel to physical recovery, she clearly realized that there was no death as the end of her existence, and this could not be. The monster turned out to be a chimera, as if specially created modern civilization of cyclops and robots". The desire for immortality leads to the death of one of the characters of the "Empire of the Spirit". Mamleev explains this phenomenon in his interview for the Vzglyad newspaper: "VZGLYAD: In the novel there is an episode in which the wife of one of the characters falls into a strange state that has purely otherworldly roots ... Yuri Mamleev: Yes, it turns out that everything her being is absorbed by the idea of ​​some kind of transcendent caress, tenderness on the part of higher forces. The text explains what it is: it is about spiritual caress, which, as it were, assures a person that he is immortal. But the heroine, who approaches this in a purely feminine way , such aspiration, in general, leads to death, because it is, as it were, entangled in the relationship between the higher forces and man.

Mamleev also has a spiritual death. "Spiritual corpses" are the people of the West. For example, in the story "People of the Graves", he compares the crowd walking towards him with some creatures belonging to the other world: "And now, remembering the humanity of the graves and looking at the faces of passers-by, I suddenly felt: I am among the corpses, spiritual corpses and there are countless numbers of them here, hundreds of millions, almost all of them. masked faces are coming at me, and there are dead, really, forever dead."

An indicative case is connected with the novel "Shatuny", one of the darkest, hopeless novels of Mamleev. Two St. Petersburg musicians ended up in Berlin and, after a series of misadventures, decided to take a desperate step - to commit suicide. However, at this time they got into the hands of the novel "Shatuny", which they read. It would seem that such a gloomy composition was quite consistent with their mindset, but the reaction was completely unexpected - they wanted to continue living, and they did not carry out their plan.

Indeed, after reading even the most hopeless works of Mamleev, there is no feeling of doom. Mamleev introduces into his stories and novels a human movement towards hope, which shows through in the very fabric of the narrative.

In particular, in many of his stories, Mamleev speaks tenderly about Russia, about his country, for which it is worth living: “Therefore, it is clear why I was embodied in Russia, even if not at the best period of its existence. So much the better. Where else to be Russian soul... But why it is in this Russia, and not in some other cosmological Russia (about which the doctrine of "Eternal Russia" speaks) is another question. a worse period than the one I ended up in, just to be in Russia, albeit unhappy, humiliated, almost conquered (but not surrendering) by malice, idiocy and hatred of this world. Let it not be so, but I would come. And I would look into the eyes of these people, in which there is still a reflection of her shrines, the spirit of her geniuses and, most importantly, the mysterious light and shadow of Russian life ... "

In connection with all of the above, it is necessary to touch upon another important issue - the problem of the image of the author. Some researchers transfer the sinfulness of the characters to the author, but this is not true - Mamleev, his creative "I" always acts only as a witness to what is happening in the work. The author is not a moralizer, he is an absolute spiritual witness, his consciousness perceives the world as an observer, a researcher, to which he calls the reader. "For me, art is a kind of knowledge, of course, not scientific, but artistic, although it is united with scientific by a goal. As a writer, I must penetrate reality most deeply and describe it quite detachedly. I consider humanity and Earth as if through a microscope, acting as an observer, a witness to what is happening around us in social, psychological, metaphysical aspects. Therefore, in no case should one confuse the positions of the author and the characters. The decoding of what is written should belong to the reader: it is terrible, dangerous, but this is good.

Institute of Philosophy G.S. Frying pans NAS of Ukraine
department of the history of foreign philosophy
sector of the history of Eastern philosophy
June 21, 2016, 16:00
room 327

SEMINAR FOR RESEARCHERS OF EASTERN PHILOSOPHY
Session XCVII

Topic of the report: "Metaphysical realism of Yu. V. Mamleev as a Western interpretation of the philosophy of Vedanta"
Speaker: Alexander Artamonov (Lviv), Chief Editor Apocrypha magazine (Ukrainian office), traditionalist philosopher, translator
FREE ADMISSION

Abstracts of the report

A discrete approach to the historical process presupposes an understanding of history as a successive change of integral units through their mutual negation. Thus, from the recognition of negation as the main factor in the historical process, a dualistic approach to history follows, demonstrated in Russian philosophy by such thinkers as, for example, V. Petrov and P. Florensky. According to this approach, history is based on the alternating change of two ideological wholes, acquiring various new interpretations in the process of denial: thus, it is obvious that in this model both “even” and “odd” eras copy each other. If we approach the concept of postmodernity from such a dualistic position, then postmodernity, as a denial of modernity, appears to be “their other” of premodernity (since both premodernity and postmodernity are denials of modernity). In this vein, one should understand the common phrase of Julius Evola: the most radical ideology is traditionalism.

