The article considers the approaches to theodicy’s problem of Russian and German philosophers with clear religious orientation: Nikolai Alexandrovich Berdyaev and Max Scheler. However, for more explicit insight into our topic we found, the article provides the general overview of theodicy tradition. Standpoints of these thinkers living in different epochs are linked by the steady belief in a reasonability of the world created by God. The main obstacle to acceptance of this argumentation is the problem of evil’s existence. The (...) way of thinking that has the goal to demonstrate the world’s perfectness presumes either necessity of evil as a mean or the evil’s insignificance or even its illusiveness, which is the result of “too human” perspective. Such ways of thought have become impossible since the second half of 19th century, when the concrete person’s experience had been recognized as a main source of philosophy. In Russian culture, this attitude became widespread after F.M. Dostoevsky, in German culture – after F. Nietzsche. Berdyaev and Scheler inherit the impulse of their thought. Distinctive feature of religious philosophies of Berdyaev and Scheler is conceptualization of the assertion of God’s need in human being, for God is in the process of becoming, is in the inner move toward full self-realization. And human being, who is capable to adopt or to reject the God’s “call,” is the crucial stage of God’s formation. For this tradition of theodicy, exactly human creative act and the direction of this act have the main role in world history. (shrink)

Peter Abelard (1079–1142 ce) was the most wide‐ranging philosopher of the twelfth century. He quickly established himself as a leading teacher of logic in and near Paris shortly after 1100. After his affair with Heloise, and his subsequent castration, Abelard became a monk, but he returned to teaching in the Paris schools until 1140, when his work was condemned by a Church Council at Sens. His logical writings were based around discussion of the “Old Logic”: Porphyry's Isagoge, aristotle'S Categories and (...) On Interpretation and boethius'S textbook on topical inference. They comprise a freestanding Dialectica (“Logic”; probably c.1116), a set of commentaries (known as the Logica [Ingredientibus], c. 1119) and a later (c. 1125) commentary on the Isagoge (Logica Nostrorum Petititoni Sociorum or Glossulae). In a work Abelard called his Theologia, issued in three main versions (between 1120 and c.1134), he attempted a logical analysis of trinitarian relations and explored the philosophical problems surrounding God's claims to omnipotence and omniscience. The Collationes (“Debates,” also known as “Dialogue between a Christian, a Philosopher and a Jew”; probably c.1130) present a rational investigation into the nature of the highest good, in which the Christian and the Philosopher (who seems to be modeled on a philosopher of pagan antiquity) are remarkably in agreement. The unfinished Scito teipsum (“Know thyself,” also known as the “Ethics”; c.1138) analyses moral action. (shrink)

This article analyzes Nikolai Berdyaev’s ideas concerning the spiritual origins of the 1917 Russian revolution. The philosopher believed that its sources were “demons” living in the Russian national spirit, discovered and awakened in the works of the Russian classics, such as Nikolai Gogol, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, and Leo Tolstoy. The main reason these demons were able to take hold of the Russian national consciousness was the collapse of everyday life, and the false orientation of this consciousness toward a violent establishment (...) of a new social order. This order attempted to create a moral of equality and fair distribution of property, while lacking a religious-metaphysical foundation. Berdyaev’s views are compared with the contemporary realities in Russia at the time and the search for a resolution to the deep sociopolitical and moral contradictions inherent in these realities. (shrink)

Western political thought during the past two centuries has been inspired by a dream of liberation that has left it prey to ideological visions of utopia. Various attempts have been made to counteract this vulnerability, but one of the most ambitious has been relatively neglected. This is the use of the tragic vision to emphasize the limits imposed upon political action by the existence of ineliminable tensions inherent in the human condition. What is of especial interest in this connection is (...) the attempt made by Nikolai Berdyaev to bring the tragic vision to bear on the reformulation of socialism in particular. The article explores the strengths and weaknesses of his tragic version of socialism. (shrink)

Philosophical aspects of belief and ancestor worship in Southern Vietnam.

This article provides a brief analysis of the life, work, and character of Nikolai Berdyaev. He is described as both a captive and apologist of freedom, and as an influential representative of existential personalism.

