Stanislaw Lem vs. Andrei Tarkovsky

Abstract

Tarkovsky recognizes these differences, saying that there is a contradiction with Lem's initial idea, because he was interested in the problems of inner life, spiritual problems, so to speak, and Lem was interested in the collision between man and Cosmos. In an ontological sense of the word, in the sense of the problem of knowing and the limits of this knowledge - it is about that. Lem even said that mankind was in danger, that there was a crisis of knowledge when man did not feels ... This crisis is growing, a snowball, takes the form of various human tragedies, including scientists.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Simulation, Simulacra and Solaris.Julian Haladyn & Miriam Jordan - 2010 - Film-Philosophy 14 (1):253-273.
Folke Tersman.Andrei Tarkovsky - 2008 - In Paisley Livingston & Carl R. Plantinga (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy and Film. Routledge. pp. 111.
Film as Symbol.Nikolaos Gkogkas - 2013 - Philosophical Inquiry 37 (3-4):78-85.
Cinematic Thinking and the Meaning of History.Natalia L. Rudychev - 2006 - International Studies in Philosophy 38 (1):141-148.
Comparative Study between Heidegger's Thought and Tarkovsky's Cinema.Seyyed Mahdi Mousavinejad & Mohammad Rraayat Jahromi - 2018 - Journal of Philosophical Investigations at University of Tabriz 12 (23):157-174.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-01-25

Downloads
247 (#77,609)

6 months
61 (#67,519)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Nicolae Sfetcu
Romanian Academy

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations