Электронный журнал «Культура культуры» :: The subject and civilization after the Dualistic Revolution

SCIENTIFIC AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY FOR CULTURAL STUDIES
SCIENTIFIC ASSOCIATION OF CULTURE RESEARCHERS

Scientific peer-reviewed electronic periodical
Since 2014

Hypotheses:

THE THEORY OF CULTURE

E.A. Orlova. The anthropological foundations of scientific knowledge

Discussions:

IN SEARCH OF THE MEANING OF HISTORY AND CULTURE (A.Ya. Flier's section)

A.V. Kostin, A.Ya. Flier. Ternary functional model of culture (continued)

N.A. Khrenov. Russian culture at the turn of the XIX–XX centuries: the Gnostic "Renaissance" in the context of symbolism (continued)

V.M. Rozin. Some features of modern art

V.I. Ionesov. Memory of things in images and plots of cultural introspection

Analytics:

CULTURAL REFLECTIONS

A.Ya. Flier. Social and organizational functions of culture

M.I. Kozyakova. The Ancient cosmos and its evolution: ritual, spectacle, entertainment

N.A. Malshina. The post-non-classical paradigm in the study of the Russian cultural industry: A new type of rationality and value system

N.A. Khrenov. A Century later: the tragic experience of Soviet Culture (continued)

Announcement of the next issue

Andrey Anatolyevich Pelipenko,
(1960-2016)
Doctor of Philosophy, Professor

The subject and civilization after the Dualistic Revolution [1]
(ending)

Abstract: The article is based on the concept of a Dualistic revolution. Its essence is that between the worldview of the primitive and ancient early class epochs, in which "good" and "evil" differed little, and the monotheistic picture of the world of Modern times, in which "good" was strategically more important than "evil", there was a period of dualistic worldview, in which "good" and "evil" were they were equally influential, were in binary opposition to each other, with equal sacredness of both. Monism actually grew out of dualism. This was the period of the formation of logocentrism, in which the Word already possessed the highest sacredness and was the main instrument of meaning formation in culture. The article is devoted to the analysis of the stages of the formation of logocentrism, monistic worldview.

Keywords: Consciousness, worldview, dualism, monotheism, logocentrism, binary oppositions, good and evil, mediation, inversion.

[1] The article was published in 2004. See: Pelipenko A.A. The subject and civilization after the Dualistic revolution // The subject's life spaces: Unity and multidimensionality of the subject-forming social evolution / Ed. by E.V. Sayko. M., 2004. pp. 187-228.
[2] Jung K.-G. On the psychology of Eastern religions and philosophy.M., 1994.p. 130.
[3] Cf. K.-G. Jung's remark that "The East cultivates the psychic aspect of primitiveness, coupled with an exorbitant amount of speculation": Jung K.-G. Decree.op. p. 133.
[4] So according to the Rigveda, Purusha, as an unconditional and unchangeable entity, represents the whole world: the past and the future. From him is born the cosmic mind – Viraj, and from Viraj – Purusha in the aspect of the prototype of man.
[5] "History has shown that in the life and culture of China, the primordial Confucianism, as if opposing Taoism, is essentially inseparable." Eidlin L.Z. On the history of the development of Chinese literature in the III-XIII centuries / The Study of Chinese literature in the USSR.M., 1973.p. 351.
[6] Russell J.B. Satan. Perception of evil in the early Christian tradition.St. Petersburg, 2001.p. 32.
[7] M.K. Trofimova writes about Gnostics: "Speaking of gnosis, we constantly have to resort to such expressions as experience, wholeness, the inseparability of the knower from the known. At first glance, all this surprisingly resembles our idea of primitive consciousness, reconstructing which scientists tend to see it in the subject-object separateness, its most essential quality." And further: "there was an attitude to overcome the rejection of the knower from the known. Gnostics (and not only them.– A.P.)wanted to get rid of this achievement of the analytical method of cognition, cursed it, associated it with the image of the world they hated, but, thinking about it, paid tribute to the very method of cognition from which they so persistently sought to escape. So, if such indivisibility was natural to me of primitive consciousness, experienced and not perceived from the outside, then for the Gnostics it turned into a desired goal, into a kind of antipode to their current existence." See: Trofimova M.K. Historical and philosophical issues of Gnosticism. M., 1979. p. 41.
[8] "Strictly speaking, the Gnostic model was born from two opposite elements that suddenly took over the human mind. One of them is the fear of a split world, of a night that hid the light, of loneliness that brought a person back to himself. The second is the joyful freedom to create worlds, the single principle of creativity revealed to the individual, which turned him from an element of the social body into a creator of thought worlds, possessing will and realizing what until recently was considered the undivided secret of the gods. For the first time, a person felt like a carrier of creative, creative power, in other words, he realized himself as a Demiurge." (Sergeev K.V. Cognitive models and the formation of religious institutions: ancient protognosticism // Polis. 2002. No. 5. p. 91).
[9] Burkhardt T. Sacred art of the East and West.Principles and methods.M., 1999.p. 146.

