The article deals with the development of E.Minkowski’s concept of «morbid rationalism», as a cause of the alienation of consciousness from lived experience, by his followers R.D. Laing and J.Gabel. R.D. Laing considers the existential alienation as the alienation of the «false» or «outer self» from the «true,» or «inner self.» According to Laing, «false self» forms in the process of socialization as a socially acceptable image of thyself, which gradually suppresses and supersedes the true image. According to J.Gabel, the (...) concept of the «morbid rationalism» should be extended to the «normal» state of a person, who doesn’t live, but leads an alienated reified existence as a thing, instrument, and social function. Both Laing and Gabel agree, that the «norm» is only a socially legalized form of alienation, while psychopathology is all, that differs from the first one. But if Laing considers schizophrenia to be the way to freedom from social masks, to return to the true self, for Minkowski schizophrenia, as a rebellion of existence against the violence of reason, is not a solution. So, the way out is not in the destruction of the subject, but in overcoming the alienation of one's consciousness from the world and people, in transcending one's partial «ego». Marcel and Minkowski overcome the dichotomy of consciousness-vs-the-world (and-vs-body), seeking to bother the person with his consciousness. They return consciousness to the body, treating man not simply as embodied consciousness, but as the oneness of body-existence-consciousness-spirit. And in this way, the absolutization of freedom is an obstacle. A person involved in the world (bodily, sensual), and in humanity (existentially, spiritually) - inevitably depends on them. (shrink)

Актуальність статті полягає в конкретному аналізі екзистенціального повороту, який відбувається у філософській думці в ситуації війни. Наводиться критика суб’єкт-об’єктної дихотомії в думці Г. Марселя і Є. Мінковського. Вводяться в науковий обіг досі маловідомі тексти засновника феноменологічної психіатрії Євгена Мінковського. Його ідеї випадіння людини з екзистенційного контексту особливо актуальні сьогодні, коли людина здебільшого випадає з дійсного життя у віртуальну реальність. Автор статті вважає необхідним актуалізувати важливі ідеї Мінковського про «життєвий контакт з реальністю», «час, що проживається» й «особистісний порив».

Purpose. To examine the existential anthropology of G. Marcel and E. Minkowski, in order to demonstrate the necessity of distinguishing the universal-spiritual, as human in human being, apart from the individual-existential in him, and to reveal the hierarchical correlation of biosocial, existential and spiritual spheres in personality. Theoretical basis. Within existential philosophy the author differentiates two separate traditions and proceeds from the insufficiency of the distinction of existential sphere, proposed by phenomenological tradition, showing the necessity of its correlation with the (...) spiritual sphere as a sphere of humanity, proposed by non-phenomenological tradition of G. Marcel and E. Minkowski. Originality. The author presents the anthropological conception of G. Marcel and E. Minkowski, in which human personality is understood as unity of individual-existential and universal-spiritual, which requires a special trans-empirical field of culture, which contains senses, images and symbols of humanity. Also, the author presents the recent developments of existential thinkers in distinguishing existential and spiritual dimensions, both not reducible to the physical and social dimensions. Conclusions. In both existential traditions, the specifically human was founded as a trans-biological and trans-social phenomenon, which appears as indefinable and non-predetermined. But in first tradition, humanity is understood as an existence, as a unique individuality, "project", variant of humanity, equivalent to other variants, and universal is understood as a community of human condition in the world. While in the second tradition, the universal is understood as spiritual. Thus, horizontal level of our private existence, as the process of movement from birth to death, is supplemented by vertical of human, universal ideals and images. Humanity appears as a task, on the way to which human being transcends beyond the limits of his individual "self" to the "super-individual", through inclusion into spiritual community, into universal culture. (shrink)

У статті зіставляються онтологічна установка Бергсона й гносеологічна – Гуссерля щодо істини й шляхів її пізнання. Виявляється відмінність у розумінні інтуїції, а саме: як супраінтелектуальної – за Бергсоном, і як інтелектуальної – за Гуссерлем, а також тієї сутності (ейдоса), яку вона має схоплювати. Обґрунтовується наявність бергсонівського варіанта «редукції», яка, на відміну від гуссерлівської, здійснюється як припинення роботи аналітичної рефлексії. Досліджуються шляхи переосмислення Е.Мінковським і Г.Марселем інтуїції та редукції як її умови.

The main purpose of this article is to prove that one can become a personality only through culture. The authors propose to regard culture as a relatively autonomous spiritual sphere, which transcends the narrow requirements of the concrete society in its historical limitations. They argue that personality is the highest level of human development to emerge in culture, whereas the level of a biosocial organism is provided by society. The authors claim that only culture, be it religious or secular, contains (...) an existential and spiritual imperative which demands each human being to realize one’s own potential humanity. They explain why in a postmodern world culture becomes an “existential choice” of each human being, depending on one’s free will: to inherit the culture, to become a human being of humanity or not. In the Free school of philosophy and culture seminars, the authors propose to enter the field of culture through the mutual interpretation of a chosen masterpiece of world literature and to link its message with our lives. (shrink)