Advertisement

Merab Mamardashvili: the concept of event and the post-secular situation of the twentieth century

  • Dmitry RyndinEmail author
Article

Abstract

This article discusses the “event” in Merab Mamardashvili’s philosophy. The roots of the post-secular interpretation of the event are traced back to Sören Kierkegaard’s concept of “the moment”, which is posited within a non-classical understanding of temporality and historicity of cognition. The concept of the “event” is also explored in the broader context of non-classical and post-secular Western philosophy of the twentieth century, especially in the works of Martin Heidegger and Jean-Luc Marion, who both belong to the phenomenological tradition. The concept of the event in Mamardashvili’s philosophy is explored as one relative to analogous conceptualizations of the event in a post-secular context.

Keywords

Event Post-secularity Phenomenology Epistemology Mamardashvili Kierkegaard 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Akhutin, A. (2009). V strane Mamardashvili. In Merab Konstantinovich Mamardashvili. Moskva: Rossiyskaya politicheskaya enciklopedia (ROSSPEN).Google Scholar
  2. Betz, J. R. (2008). After enlightenment: The post-secular vision of J. G. Hamann. Hoboken: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bibler, V. (1990). Vnutrennyaya rech’ ‘otkrytim tekstom’ (esli sootnesti Gegelya i Vygotskogo). In Ot naukouchniyak logike kulturi: Dva filosofskih vvedeniya v XXI vek. Moskva: Politizdat.Google Scholar
  4. Caputo, J. (2001). On religion. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Deleuze, G. (2000). Proust and signs. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  6. Deyanov, D. (2009). Mamardashvili i evropeyskaya filosofiya XX veka. In Merab Konstantinovich Mamardashvili. Moskva: Rossiyskaya politicheskaya enciklopedia (ROSSPEN).Google Scholar
  7. Falkenhayn, K. (2003). Augenblick und Kairos. Zeitlichkeit im Frühwerk Martin Heideggers. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  8. Faybishenko, V. (2013). Vstrecha s fenomenom: voploshenie I razvoploshenie.O nekotorih chertah fenomenologicheskogo proekta M.K. Mamardashvili. International Journal of Cultural Research, 3(12), 35–41.Google Scholar
  9. Gasparyan, D. (2013). Filosofiia soznaniia Meraba Mamardashvili. Moskva: Kanon+.Google Scholar
  10. Heidegger, M. (1995). Einleitung in die Phänomenologie der Religion. Gesamtausgabe 60. Frankfurt am Mein: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar
  11. Heidegger, M. (2002). Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  12. Ilyenkov, E. (1977). Dialectic logic: Essays on its history and theory. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Janicaud, D. (2000). The theological turn of French phenomenology. In Phenomenology and the “theological turn”. The French debate. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Kearney, R. (2009). Anatheism: Returning to god after god. New York City: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Kierkegaard, S. (2005). Zaklyuchitel’noe nenauchnoe posleslovie k filosofskim kroham. St. Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo S.-Peterburgskogo Universiteta.Google Scholar
  16. Kierkegaard, S. (2009). Filosofskie krohi, ili Krupitci mudrosti. Moskva: Institut filosofii, teologii I istorii Sv. Fomi.Google Scholar
  17. Konacheva, S. (2010). Bitiye. Svyashchennoe. Bog: Haidegger i filosofskaya teologiya 20-go veka. Moskva: RGGU.Google Scholar
  18. Levinas, E. (1994). Les imprévus de l’histoire. Fata Morgana: Fontfoid-le-Haut.Google Scholar
  19. Mamardashvili, M. K. (1989). Ideya preemstvennosti i filosofskaya tradiciya. https://www.mamardashvili.com/ru/merab-mamardashvili/publikacii-iz-arhiva/interview/ideya-preemstvennosti-i-filosofskaya-tradiciya. Accessed April 15, 2019.
  20. Mamardashvili, M. K. (1991). Filosof mozhet ne byt’ prorokom. https://www.mamardashvili.com/ru/merab-mamardashvili/publikacii-iz-arhiva/interview/filosof-mozhet-ne-byt-prorokom. Accessed April 15, 2019.
  21. Mamardashvili, M. K. (1992a). Fenomenologiyasoputstvuyushiy moment vsyakoy filosofii. In Kak ya ponimayu filosofiyu. Moskva: Izdatel’skaya gruppa “Progress”; “Kultura”.Google Scholar