Radical postmodern is a direct negation of modernity, appealing to the same ideological foundations as premodernity, but rethought in a new, relevant today, key. Thus, premodern Tradition is replaced by postmodern traditionalism. One example of a radical postmodern (i.e. traditionalist, built on the denial of the worldview foundations of modernity) philosophy is the concept of the so-called. "metaphysical realism" of the Russian writer and philosopher Yu. V. Mamleev.
Since postmodernity as a denial of modernity is a total process, it affects all spheres of public life, incl. and art. Moreover, it is art that provides the widest potential for unfolding a consistent denial of the previous forms of comprehension of reality.

Thus, the roots of Western traditionalism as a philosophical concept can be found in the fiction of the era of romanticism (especially the so-called "black fantasy" or "dark romanticism" - the so-called "dark romanticism"). Similarly, Y. V. Mamleev’s main field of activity is fiction: for example, metaphysical realism was considered by its creator primarily as a literary style in which Mamleev’s main works of art were written, starting with his novel The Rods and ending with The Empire of the Spirit ". As the basic principles of metaphysical realism (in the broad sense - as a literary style, interpretive method and philosophical doctrine), one can conditionally single out manifestationism, the integrality of the world and personalism. Metaphysical realism in the narrow sense (as a literary style - this is how Mamleev understood it) is based on an attempt to reveal the above worldview attitudes through a literary text: thus, Mamleev demonstrates in his fiction and poetry the metaphysical side of reality.

Nevertheless, in addition to fiction, Mamleev also created purely philosophical treatises. Such is his work "The Fate of Being" (it is curious that the title of the book is a literal translation of the Heideggerian concept "Seynsgeschichte"). So, in this work, Mamleev tries to summarize the main ideas scattered by him throughout his artistic prose in one systematic compendium (the so-called “religion of the Self”, first mentioned by Mamleev in the novel “Connecting Rods” as a philosophical doctrine, became the main framework of this system, developed by one of the main characters - Padov). It is important to emphasize that the religion of the Self as a philosophical doctrine is one of the aspects of a broader doctrine - the previously mentioned metaphysical realism - which Mamleev himself stated in an interview: “Russian literature carries a philosophy much deeper than, for example, Russian philosophy proper … because the image is deeper than the idea, and it is the image that can best express the whole mysterious subtext of Russian metaphysics. Precisely because everything that relates to the peculiarities of the religion of the Self, in one way or another, affects the doctrine of metaphysical realism as a whole.

As mentioned earlier, postmodernity as a denial of modernity appeals to premodernity, interpreting it in its own way. In this sense, the traditionalist teaching of Mamleev is based on the Traditional doctrine of Vedanta, which is repeatedly emphasized by the author in a number of his works (especially in "The Fate of Being" and "The Empire of the Spirit"). It is important that Mamleev himself is a world-famous Indologist: he taught a course in Indian philosophy at the Institute of Oriental Civilizations in Paris (being a Soviet emigrant), as well as at the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University. M. Lomonosov (after the collapse of the USSR). Mamleev himself in The Destiny of Being explains that, since India is the "metaphysical center of mankind", it is best to show the features of any metaphysical teaching by comparing it with the philosophy of Vedanta, which is the "basic doctrine of Hindu metaphysics", the main principle of which is "non- dualism". Contrasting the doctrine of his religion with the Self to Vedanta, Mamleev actually substantiates their theoretical unity in the first place, since it is precisely because of this unity that an illustrative comparison is possible.

The main similarity in this context lies in those principles of Vedanta that Mamleev singles out as the main ones. These are fundamental non-dualism (the assertion of the absolute identity of Atman and Brahman), lack of system (dogmatism) and paradoxical paradox (the impossibility of rational understanding of the descriptive system of Vedanta in its entirety). So, to emphasize the contrast, Mamleev also brings the religion of the Self as close as possible to Vedanta in the conceptual aspect: he replaces the concept of "I" with "Atman", and "Absolute" with "Brahman". The Vedantist concept of "Brahman" for Mamleev means "The Great Metaphysical Silence, which contains the possibility of sound (i.e. the world), but which in itself is immensely greater than this possibility", while the concept of "Atman" is identical to the indestructible, unchanging individual soul, identical to Brahman . In his exposition of the essence of the Vedanta-Sutra, Mamleev explains that the manifested reality is the otherness of Brahman, necessary for him to cognize modes unusual for him (as the Absolute). So, as a result of a certain life path, Atman (projected into the manifested reality in the form of an individual soul) is “colored” by a certain experience, and then, liberating, saves this experience in order to merge into Brahman, forming in it “its own
intimate stream" (here Mamleev refers to Rene Guénon, who spoke of the so-called Vedantist "distinction in the indistinguishable"). Mamleev claims that "our soul before the eyes of God brings something that is for him an undoubted metaphysical gift" .

