Suchergebnisse

The article presents the experience of revealing N. Fedorov's philosophical system through an appeal to the theme and image of Easter. It is shown that for Fedorov Easter is the Central category of the philosophy of active Christianity and at the same time a symbol of fundamentally new choice of civilization. The connection between Fedorov's anthropology, ontology, and ethics and the Easter dogma is revealed. The lines of Fedorov's criticism of the anti-Paschal consciousness and the anti-Paschal vector of the world that has lost faith in the reality of the Resurrection of Christ are considered. It is emphasized that appealing to the Paschal dogma, according to which Christ rose in the fullness of two natures (divine and human), Fedorov brings the idea of divine-human synergy to the eschatological plan, extending it to the promise of the resurrection of all the dead. The symbolism of the Easter service Fedorov considers as the origin to such concepts as «extra-temple Liturgy» and «extra-temple Easter» It is shown that the category of paschality in Fedorov's philosophy correlates with the literary and philosophical tradition and simultaneously sets an active and projective understanding of Easter, which influenced the development of the resurrection theme in literature and philosophical thought in the last quarter of the XIX–XX centuries (F.М. Dostoevsky, V. Solovyov, S. Bulgakov, V.V. Mayakovsky, A. Platonov, B. Pasternak, et al).

The work of F.M. Dostoevsky is considered a kind of ideological and artistic precedence of Russian thought that was formed in Russia in the last quarter of the XIX century and was called "Russian cosmism". The importance of Dostoevsky's ideas and images in the formation of ontology, anthropology, ethics, historiosophy, eschatology of Russian cosmism is shown. The revolt of Dostoevsky's heroes against the idea of the thermal death of the universe stimulated cosmist philosophers to create the idea of the antientropic essence of human life and work. The writer's idea of Christ as the "ideal of man in the flesh" and his belief in the Incarnation of God are explained on the basis of the idea of moral interpretation of dogma peculiar to the writer and cosmist philosophers. It is shown that Dostoevsky, like Russian cosmists, represents the world and man from the point of view of deontology, in the light of what they should be. He is one of the forerunners of the idea of history as a work of salvation, the development of which was given by N.F. Fedorov and Christian cosmists.

С учетом новых фактических данных рассмотрен духовно-творческий диалог писателя и мыслителя М.М. Пришвина и философа, поэта А.К. Горского, разворачивавшийся с 1922 по 1943 г. Предложенное Горским прочтение «Философии общего дела» Н.Ф. Федорова в свете современности, стремление расширить на ее основе идеал строительства нового мира, мысль о глубинном единстве христианского подвига и «подвига искусства», идея творческого преображения эроса находят живую реакцию в дневниках Пришвина, встречаясь с его собственными размышлениями об эросе и поле, перспективах большевизма и «общем деле» воскрешения отцов. Рассмотрена интерпретация Горским романа «Кащеева цепь» в контексте кризиса символизма и поиска новых путей жизнетворческого действия, опирающегося на идеи активного христианства. Показано, что Пришвин для Горского воплощает тип художника-вестника, восходящего от «адамизма» к «литургизму», а Горский для Пришвина – тип христианского деятеля, который преодолевает косность официального православия, его пассивность и уклон в потусторонность. Выявлена эволюция отношения Пришвина к тезису Горского о необходимости трансформации советской идеологии на основе «Философии общего дела» (принятие этого тезиса в 1920-е гг., спор с ним в эпоху репрессий, возвращение к идее религиозно-нравственного обновления коммунизма в годы Великой Отечественной войны). В отличие от Горского, стремящегося высказать свое слово, Пришвин в конце 1930-х гг. избирает позицию «молчания», понимая это молчание как род подспудного действия.

The article is the first part of the study of the problem of spiritual and creative dialogue between the founder of Russian symbolism V.Y. Bryusov and the philosopher of common cause N.F. Fedorov. In the works of Russian and foreign researchers, this dialogue was studied by V.Y. Bryusov, in terms of the poet's interest in cosmic themes, in the context of his theory of scientific poetry. In this study, the focus is on the question of the meaning and purpose of art. For the first time, with the involvement of new, including archival sources, the reaction of N.F. Fedorov to the meeting with V.Ya. Bryusov, held on April 20, 1900 in the house of Yu.P. Bartenev, is considered, it is shown how the ideological dispute that arose during this meeting was reflected in the late work of the philosopher. The content of the dispute and the interrelation of its two themes – the possibility/impossibility of overcoming death and the attitude to the ideas of F. Nietzsche are revealed. Fragments of articles and notes written by N.F. Fedorov, in which his dispute with V.Y. Bryusov is mentioned, are analyzed. N.F. Fedorov's perception of decadence is reconstructed, the philosophical complex of which, as well as the ideas of the new religious consciousness, the philosopher associated with the spiritual crisis of the fin de siècle era, contrasting them with the idea of active Christianity, man's cooperation with God in history. It is shown how N.F. Fedorov's liturgical aesthetics is formed in the polemic with Nietzschean aesthetics and decadence aesthetics, in the center of which is the image of art as an extra-temple liturgy. The relation of N.F. Fedorov to the current of symbolism, to which he opposed the religious understanding of the symbol, is considered.