  22. Mamardashvili, M. K. (1992b). Problema soznaniya i filosofskoe prizvanie. In Kak ya ponimayu filosofiyu. Moskva: Izdatel’skaya gruppa “Progress”; “Kultura”.Google Scholar
  23. Mamardashvili, M. K. (1993). Kartezianskie razmishleniya. Moskva: Izdatel’skaya gruppa “Progress”; “Kultura”.Google Scholar
  24. Mamardashvili, M. K. (1996). Neobhodimost’ sebya. Moskva: Labirint.Google Scholar
  25. Mamardashvili, M. K. (1997). Strela poznaniya (nabrosok estestvennoistoricheskoy gnoseologii). Moskva: Shkola “Yaziki russkoy kul’turi”.Google Scholar
  26. Mamardashvili, M. K. (2010). Klassicheskiy i neklassicheskiy ideali ratsional'nosti. In Klassicheskiy i neklassicheskiy ideali ratsional'nosti. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, Azbuka-Attikus.Google Scholar
  27. Mamardashvili, M. K. (2011a). Analiz soznaniya v rabotakh Marksa. In Formi i soderzhanie myshleniya. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, Azbuka-Attikus.Google Scholar
  28. Mamardashvili, M. K. (2011b). Prevrashchenie formi. In Formi i soderzhanie myshleniya. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, Azbuka-Attikus.Google Scholar
  29. Mamardashvili, M. K. (2011c). Evropeyskaya otvetstvennost’. In Soznanie i tsivilizatsiya. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, Azbuka-Attikus.Google Scholar
  30. Mamardashvili, M. K. (2014). Psihologicheskaya topologiya puti. Moskva: Fond Meraba Mamardashvili.Google Scholar
  31. Mamardashvili, M. K. (2015). Psihologicheskaya topologiya puti. Moskva: Fond Meraba Mamardashvili.Google Scholar
  32. Manoussakis, J. P. (2007). God after metaphysics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Manoussakis, J. P. (2009). The promise of the new and the tyranny of the same. In Phenomenology and eschatology. Not yet in the now. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  34. Marion, J.-L. (2002). Being given. Toward a phenomenology of givenness. Palo Alto, CA: Standford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Marion, J.-L. (2014). Nasishenniy fenomen. In (Post)fenomenologiya. Moskva: Akademichesky proekt.Google Scholar
  36. Marx, K. (2018). Kapital: kritika politicheskoy ekonomii. St. Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo «Palmira».Google Scholar
  37. Milbank, J. (2005). The sublime in Kierkegaard. In Post-secular philosophy. Between philosophy and theology. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Milbank, J. (2006). Theology and social theory. Hoboken: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Romano, C. (2017). Avantyura vremeni. Moskva: RIPOL Classic.Google Scholar
  40. Ryndin, D. (2015). Mamardashvili: Lekciya kak sobytie mysli. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 11/15.Google Scholar
  41. Saint Augustine. On the Trinity. http://www.logoslibrary.org/augustine/trinity/index.html. Accessed April 15, 2019.
  42. Silesius, A. (1932). The Cherubinic Wanderer (translated with an introduction by J. E. Crawford Flitch). London: G. Allen & Unwin Ltd.Google Scholar
  43. Solovyev, E. (2009). Ekzistencial’naya soteriologiya Meraba Mamardashvili. In Merab Konstantinovich Mamardashvili. Moskva: Rossiyskaya politicheskaya enciklopedia (ROSSPEN).Google Scholar
  44. Stewart, J. (2003). Kierkegaard’s relations to Hegel reconsidered. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Taylor, C. (2007). A secular age. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Thulstrup, N. (1980). Kierkegaard’s relation to Hegel.   New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Uzlaner, D. (2011). Vvedenie v postsekulyarnuyu filosofiyu. In Logos, #3 (82).Google Scholar
  48. Uzlaner, D. (2013). Kartografiya postsekulyarnogo. In Otechestvennie zapiski, #1(52).Google Scholar
  49. Voronina, N. (2003). Koncept “sobytiya” u Mamardahsvili i Deleza. http://www.phil63.ru/kontsept-sobytiya-u-m-mamardashvili-i-zh-deleza. Accessed April 15, 2019.
  50. Ward, K. (2008). Augenblick. The concept of the ‘decisive moment’ in 19th- and 20th-century western philosophy. New York: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Russian State University for the HumanitiesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations