Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


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

Back to contents

Culture and Art
Reference:

Donskikh, O. A. HORROR ZIVILIZATIONIS or the Horror of Subjectivity

Abstract: The article is devoted to the relationship between culture and civilization. Within the framework of the research, civilization is interpreted as the external expression of culture while culture is the content of civilization. Culture and civilization develop in different directions because civilization moves towards the greatest possible objectivity while culture develops retaining its subjective nature. This creates a growing tension in the relationship between civilization and culture. Civilization does not try to get rid of subjectivity, however, natural or socio-humanitarian sciences are unable to offer ways to do it. The present article was written based on the analysis and synthesis of the terms ‘culture’, ‘civilization’ and ‘subjectivity’ in the history of science. The author of the article also uses the method of rising from the abstract to the concrete. The author offers his own definition of the term ‘subjectivity’ in terms of the relationship between culture and civilization. According to the author, the ‘building’ of modern civilization is built upon the outrageous discrepancy between the speeding movement towards the globalized humanity (following the way of technological progress that involves the society and human himself and transforms the latter into an objective and controlled element) and the level of understanding the nature of this movement.


Keywords:

Horror zivilizationis, civilization, culture, subjectivity, progress, natural sciences, socio-humanitarian sciences, noosphere, technical development, rationality.


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

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Parsons T. O strukture sotsial'nogo deystviya. — M.: Akademicheskiy Proekt, 2000.-880 s.
2. Kun T. Struktura nauchnykh revolyutsiy. M.: Progress, 1977. – 300 s.
3. Kondorse Zh.A. Eskiz istoricheskoy kartiny progressa chelovecheskogo razuma. // URL: http://larevolution.ru/books/Condorcet-5.html.
4. Gurevich P.S. Plenitel'noe mertsanie tsivilizatsii // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2014.-10.-C. 1389-1392. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2014.10.13119.
5. Gol'bakh P.A. Sistema prirody // Pol' Anri Gol'bakh. Izbrannye proizvedeniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 1. M.: Izd-vo sots-ek. lit-ry, 1963.-715 s.
6. Viner N. Ya – matematik. M.: Nauka, 1964-354 s.
7. Vernadskiy V.I. Neskol'ko slov o noosfere (1944) // URL: http://vernadsky.lib.ru/e-texts/archive/noos.html
8. Bulgakov S.N. Filosofiya khozyaystva. M.: Institut russkoy tsivilizatsii, 2009-464 s.
9. Vernadskiy V.I. Filosofskie mysli naturalista. M.: Nauka, 1988.-520 s.
10. Smit A. Issledovanie o prirode i prichinakh bogatstva narodov // URL: http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adam-smith/wealth-nations.pdf
11. Khaydegger M. Vopros o tekhnike // Martin Khaydegger Vremya i bytie. M.: Respublika, 1993. – 447 s.