_Philosophical Aspects of Globalization_ is a collection of essays by leading contemporary Russian philosophers and scholars concerned with addressing pressing questions of globalization and its impact from a philosophical point of view.
Merab Mamarda?svili's lectures on the history of philosophy captured the attention of the Soviet intelligentsia in the 1970s and 1980s. This presentation will look at Mamarda?svili's work on the history of philosophy from the middle period of his career (1970s - early 1980s), with an emphasis on his lecture cycles on Kant and Descartes. The biographical-philosophical manner in which Mamarda?svili takes the lives and psychological stances of these two philosophers as primary source material stands out dramatically against the backdrop of (...) the official Soviet philosophical historiography on Kant and Descartes of the period during which Mamarda?svili lived and worked. (shrink)
Philosopher Merab Mamardashvili had multiple connections to the Soviet film industry, including the years he spent lecturing to cinema students in Moscow, and yet his work in this area has thus far been neglected by scholars of philosophy and cinema alike. In this article, I consider Mamardashvili’s most sustained remarks on film, including his use of the metaphor of the movie theatre and his commentary in The Aesthetics of Thinking on Vadim Abdrashitov and Aleksandr Mindadze’s The Train Stopped. Mamardashvili used (...) film as a metaphor for consciousness and described how film constructs an extended, empirical and psychological reality, a new space and time originating in itself, and which, if only for a couple hours, offers the experience of a “different regime of life than the one to which we are accustomed”. (shrink)
This volume explores the influence of the Socratic legacy on philosophy and literature in the Russian, East European, and Soviet contexts, including the work of Skovoroda, Radishchev, Herzen, Dostoevsky, Rozanov, Bely, Narbut, Bulgakov, and many others.
The End of Russian Philosophy describes and evaluates the troubled state of Russian philosophical thought in the post-Soviet decades. The book suggests that in order to revive philosophy as a universal, professional discipline in Russia, it may be necessary for Russian philosophy to first do away with the messianic traditions of the 19th century.
This article addresses the writing of the history of Russian philosophy from the first of such works—Archimandrite Gavriil’s Russian Philosophy [ Russkaja filosofija , 1840]—to philosophical histories/textbooks in the twenty-first century. In the majority of these histories, both past and present, we find a relentless insistence on the delineation of “characterizing traits” of Russian philosophy and appeals to “historiosophy,” where historiosophy is employed as being distinct from the historiographical method. In the 1990s and 2000s, the genre of the history of (...) Russian philosophy has grown increasingly conservative with regards to content, with histories from this period demonstrating an almost exclusive Orthodox focus. This conservatism, in turn, has contributed to widespread contention in recent years over the status of these philosophical textbooks—disagreements that often lead to either (1) further appeals to “historiosophical” methods; or (2) denials of the domestic philosophical tradition altogether, where the response to the query “Is there philosophy in Russia?” is emphatically negative. This article argues that the contemporary disputes over the development and preservation of the Russian philosophical canon are in many ways part of a larger debate over the roles of Orthodoxy and the history of philosophy in post-Soviet philosophical thought. (shrink)