However, the necessity of the Absolute in additional experience contradicts its "absoluteness", as Mamleev himself notes. It is from this contradiction that the fundamental difference between the religion of the Self and Vedanta arises. Appealing to the above-mentioned principle of "paradoxical paradox", characteristic of Vedanta, Mamleev denies the status of God as the final destination of the Atman. So, the philosopher repeats the idea of ​​Fridtjof Schuon: "Paradise is the same prison for the initiate, as the earthly world is a prison for the true believer." Paradise and salvation for Mamleev are connected with Western religiosity, and liberation - with Eastern metaphysics. In an attempt to resolve the contradiction mentioned above, the thinker actually proposes to comprehend the third step spiritual path as a synthesis of salvation and liberation, that is, as an exit beyond the limits of a limited God into a certain unknowable negative “Abyss”, which at this third stage (the stage of the so-called “Last Doctrine”) acquires a paradoxically positive role in the realization of its eternal selfhood by the Atman .

Based on the foregoing, the philosophical teaching of Mamleev (the religion of the Self as an integral part of the doctrine of metaphysical realism) obviously appears to us as a postmodern interpretation of the modern traditionalist understanding of Vedanta. In other words, Mamleev radicalizes both postmodernism and Vedanta itself (which in Western society is usually understood in a moderate rationalist way, which best example is "Man and his realization according to the Vedanta" by René Guénon). Mamleev notes on this occasion: although in the doctrine of "religion I" "also in question in fact, about the same Absolute Self as in the Tradition, but with a significantly different approach and interpretation. In this vein, it is very important to understand that Mamleev actually opposes his teaching not to Vedanta as such, but to its modern interpretation, offering, as a more adequate option for modern challenges, the interpretation of the Vedanta Sutra from the point of view of radical postmodernity (or traditionalism in the highest degree; or so-called "new metaphysics").

In this vein, Mamleev’s statement is interesting (made with reference to one of his comrades in the Moscow “schizoid” underground during the “Brezhnev stagnation”): “one of the active participants in the Yuzhinsky circle, the poet and seer Valentin Provotorov, when he read Guenon, said that this a true esotericist, but he has no "new metaphysics" at all. He relies only on tradition, believing that no new metaphysical movements in the human spirit are possible. The religion of the Self and the doctrine of metaphysical realism are Mamleev's attempts to develop a modern interpretation of the Tradition, and in this sense it is quite clear that his ideas are designed to overcome not the limitations of Vedanta, but the limitations of the generally accepted Western understanding of Vedanta. In this light, the philosophy of Yuri Mamleev is a vivid example of an adequate adaptation of the Tradition (in this case, Vedanta) to the conditions of the Western world, which is completely consistent with our proposed discrete approach to the historical process and the concept of postmodernity.

LITERATURE
1. Mamleev, Yu. V. The fate of Genesis. [Electronic resource]. Access mode.

metaphysical realism

If we briefly define the main intention of thought, then it consists in the wise ignorance of the Incomprehensible. What is the theoretical problem solved in his philosophy? In the world around us, we would not be able to navigate and solve life problems if we did not capture in the new changed conditions the elements of the familiar, the familiar, the known. This is mainly due to the concepts that form the field of abstract knowledge. Using them, we subsume under concepts the manifold that we encounter in experience. In this operation, common sense and scientific knowledge essentially coincide, providing the order and expediency so necessary for our picture of the world. However, it is impossible to reduce everything new to what is already familiar.

"In every experience of beauty - in the enjoyment of art or in the contemplation of the beauty of nature or human face- we are seized, at least for a brief moment, by a sacred awe. In the face of events that shake us - be it death loved one or the birth of a new human being - we feel that we are standing before a certain mystery: the bearers of life seem to disappear into some incomprehensible distance or emerge from an incomprehensible depth, "writes. Censorship of the rational, everyday consciousness turns out to be insufficient at such a moment, and we "we feel the incomprehensible", which goes beyond the boundaries of the logical, reveals a different dimension of being. The problem underlying all the constructions of the thinker is thus clarified primarily as a question of the relationship between reality and knowledge. In understanding it, the main theoretical takeoff of thought.

Essential for epistemology is the distinction between the subject of knowledge and its content carried out by the thinker. Indeed, consciousness is always directed at something and at the same time fixes the features of the object. Moreover, the logical meaning of the statement remains constant even when the grammatical form is changed, and with various psychological loads that it can have: the expression "Moscow is the capital of Russia" is equivalent to another - "The capital of Russia is Moscow." How is the transition from the subject of knowledge to knowledge of its content carried out in cognition? Universal Formula knowledge: "A is B". But A in itself is always only A, for if in the concept A its connection with B was conceived, then it would not be A, but AB. At the same time, the combination of the concepts A and B in knowledge testifies that from the very beginning A is in connection with something else, which makes the connection of AB possible. This discovered unknown will be denoted by x, then we get: Ah is B. In the process of cognition, in addition to property B, the presence of other qualities of the object is established. But the fundamental epistemological scheme does not change from this: in each act of consciousness directed at an object, there is an object of knowledge, by which "we mean the complete completeness of certainty, indefinite for us and subject to definition. Denoting it as x, we characterize not its own internal nature, but only its functional place in the composition of our knowledge.