Introduction. The technocratization that a person faces in the current reality, along with increased life comfort, has also brought with it a clear threat to changing the status of a person in the world irrevocably. In the discourse of modern posthumanistic philosophy, attempts are being made not to annul the privileges of a person, but to extend them to the whole world, that is, to make suffering, the ability to question, subjectivity and other characteristics of a person belong to everyone. (...) The Russian philosophical tradition of questioning about man throughout its existence denied and continues to deny the deanthropologization of the world and seeks to conduct a discourse about man as one who is ontologically not equal to the world and cannot be forced out of the privileged position he occupies. -/- The purpose of the article is to touch upon the most interesting, in the author’s opinion, works existing in the world research field concerning the philosophical understanding of the “Legend of the Grand Inquisitor”, as well as to develop her own idea, which is based on an attempt to philosophically and anthropologically refract the “Legend” and to show that it bears the features of precisely Russian philosophical thought and radically denies the deanthropological tendencies of Western thought, arising from its internal logic and naturally leading it to nullify the privileged position of man in the world, and to demonstrate the possibilities that the Russian philosophical tradition provides for overcoming the anthropological catastrophe, which is so widely discussed today. -/- Methods. The main method of the research is a comparative philosophical and literary analysis of the works of F. M. Dostoevsky, V. V. Rozanov, N. A. Berdyaev, S. L. Frank, A. Camus, Z. Freud, I. Neifeld, G. Hesse, as well as a point reference to the works of K. N. Leontiev, S. N. Bulgakov, N. O. Lossky and V. S. Solovyov. These types of analysis are aimed at identifying connotations and discrepancies in the philosophical systems of the studied thinkers, both at the level of textual analysis of their works, and at the level of studying their concepts. Textual analysis is used as an additional method. The author of the article gives a conscious preference to the comparative method, as such, which serves to achieve the purpose of the article. -/- Scientific novelty of the research. The paper focuses on comparing attempts to conceptualize a person in the discourse of Russian and European thought. As exemplified by a number of representatives of the Russian and Western intellectual traditions, as well as a comparative analysis of their concepts. The article attempts to reflect the deep difference between the two anthropologies. In addition, the author makes an attempt to find in the philosophy of F. M. Dostoevsky those deep anthropological problems that are of a universal nature, and have found their understanding, both in the Russian and in the European philosophical tradition. -/- Results. The author explores the anthropological configurations of the philosophies of the chosen thinkers. The article analyzes both Russian and European attempts to ask about a person, focusing their attention on interpreting the “Legend of the Grand Inquisitor”, which is part of the last novel by the Russian writer and thinker F. M. Dostoevsky. -/- Conclusions. Russian philosophical thought, which is rooted in the Gospel tradition of comprehending man, is characterized by attempts to see person as finite, which contains the infinite. Russian philosophy in its ideas continues to defend man, his existential uniqueness and subjectivity, guaranteed by God. At the same time, European philosophy is on the path of development, in the process of which a person risks losing the privileges of existence, a posthuman, a superhuman is conceptualized, and a tendency is outlined to blur the border between a human and non-human entities. (shrink)

Classical work on Hindu cosmology by Huccaṇṇa, 16th century Kannada author.

Author's answers to questions on Buddhist philosophy, posed to him by some foreign scholars.

Jung's Philosophy and Tibetan Buddhism: Western and Eastern Paths to the Heart. Radmila Moacanin. Wisdom, London 1986. 160 pp. £5.95.

Today's medical students are being confronted with ethical situations of far greater complexity than were their predecessors and yet the medical education system does little to prepare students for the ethical dilemmas which they inevitably face when entering the hospital environment. The following article addresses the issues surrounding a case where a patient has told a student in confidence of his plans to commit suicide. What should the student do? The only way for the student to prevent death is by (...) breaking confidentiality because the student has insufficient clinical experience to provide adequate guidance. However, this requires ignoring the patient's right to autonomy, a right enshrined in both case law and medical ethics. Clearly the student's ethical, moral and legal position must be carefully evaluated. (shrink)