ISSN 2311-3723

Founder:
OOO «Soglasie» publisher

Publisher:
Scientific Association of Culture Researchers

Official registration № ЭЛ № ФС 77 – 56414 от 11.12.2013

The magazine is indexed:

Issued quarterly in electronic form only

Issue produced by:

Editorial Director
A. Flier

Editor in Chief
T. Glazkova

Head of IT Center
A. Lukyanov

Our banner:

Our e-mail:
cultschool@gmail.com

OUR PARTNERS:

SCIENTIFIC AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY FOR CULTURAL STUDIES SCIENTIFIC ASSOCIATION OF CULTURE RESEARCHERS Scientific peer-reviewed electronic periodical Since 2014
	NEW ISSUE ABOUT EDITORS TO AUTORS ARCHIVE	РУС ENG

Hypotheses: THE THEORY OF CULTURE E.A. Orlova. The anthropological foundations of scientific knowledge Discussions: IN SEARCH OF THE MEANING OF HISTORY AND CULTURE (A.Ya. Flier's section) A.V. Kostin, A.Ya. Flier. Ternary functional model of culture (continued) N.A. Khrenov. Russian culture at the turn of the XIX–XX centuries: the Gnostic "Renaissance" in the context of symbolism (continued) V.M. Rozin. Some features of modern art V.I. Ionesov. Memory of things in images and plots of cultural introspection Analytics: CULTURAL REFLECTIONS A.Ya. Flier. Social and organizational functions of culture M.I. Kozyakova. The Ancient cosmos and its evolution: ritual, spectacle, entertainment N.A. Malshina. The post-non-classical paradigm in the study of the Russian cultural industry: A new type of rationality and value system N.A. Khrenov. A Century later: the tragic experience of Soviet Culture (continued) Announcement of the next issue	Andrey Anatolyevich Pelipenko, (1960-2016) Doctor of Philosophy, Professor The subject and civilization after the Dualistic Revolution [1] (ending) Abstract: The article is based on the concept of a Dualistic revolution. Its essence is that between the worldview of the primitive and ancient early class epochs, in which "good" and "evil" differed little, and the monotheistic picture of the world of Modern times, in which "good" was strategically more important than "evil", there was a period of dualistic worldview, in which "good" and "evil" were they were equally influential, were in binary opposition to each other, with equal sacredness of both. Monism actually grew out of dualism. This was the period of the formation of logocentrism, in which the Word already possessed the highest sacredness and was the main instrument of meaning formation in culture. The article is devoted to the analysis of the stages of the formation of logocentrism, monistic worldview. Keywords: Consciousness, worldview, dualism, monotheism, logocentrism, binary oppositions, good and evil, mediation, inversion. [1] The article was published in 2004. See: Pelipenko A.A. The subject and civilization after the Dualistic revolution // The subject's life spaces: Unity and multidimensionality of the subject-forming social evolution / Ed. by E.V. Sayko. M., 2004. pp. 187-228. [2] Jung K.-G. On the psychology of Eastern religions and philosophy.M., 1994.p. 130. [3] Cf. K.-G. Jung's remark that "The East cultivates the psychic aspect of primitiveness, coupled with an exorbitant amount of speculation": Jung K.-G. Decree.op. p. 133. [4] So according to the Rigveda, Purusha, as an unconditional and unchangeable entity, represents the whole world: the past and the future. From him is born the cosmic mind – Viraj, and from Viraj – Purusha in the aspect of the prototype of man. [5] "History has shown that in the life and culture of China, the primordial Confucianism, as if opposing Taoism, is essentially inseparable." Eidlin L.Z. On the history of the development of Chinese literature in the III-XIII centuries / The Study of Chinese literature in the USSR.M., 1973.p. 351. [6] Russell J.B. Satan. Perception of evil in the early Christian tradition.St. Petersburg, 2001.p. 32. [7] M.K. Trofimova writes about Gnostics: "Speaking of gnosis, we constantly have to resort to such expressions as experience, wholeness, the inseparability of the knower from the known. At first glance, all this surprisingly resembles our idea of primitive consciousness, reconstructing which scientists tend to see it in the subject-object separateness, its most essential quality." And further: "there was an attitude to overcome the rejection of the knower from the known. Gnostics (and not only them.– A.P.)wanted to get rid of this achievement of the analytical method of cognition, cursed it, associated it with the image of the world they hated, but, thinking about it, paid tribute to the very method of cognition from which they so persistently sought to escape. So, if such indivisibility was natural to me of primitive consciousness, experienced and not perceived from the outside, then for the Gnostics it turned into a desired goal, into a kind of antipode to their current existence." See: Trofimova M.K. Historical and philosophical issues of Gnosticism. M., 1979. p. 41. [8] "Strictly speaking, the Gnostic model was born from two opposite elements that suddenly took over the human mind. One of them is the fear of a split world, of a night that hid the light, of loneliness that brought a person back to himself. The second is the joyful freedom to create worlds, the single principle of creativity revealed to the individual, which turned him from an element of the social body into a creator of thought worlds, possessing will and realizing what until recently was considered the undivided secret of the gods. For the first time, a person felt like a carrier of creative, creative power, in other words, he realized himself as a Demiurge." (Sergeev K.V. Cognitive models and the formation of religious institutions: ancient protognosticism // Polis. 2002. No. 5. p. 91). [9] Burkhardt T. Sacred art of the East and West.Principles and methods.M., 1999.p. 146.	ISSN 2311-3723 Founder: OOO «Soglasie» publisher Publisher: Scientific Association of Culture Researchers Official registration № ЭЛ № ФС 77 – 56414 от 11.12.2013 The magazine is indexed: Issued quarterly in electronic form only *Issue produced by:* Editorial Director A. Flier Editor in Chief T. Glazkova Head of IT Center A. Lukyanov Our banner: Our e-mail: cultschool@gmail.com OUR PARTNERS:

	NEW ISSUE ABOUT EDITORS TO AUTORS ARCHIVE	РУС ENG
Разработка сайта Мнение редакции может не совпадать с мнением авторов. При полном или частичном использовании материалов ссылка на «Культуру культуры» обязательна. © Научная ассоциация исследователей культуры, 2014-2024