The relationship of the content of knowledge to its subject appears in a paradoxical form: what we do not know is the basis and carrier of what is known to us. But the fact of the matter is that only such content should be called knowledge, regarding which it is established that it exists independently of the process of cognition. Knowledge is knowledge of the object, or, to use more precise formulations, the object of knowledge is transcendent in relation to the immanent material of knowledge. The substantiation of the objectivity of the object of knowledge is an important result in the framework of Frank's theory of knowledge. Non-trivial consequences follow from it. First, since the object is always present in the form x, it requires special efforts to infiltrate yourself. Secondly, the establishment of an object transcendent to knowledge fundamentally substantiates epistemology and opens the way for the creation of a philosophical concept of being, i.e., an ontology of being. However, before talking about the latter, it is required to understand how an object that is outside the consciousness can enter into its composition?

As you know, Kant, faced with this problem, came to the conclusion that the transcendental object is unknowable, it is a thing in itself. The concept he used turned out to be internally contradictory, and Jacobi was certainly right when he asserted that without this premise (the existence of things in themselves) it is impossible to enter the system of Kantian philosophy, and with it it is impossible to remain in it. Indeed, if an object is unknowable, then it is unthinkable. Neo-Kantians tried to modernize the doctrine of the Koenigsberg theorist, explaining that the object is not some kind of metaphysical reality, spatially separated from consciousness, but only a special moment in the structure of consciousness itself. In fact, they replaced the concept of the object of knowledge with another one - "objectivity", which is an immanent feature of our consciousness, due to which the content of knowledge acquires for us objective character. But an absolutely immanent object, Frank objects, is a contradiction by definition, since it is dissolved in consciousness and cannot be precisely the object of knowledge. In contemporary philosophy, the thinker sees only attempts to fix, discover the problem, but not solve it.

So, Rickert spoke about the sense of duty, designed to guarantee the objective value of knowledge. But as an experience, it remains a moment of the subjective world of man. Husserl emphasizes the focus of knowledge on the subject, but stops there. Intuitionism, postulating the inseparability of the subject and object of knowledge, thereby destroys the object as being in itself. In one form or another, these concepts include the elimination of the duality of being and knowledge, and this is their fatal mistake. But the recognition of the irreducible dualism of image and object is not a return to naive realism or common sense. "Not two separate objects (as dualistic realism interprets). - Frank reveals the main epistemological relation, - but one and the same object is given to us, nevertheless, in two fundamentally different epistemological aspects: on the one hand, as unknown, on the other - as known ".

Let's use the following example to clarify the idea. In the room where we are, we are surrounded by some things. Each of these items is limited in space, occupies a certain place. Does the picture we perceive mean that there is nothing beyond the visible? In such a formulation of the question, the answer to it becomes simple: any concrete being presupposes existence in general, limited is conceivable only as limited by something else, and, therefore, simultaneously with the spatially finite, we are also given the spatially infinite. “The absolute limits of the picture of the given,” Frank concludes, “are not only never given to us, but are also unthinkable: every limit presupposes something limiting beyond its limits”4. Thus, going beyond the immediately given is carried out - through space, time and the timeless. We manage to catch only certain aspects, features of being, but this is enough to understand: every thing is something more than we know about it, and something different than we imagine it, and in this infinite fullness it remains incomprehensible to us. . So, the object to which our knowing gaze is directed is not only the unknown, but other than what we can ever know about it. Being turns out to be not the content of knowledge, but containing it - this reveals the true status of the object of knowledge in itself.

This is how philosophy substantiates the possibility and necessity of the transition from the image to the object, from the study of the content of knowledge to the understanding of its subject. When analyzing the latter, the same way of reasoning is reproduced that was used in characterizing the material of knowledge, when it was established that the initial materials of knowledge are not separate contents A, B, C, etc., but such unities, which are then decomposed into certain components. Behind each specific property found in an object lies a certain x, thanks to which the relation AB, AC, BC, etc. becomes available to our knowledge. A holistic picture of being precedes knowledge fixed in concepts, and by its nature it cannot be anything other than complete unity. And in this it opposes the certainty of abstract knowledge. The latter rests on the well-known logical laws of identity, contradiction, and the excluded middle ("A is A", "A is not non-A", "everything that is not non-A is A"). Thanks to them, from the continuous unity of being, the specific contents of knowledge A, B, C, etc. are revealed, realized in clear and distinct concepts.

