MAIN PAGE
> Back to contents
Culture and Art
Reference:
Donskikh, O. A.
HORROR ZIVILIZATIONIS
or the Horror of Subjectivity
// Culture and Art.
2015. № 1.
P. 7-15.
URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=65877
Donskikh, O. A. HORROR ZIVILIZATIONIS
or the Horror of Subjectivity
Abstract:
The article is devoted to the relationship between culture and civilization. Within the framework
of the research, civilization is interpreted as the external expression of culture while culture is the
content of civilization. Culture and civilization develop in different directions because civilization moves
towards the greatest possible objectivity while culture develops retaining its subjective nature. This creates
a growing tension in the relationship between civilization and culture. Civilization does not try to get rid of
subjectivity, however, natural or socio-humanitarian sciences are unable to offer ways to do it. The present
article was written based on the analysis and synthesis of the terms ‘culture’, ‘civilization’ and ‘subjectivity’
in the history of science. The author of the article also uses the method of rising from the abstract to the
concrete. The author offers his own definition of the term ‘subjectivity’ in terms of the relationship between
culture and civilization. According to the author, the ‘building’ of modern civilization is built upon the outrageous
discrepancy between the speeding movement towards the globalized humanity (following the way of
technological progress that involves the society and human himself and transforms the latter into an objective
and controlled element) and the level of understanding the nature of this movement.
Keywords:
Horror zivilizationis, civilization, culture, subjectivity, progress, natural sciences, socio-humanitarian sciences, noosphere, technical development, rationality.
This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article
This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here
.
References
1. Parsons T. O strukture sotsial'nogo deystviya. — M.: Akademicheskiy Proekt, 2000.-880 s.
2. Kun T. Struktura nauchnykh revolyutsiy. M.: Progress, 1977. – 300 s.
3. Kondorse Zh.A. Eskiz istoricheskoy kartiny progressa chelovecheskogo razuma. // URL: http://larevolution.ru/books/Condorcet-5.html.
4. Gurevich P.S. Plenitel'noe mertsanie tsivilizatsii // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2014.-10.-C. 1389-1392. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2014.10.13119.
5. Gol'bakh P.A. Sistema prirody // Pol' Anri Gol'bakh. Izbrannye proizvedeniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 1. M.: Izd-vo sots-ek. lit-ry, 1963.-715 s.
6. Viner N. Ya – matematik. M.: Nauka, 1964-354 s.
7. Vernadskiy V.I. Neskol'ko slov o noosfere (1944) // URL: http://vernadsky.lib.ru/e-texts/archive/noos.html
8. Bulgakov S.N. Filosofiya khozyaystva. M.: Institut russkoy tsivilizatsii, 2009-464 s.
9. Vernadskiy V.I. Filosofskie mysli naturalista. M.: Nauka, 1988.-520 s.
10. Smit A. Issledovanie o prirode i prichinakh bogatstva narodov // URL: http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adam-smith/wealth-nations.pdf
11. Khaydegger M. Vopros o tekhnike // Martin Khaydegger Vremya i bytie. M.: Respublika, 1993. – 447 s.
Link to this article
You can simply select and copy link from below text field.
|