Introduction. N. A. Berdyaev’s many-sided philo- sophical interests and his indefatigability in creative activity contributed to the development of an original worldview system, in which eschatological ideas were the basic part. The authors consider the assessment of these ideas by the outstanding his- torian of Russian philosophy V.V. A. Berdyaev, the significance of which is enhanced due to the fact that it was given not only by a historian of thought, but also by the creator of his own (...) and generally complete philosophical system, based, like the philosophy of N. A. Berdyaev, on the ideological foundation of Orthodoxy. The purpose of the study. The authors attempt to identify the causes and motives for the discrepancy between N. A. Berdyaev’s eschatological ideas and the traditional Christian understanding of the “end of history”, which V. V. Zenkovsky strictly adhered to. Methods. As a general philosophical methodology, the authors use a personalistic approach, which was followed by both N. A. Berdyaev and V. V. Zenkovsky. The main premise of this approach is to affirm the free-creative activity of a person who, following his inner impulses is capable of changing the surrounding reality, both social and natural. The study also uses general scientific methods — analy- sis, synthesis, comparison, generalization. Scientific novelty of the research. The authors’ conclusions regarding the fact that N. A. Berdyaev did not overcome the evolutionist historiosophical paradigm, which has retained its significance in Russian metaphysics since the publication of the early works of V. S. Solovyov, the founder of this direction, have scientific novelty. Results. The eschatology of N. A. Berdyaev should be considered transitional from immanent (evolu- tionary) to transcendent, since elements of panthe- ism were preserved in it. V. V. Zenkovsky drew attention to this, noting that the entire religious world of N. A. Berdyaev bears the “fatal seal” of religious immanentism. Due to the inconsistency of his beliefs with the general worldview of Christian transcendentism, which never essentially brought the Creator and creation closer together, V.V. Zenkovsky avoided assessing N.A. Berdyaev as an Orthodox philosopher. (shrink)

Work on Sankhya system in Hindu philosophy; includes commentaries.

The object of this paper is creativity as a cultural philosophical and historical-philosophical phenomenon. The subject of the research is the substantiation of the essence of creativity by Russian religious philosophy on the example of the doctrine of V.S. Solovyov and N.A. Berdyaev. The aim of this research is to identify and articulate the key semantic constructs of creativity from the positions of the above-mentioned thinkers. The article also explores ideas about the nature of creativity and the specific features (...) of a creative subject through the prism of relevant concepts of a socio-humanitarian orientation. A brief historical and philosophical excursion into the understanding of the ontological essence of creativity is carried out, modern ontological concepts of creativity are revealed and an existentially oriented concept of creativity is proposed. The theoretical basis of the research is the original works of V.S. Solovyov and N.A. Berdyaev, as well as various commenting scientific sources. The methodological foundation of the research is a comparative analysis and a method of contextual vision of creativity. The main result of the conducted research is the articulation of key aspects of the understanding of creativity by V.S. Solovyov and N.A. Berdyaev. It is shown that for the first philosopher, the central task of creativity is the spiritualization of the material world through the realization of the unity of Goodness, Truth and Beauty, while the second thinker considers the main mission of creativity to be the establishment of a fundamentally different spiritual being by the subject. The scientific novelty of the research also lies in the comparative characterization of the concepts of creativity of these thinkers in terms of essence, tasks, meaning, material, sources, functions, result and other structural aspects. (shrink)

Treatise with auto-commentary on Dvaita philosophy.

The paper compares two intellectual traditions, that is, psychoanalysis and Russian philosophy. As a result, it demonstrates the kinship of the main methodological principles of both of these two trends of thinking in twentieth century. First, a psychoanalytic image of the Russian type of cognition is set - this is an existentially loaded experience of asking the truth, carried out by a person from the people. In culture, this image is presented as an agent of truth, usually in need. The (...) following demonstrates the attitude to this image in the work and personal way of knowing N.A. Berdyaev. In this part of the article, a psychoanalytic study of the work of the Russian philosopher is done. In particular, the neurotic nature of N. Berdyaevs letter, which is expressed in the excessive emotionality of the text and the prophetic emphasis, which sets the tone throughout his work, is noted. The main part of the article is devoted to the analysis of the intuitive-symbolic method of working with consciousness in the psychoanalysis of Freud and the philosophy of Berdyaev. Here the author emphasizes the practical side of the psychoanalysis and to how an emotionally and bodily tinted meaning arises in that context. This phenomenological reconstruction allows us to draw a parallel with what constitutes a symbol in the tradition of Russian religious thought, which also notes the experienced nature of the work of obtaining the meaning of a symbolic utterance. In this perspective, the author conducts a hermeneutic reconstruction of the continuity of the method of these two traditions from mystical Christian theology, in which the knowledge of God is understood as a passionately lived experience of communication with the Other, which occupies the status of a lover. This article represents the initial stage of a more detailed study of the relationship between psychoanalysis and Russian philosophy. (shrink)

This book overviews how different special sciences could be applied in everyday life. The book was published as part of a nonfiction agricultural series written and edited in part by Nikolai Borodin (1861-1937). In the pre-revolutionary period, Borodin and fellow scholar B. Bakhmetiev visted the USA to obtain a loan and ensure the execution of order for supply of military and agricultural equipment. During the Civil War Borodin joined the White movement and Kolchak's government which sent him to the United (...) States to purchase the agricultural machinery and equipment for educational institutions in Sberia. When the Bolsheviks won the war, Borodin remained abroad. (shrink)