This point of Frank's reflections contains a moment of exceptional importance for all his subsequent constructions. The philosopher came to a conclusion representing a discovery that allowed him to create a new metaphysics of unity. His idea is that if the previous conclusion is true, then "unity - this is the womb, from which, by virtue of the principle of certainty, a dismembered set of separate certainties arises, is itself not subject to the indicated logical principles or laws, but rises above them, or, better, lies deeper than them, constitutes a more primary layer of reality. This layer we call metalogical unity. We see, therefore, that the analysis of the certainty of knowledge leads us to the same results as the analysis of its validity. And the differentiation (dismemberment into concepts) of knowledge - t i.e., its object, - and its connectedness are equally explicable and stem from the very nature of being as a continuous, internally merged unity - from the nature of being as a metalogical unity.

Frank lies in the fact that during the period of dominance in philosophy of subjectivist concepts that reduce the world, reality to objectivity, understood as a countermember of the subject, etc., he restored this concept in its rights, allowed theoretical thought to enter the wide expanse of reality lying in the basis of knowledge. The introduction of the category of metalogical unity also has one more consequence. Until now, all knowledge of the subject has been understood as abstract, that is, expressed in concepts and judgments. But the establishment of the circumstance that its object is concrete, different from any "abstract", testifies to the accessibility of being to our contemplation, which is different from conceptual thinking. This means that in fact there is not one, but two knowledge about the subject, and logical knowledge is secondary and derivative. Primary knowledge consists in the direct intuition of the object in its metalogical wholeness. Attempts to express it with the help of concepts form abstract knowledge, but between two levels of knowledge there cannot be a relation of logical identity, but only "metalogical correspondence or inconsistency" is possible. Since the continuous wholeness of being is not amenable to fixation in the system of certainties, then all those characteristics that are used in relation to abstract knowledge. They do not make sense in the field of metalogical unity. So, each concept, judgment, conclusion in terms of its certainty can be called definite. In such a case, concrete reality must be regarded as transdefinite. And so on.

Developing this idea, Frank comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to distinguish between reality and reality. Reality is usually opposed to dreams, dreams, the content of fantasy; it is, so to speak, a stone wall against which we bruise our foreheads. At the same time, our moods and desires - in a word, the world of subjective, inner life - also have an existence, along with stones, mountains and other objects that are undoubtedly related to reality. Already from this we can conclude that reality does not completely coincide with being or reality. Even more interesting is the understanding that their separation is relative, since any subject content that has certainty is already a part of reality, but until it is named, it is only experienced by us, it constitutes reality. Reality is that fragment of reality that is rationalized by us.

Requires clarification, from the point of view of Frank, and the relationship of objective being and reality. Plato's doctrine of the "world of ideas" contains a great rational meaning, since such elements of being as numbers, geometric figures, colors, etc., taken as the essential contents of concepts, although devoid of a temporal definition, have power in themselves, regardless of our knowledge. This Platonic realm of "truly existing" must also be included in the concept of objective being, which thus turns out to be much broader than "reality." True, the great creator of the theory of ideas believed that "ideal being" logically and ontologically precedes concrete reality as a goal and paradigm. But the realm of ideas does not yet form an unconditional reality; on the contrary, it can itself be understood only on the basis of a metalogical unity. Any idea is conceived with the help of the principle of certainty, and thus its analysis repeats all the problems that are known from the previous presentation of the connection between the attributes of an object. And every limitation, naturally inherent in the elements of the realm of ideas, is possible only through a fused, indefinite unity, which remains hidden from us. The study of ideal being allows Frank to dissociate himself from all idealism as rationalism. He sees the error of the latter in the inability to recognize unconditional being as essentially incomprehensible, as different from everything definite, conceivable in concepts. Reality, he believes, coincides with transrationality.

Consideration of various aspects of being leads the philosopher to a general, integral generalization that in the composition of being there is nothing that exists separately, without connection with something else. The entire development of ideas about the subject of knowledge leads to the discovery of the unity of being, in which not a single element (real or ideal) can exist by itself. “Being,” Frank formulates his credo, “is a unity in which everything particular exists and is conceivable precisely only through its connection with something else – ultimately with everything else. In this respect, even the concept of God is only an imaginary exception; and God, strictly and precisely speaking, does not have the attribute that scholasticism designated with the word aseitas (being-from-itself - S.K.), i.e., is not ens a se (being due to itself - S.K.). For precisely because he is conceived as the "primary principle", "creator", "almighty" of the world and everything else in general, he is inconceivable without regard to what his "creation" is. The new interpretation of unity developed by Frank seems contradictory by definition, for what can be said of the incomprehensible at all, except that it is incomprehensible, how does the philosopher solve the difficulty that has arisen?

