'Sacral and technical: image of the boundaries of cultural pluralities' Philosophy and Culture nbpublish.com
Please select your language to translate the article

You can just close the window to don't translate
Your profile

Gibelev I.V. Sacral and technical: image of the boundaries of cultural pluralities

Published in journal "Philosophy and Culture", 2016-11 in rubric "Philosophy and culture", pages 1583-1588.

Resume: The discussion of cultural pluralities causes difficulties in cultural philosophy, as well as philosophical anthropology, because the ontological status of plurality eludes the explaining and understanding examination. In such case, the criticism remains comprehensible. The positive interpretation will be considered accomplished, if concentrate on the boundaries of cultural pluralities. Explication of the phenomenon of boundary in the space of cultural pluralities is associated with understanding of interrelation between the sacral and technical spaces. They are subject to examination in the post-historical horizon, which change the ontological status of their boundary if compared to the classical culture. The two given by Aristotle fundamental definitions of boundary (boundary as differentiation-synthesis and boundary-limit) transform the connection between the technique and sacral into the hybrid unity. The scientific novelty consists in the attempt of a positive review of the cultural pluralities, formed by the intersection of sacral and technical spaces within modern culture. Such original spaces require the determination of a specific scale of their analysis. As the scale and simultaneously mechanism of the analysis, the author uses the concept of boundary. The work provides the description of a number of phenomenological signs of the boundary between the sacral and technical.

Keywords: Post-apocalypse, Post-history, Technical, Sacral, Cultural plurality, Plurality, Machine and apparatus, Ontological status of the boundary, Phenomenology of the boundary, Boundary

DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2016.11.17677

This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

Steinbock A. Limit-Phenomena and the Liminality of Experience. Thopos. 2009. no 2-3, pp. 192-213.
Aristotle. Metaphysics. M.: Exmo. 2006. 608p.
Nancy J.-L. Being Singular Plural. Mn.: Logvinov. 2004. 272p.
Gehlen A. On Cultural Crystallization (electronic book) Available at: socionavtika.narod.ru/Staty/Methodologos/gelen1.htm (accessed 17 January 2016)
Bultmann R. History and Eschatology: The Presence of Eternity. M.: Kanon+ ROOI Reabilitatcia. 2012. 208p.
Bibikhin V. The philosophy language. M.: Yazyki slavianskoy kultury. 2002. 416p.
Agamben G. The Open: Man and Animal. M.: RSUH. 2012. 112p.
Kassung Ch. The device-is not a hock. Logos. no 1(74). 2010. pp. 164-172.
Marion J.-L. The Idol and Distance. Symbol. no 56. 2009. pp. 1-290.
Bataille G. Inner Experience. SPb.: Axioma, Mythril. 1997. 336p.
Habermas J. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. M.: Ves Mir. 2003. 416p.
Zenkin S. Undivine sacred: Theory and artistic practice. M.: RSUH. 2012. 537p.
Samsonow E. Body, machine and art. Interview with Prof. Elisbeth von Samsonov. Chora. no 1-2. 2010. pp. 150-156.
Foucault M. Intellectuals and power. Selected Political articles, speeches and interviews. M.: Praxis. 2006. 320p.
Kris Kuksi official site (electronic resource) Available at: http://kuksi.com/ (accessed 15 January 2016).
Estetico (electronic journal) Available at: estetico.me/posts/view/mrachnyj-assambljazh (accessed 15 January 2016).

Correct link to this article:
just copy this link to clipboard