He follows the path paved in philosophy by famous mystics - Jacob Boehme, Nicholas of Cusa and others - offering "wise ignorance" as a way of knowing. By its very nature, no thinking can adequately express the incomprehensible. The impossibility of realizing the original intention of philosophy - to comprehend being without a trace in the system rational concepts- opens before her as the deepest result of her historical development that there is a boundary beyond which lies a living and vast reality. Overcoming rationality is considered by Frank as the main task of philosophical thinking. He calls such a cognitive attitude the position of "antinomian monodualism." In the field of antinomian knowledge, according to his teaching, the judgment "A is not B" is opposed by the equally legitimate judgment "A is B". They cannot be combined in one logical formula according to the principle "both one and the other", because then the claim to an adequate comprehension of transrational being would again be stated. “Transrational truth,” the thinker insists, “lies precisely in the inexpressible middle, in the inexpressible unity between these two judgments, and not in any connection between them that can be logically fixed. It is an incomprehensible, logically inexpressible unity of knowledge, which in the sphere of abstract logical synthesis remain unconditionally inconsistent"7. Accordingly, Frank does not recognize the possibility of synthesis as a resolution of the contradiction of antinomic judgments and opposes "hovering" over them to the philosophical removal of opposites, carried out in Hegel's system. The thinking of the author of The Incomprehensible is a revolt against rationalism, and it has its own truth, since being is irreducible to either thought or concept.

Thus, it was established that the incomprehensible is not some unknowable thing in itself, it is open and reveals itself to itself and at the same time to us, insofar as we participate in it. In our own being we discover the incomprehensible in its immediacy. Because it has not yet been defined and distorted by our thought. In our twilight states mental life, during the transition from wakefulness to sleep, etc. One feels the deep unity of our being and the incomprehensible. An even more striking example of such an undifferentiated unity is human passion, whether it be fear or anger, love or hatred. The impulse takes possession of us to such an extent that any boundary of the ego is lost, and our own being is drowned in the boundless chaos of the whole. The world, divided into internal and external, merges at such moments into an indistinguishable being in general. Minutes of ecstasy are evidence that our self comes from a dark infinity. To comprehend the nature of the spiritual life of man has always been main task psychology, but its predominantly rationalistic attitude prevented the solution of this problem. Therefore, Frank, after writing the "Object of Knowledge", begins to prepare a new work - "The Soul of Man". It attempts to study the self-disclosure of being.

It is no coincidence that the book on mental life has the subtitle "The Experience of an Introduction to the Philosophy of Psychology." Its author argues that modern psychology is three-quarters psychophysiology and completely loses its "living soul." What can a supporter of empirical psychology say about the richness of emotional experiences, the flight of thought, the will that knows no barriers? How will he determine the state of being in love through objective observations, measuring pressure, studying changes in nutrition, well-being, etc.? “Since psychology, at the same time, imagines,” writes, “that in these statements it has expressed, even if incompletely, the very essence of falling in love, this is a mockery of the lover, a denial of the mental phenomenon, offered as its description. For for the lover himself, all this is only the symptoms or consequences of his feeling, and not the feeling itself. Mental life is not a set of mental processes, but rather a great abyss that has a different dimension than the objective spatio-temporal world. Therefore, it requires the use of another method of its comprehension - introspection as living knowledge, in which an immanent understanding of the subject's inner life takes place.

Mental life acts as a substratum and basis of consciousness. Considering their relationship, Frank recalls Leibniz's deep thought about the stages of consciousness, about the continuity of the transition from the minimum of consciousness (the unconscious) to its maximum. In this regard, he even formulates a kind of metaphysical theorem, which is that "the intensity of the light of consciousness - starting from its minimum as the first barely distinguishable flicker in the darkness and ending with a maximum - is directly proportional to the degree of fusion or condensation of mental life." Spiritual life - this is the fusion and condensation inner peace person, taken from the side of its quality. Its quantitative characteristic is unlimited.

But in the soul, the principles that form and direct also awaken: from the inside it is controlled by self-consciousness, and from the outside it is limited by objective consciousness. Frank allows us to distinguish three main states of mental life: firstly, this is spiritual life in its immediacy and purity - a kind of formless community of mental elements, secondly, the opposition between self and not-self that has arisen, the emergence of self-consciousness and objective consciousness, thirdly, spiritual life, which marks, as it were, a return to the original fusion, but it is already different, since our self is aware of itself in an organic relationship with objective being and other rational beings. In "The Soul of Man" Frank really manages to discover such a sphere of mental manifestations, which remains inaccessible to research by means of experimental psychology and which is of great importance for a person. His understanding of the importance of the integrity of the subject's spiritual world laid the philosophical foundations for the development of systemic approaches in psychology. In Frank's demand to master living knowledge, a protest was expressed against the one-sided analytical methods that dominated contemporary science. In "The Soul of Man" the reader will find deep insights, accurate observations, precise characteristics of many phenomena and movements of the human soul.

Frank saw the key to comprehending the latter in understanding the unity of mental life. The concept developed by him states that the pure self lies at the basis of such unity, and the presence of a supratemporal principle and meaning is felt in our soul. If the objective world in which we find ourselves turned out to be a private segment of the total unity of being, then our individual self also comes from an absolute, impersonal root. “In living knowledge,” notes the philosopher, “that we have, we are directly given precisely this organic unity of being itself, by virtue of which everything derivative, relative, subjective, at the same time, is rooted in the absolute, primary, self-sufficient and is only its discovery.” Thus, Frank's interpretation of mental life reveals its dependence, derivativeness from the general principles of the philosophy of unity. In the doctrine of man, it takes the form of impersonalism, since in the end it turns out that the human soul is nothing but a single radiation of an absolute, supra-individual life.

("1") The development of the philosophical foundations of psychology allowed Frank to proceed to the construction of a metaphysics of human existence. In immediate self-existence we discover the limits and at the same time we are forced to recognize the continuity, the fusion of psychic life. Therefore, it should be attributed to the very essence of our reality that it is not able to stay within itself. Frank calls the transition through the boundaries of one's own realm of being transcendence. Its first form is transcendence in relation to I-you. Here we encounter the concept of someone else's consciousness, and if it is taken as ready-made, already given, then it turns out to be completely hidden and inaccessible to me. The problem posed by Frank is extremely important, it is the problem of understanding the other as a subject of mental life. Hypotheses about knowing the other peace of mind through inference by analogy with our own self, as well as the assumption of empathy as a special mechanism for comprehending someone else's animation, turn out to be unsatisfactory. Both of these methods clearly contradict the immediate givenness of you.

To reveal the primacy of the I-you relationship, Frank finds a very expressive confirmation in fiction, in the prose poem "Dog". “The dog sits in front of me - and looks straight into my eyes,” the writer notes. “And I also look into her eyes. She seems to want to tell me something. She is mute, she is without words, she does not understand herself - but I I understand her. I understand that at this moment the same feeling lives in her and in me, that there is no difference between us. We are identical; in each of us the same quivering light burns and shines ... No! This is not an animal and not a person changing their views ... These are two pairs of identical eyes fixed on each other. And in each of these pairs - both in an animal and in a person - the same life shyly presses against the other. To this phenomenon of oneself to another, the philosopher adds, only one concept is suitable - "revelation". The I-thou relation is already a special kind of being, and its inner side is characterized as we. The understanding of the latter "is subordinated to the general ontological principle of antinomistic mono-dualism - the coincidence of the opposite."

Frank's thinking is subject to strict sequence, the initial understanding of unity is carried out by him through all sections and parts of it. philosophical system. Does the philosopher eventually manage to create an organic whole, a consistent unity in which all elements are harmoniously ordered? For a worldview that affirms the permeation of the world by God, the fact that the world of God is at the same time the arena of the action of the forces of evil must represent the greatest mystery. The justification of God, i.e., the explanation of the origin and essence of evil, becomes the final problem of the philosophy of unity. Historically, posing the question of theodicy has led either to substantiating unbelief, denying the existence of God, or to recognizing evil as seemingly non-existent. However, these solutions are extremely superficial and do not reveal the full depth of the problem.

What exactly does it mean to explain the reality of evil? “It means,” he answers, “to find its basis, or, which is the same thing, to see its proper, lawful place in the total unity of being. We know that the real basis in its last depth must coincide with the ideal In the end, with the very Foundation or First Principle, with Truth itself as the primary source of all "significance". To "explain" evil would mean to "substantiate" and thereby "justify" evil. But this contradicts the very essence of evil as something that is illegal, that should not be ". In this case, it turns out that the problem of theodicy is rationally insoluble in general. This is exactly what Frank does. But his position on this issue is not reduced to stating the rational unsolvability of the problem. By appealing to the unfathomably Incomprehensible, he seeks to prove that the true truth lies on the other side of our knowledge. The very understanding of good and evil by man is initially not adequate to reality. The reason for this can be seen in the fall into sin, etc., but the fact is that absolute truth is given in "brute factuality" and in an undivine way. Obviously, Frank seeks to overcome the difficulties associated with the justification of God for the existence of evil in the world, on the path of subjectivism.

However, this is only one of the options for the movement of thought. In the concept of the philosopher there is another attempt to preserve the integrity of being, violated by the bitter reality of evil. Every private existence is limited and, in this sense, deficient, defective. Its incompleteness is made up for by belonging to the all-unity, and it turns out that it constantly needs infinitely many things. As a result, a desire for self-affirmation and isolation arises, and the struggle of all against all becomes the law of private and individual existence, which, due to the universal connection, is an endless self-destruction. Such is the metaphysical meaning of evil as a disaster. But even this, the second, path of theodicy cannot hide what is gradually revealed in the philosophy of unity: being has cracked, split into separate pieces - and not only in our human world. If it is impossible to rationally comprehend the coexistence of God and evil in the world created by him, then the mystical concept of total unity is not able to cope with the fatal difficulty for it.

The doctrine of metaphysical realism, as the thinker himself called his concept, was concretized and developed by him in works on social philosophy, the most important of which is the work Spiritual Foundations of Society, which completes the philosophical trilogy begun and continued by The Subject of Knowledge and The Soul of Man. The question of the true causes of the development of society is of fundamental importance for the social sciences. In his book, Frank sought to prove that social life does not coincide with the world of material existence. Agreeing with those who associate social phenomena with physical processes, the philosopher at the same time insists that the true essence of historical processes does not find expression in physical nature and is not defined by it. Thus, the greatest social upheavals can occur completely unnoticed by physical world, and the signature of the legislator, which transforms social reality, from the point of view of its material composition, like a trace on paper, a stroke of a pen, is a completely insignificant phenomenon. At the heart of public relations, according to Frank, is an internal spiritual complicity. Therefore, the materialistic - biological or physical - interpretation of the development of mankind is untenable.

Defending the idea that social being is spiritual life, the thinker emphasized the inadmissibility of identifying the latter with the totality of mental experiences, distinguishing it from the abstract-ideal timeless being of Plato-Hegel. Given the special nature of human existence, since a person cannot be the unconditional creator of his being, it should be concluded that historical creativity embodies the principles and values ​​of more high level than the desires and aspirations of the individual. Thus, the ideal principle appears in social life as its active side, as "the ideal and due", and it itself acquires a moral character.

Frank's concept continues and develops the ideas of the Slavophiles about catholicity: the spiritual life of society is understood by him as a catholic being. The philosopher denies the doctrine of social atomism, which reduces society to a collection of individuals ("atoms"). Theories of this kind fix the surface of phenomena, without penetrating the empirical layer of being, behind which lies the primary harmony, inner unity. It is revealed in the fact that without mutual understanding of people, the emergence of no social relations is impossible; the inner spiritual connection constitutes the totality of human relations, starting with intimate love and ending with official business. “This internal, organic unity,” writes the philosopher, “which we call “catholicity” and which underlies all human communication, any public association of people, can have different forms or parties in which it acts as an internal unifying principle. "Sobornost appears not as the external environment of the individual, but as its life content. The study of catholicity leads the philosopher to the discovery of the supertemporal foundation of social life, since in every visible state society is an inseparable unity of all of its members - dead and not yet born - with the living. The principle of proper service to the highest values ​​becomes the main one in Frank's ethical teaching, so that the question of the meaning of life is concretized into the question of the possibility of realizing the highest good. The stoic view of things eventually prevailed in ethics metaphysical realism, displacing the principle of grace and love.

A special and extremely interesting side of Frank's work is the development of problems of the originality of Russian national thinking, carried out in the article "The Essence and Leading Motives of Russian Philosophy", as well as in the essay "Russian World View". Distinctive features the latter is in its intuitiveness, so that systematic and conceptual development turns out to be secondary for it, although not secondary. As a result, Russian philosophy becomes a worldview theory, the main goal of which is not impartial knowledge of the world, but its religious and emotional interpretation. Frank expressed the essential features of the thinking of our people and revealed the national character of Russian philosophy, for which life experience and the desire for realism associated with it play an enormous role.

The original ontologism of Russian thinkers is also of fundamental importance, when the theory of knowledge itself acquires meaning as a fact of being (the idea associated with the names of Khomyakov and Kireevsky, continued by Vl. Solovyov, acquiring new forms in the philosophy of S. Trubetskoy and N. Lossky). The spirit of collectivism is also specific to Russian self-consciousness, but it does not oppose itself to the idea of ​​personal freedom and individuality. While the West takes the existence of the self as the starting point, it is possible that it is we who form the basis of spiritual being. “Here, only the independence and separateness of different “I” from each other is denied,” the philosopher explained his thought, “and, consequently, their self-sufficiency and isolation. This, so to speak, is “we-philosophy” - as opposed to the “I-philosophy” of the West ". Deep religiosity and humility, rooted in the soul of the Russian people, according to Frank, will lead to its revival after the grandiose social upheavals of the early twentieth century.

The merit of the philosopher lies primarily in the fact that he created a fundamental epistemological ontology containing the justification that no study of knowledge is possible outside the understanding of the subject of knowledge. Understanding the limits of abstract knowledge, i.e. logical thinking, led Frank to the construction of a new metaphysics of unity. At the same time, the development and thinking over of the latter revealed an internal contradiction in its design, and therefore the Frank system can be considered as the result of the evolution of the idea of ​​unity in Russian philosophy.

Bibliography

For the preparation of this work, materials from the site http://istina were used. *****/