September 15, 1930, Merab Konstantinovich Mamardashvili was born in Gori- philosopher, doctor of philosophical sciences (1970), professor (1972).
Merab Mamardashvili is an outstanding philosopher of the second half of the 20th century. Brilliantly educated, he spoke five European languages, which he learned himself - his talent was amazing. The main topic of the scientist's research was the phenomenon of consciousness. Philosophizing Mamardashvili, at times, was called "Socratic". He gave many lectures, but during his lifetime his work was almost never published. Nevertheless, they significantly influenced the development of independent philosophical thought in Russia.
In life, in human communication, Merab was extremely artistic and light - nothing from the traditional image of a biscuit-philosopher. With his own being, he asserted the characteristic given to him by the Georgian character: “I would call it a talent, or the talent of illegal joy ... This is a special kind of tragedy, which contains an absolute formal prohibition to burden others, those around, with your tragedy ... A ringing note of joy, as a challenge to fate and misfortune. There is one such experience: Georgian ”.
Yuri Vachnadze
Merab Mamardashvili was practically never published during his lifetime, but he influenced a whole generation of Soviet intellectuals "by airborne droplets" - he lectured and held meetings. He considered philosophy to be thinking aloud. “This is one of the reasons why he was compared to Socrates,” explains Nelly Motroshilova, author of a book on Mamardashvili's philosophy.
“He is known mainly not for the books he wrote, but he wrote them. But they were reluctant to publish it. Or they didn't print at all. And then he chose such a wonderful genre of lectures. The lectures were in supervised Moscow and in other cities. But all of Moscow, as they say, came to them. And there were also institutions that provided him with a tribune. "
Nelly Motroshilova.
Paola and Mamardashvili were bound by an inner understanding of life. Perhaps she, too, was a grateful listener, because she could hardly support controversy about deep philosophical ideas. In philosophical disputes, it is imperative to be partly Georgian, because a Georgian begins the game in conversation with the word "ara". That means no, and then whatever you think. That is, you need to resist.
In audience number one - at the Higher Directing Courses - Vladimir Khotinenko is teaching a lesson. Once upon a time, he studied within the same walls. One of the teachers was Merab Mamardashvili. Khotinenko is sure that anyone who communicated with this philosopher for more than five minutes left a mark on his soul. He taught me not to live by quotations, I taught to think.
“He never said, 'Let's think about it, guys.' Nothing. In practice, this is a perfect example of a living example. When you see how he thinks, and you like it, and you use this as an example. It is impossible even to show it. It was an absolutely wonderful pleasure when you see how an unusual thought is born. "
Vladimir Khotinenko.
Once there was such an influx of Mamardashvili's lectures that the crowd was dispersed by the mounted police. Extraordinary, uncomfortable, thinker.
At his lectures, Mamardashvili, with an intonation and a voice rich in overtones, like sirens from ancient Greek myths, gradually, gradually fascinated the audience, luring them into the unknown jungle of consciousness. Something similar happened at one time at the concerts of the great pianist Sofronitsky.
Yuri Vachnadze
Merab Mamardashvili said: "Philosophy is freedom, consciousness is freedom". He taught a lesson on how to think freely in a society full of prohibitions.
Merab Mamardashvili, late 1970s
Tbilisi, Vake quarter, near the university. House of Stalinist architecture, but animated by the south. The facade is very beautiful, the side of the house facing the courtyard looks neglected. A door with buttons, above one of which is the inscription "Iza" in Georgian: Iza Konstantinovna is the philosopher's sister, the only tenant of the apartment. The entrance is old and shabby, like many entrances in the city.
Sister and love
The window of an unheated room is open into the courtyard, which makes it impossible to enter in winter. The effect of recent presence: not that the philosopher just went out like that. Rather, he just left. Drawings by Ernst Neizvestny on the wall, portrait of Kant. Books that seemed to be opened quite recently and the owner of the room worked with them - underlined lines and notes in the margins. Antonin Artaud, Georges Poulet - direct references to articles and lectures. French, Italians, The Big Italian Dictionary.
In the passage room where the deceased mother slept, there are old records, including those brought by Merab. There is no player. “I read records,” laughs Iza. A person of the Russian-Georgian aristocratic culture, she looks a little dry and strict, but in fact she is warm, witty and kind. Iza teaches Russian to two Georgian girls who love Russian literature and they communicate on equal terms. I think that is why they go to Izya. And they are definitely attracted by the house in which the spirit of the philosopher lives.
His sister's love for him was silent and attentive, demanding nothing in return. With her, Merab discussed a possible departure from Georgia. Their relationship over the years has become so close - Iza raised his daughter in the 1970s, and in the 1980s made sure that he could calmly, in comfortable solitude, study philosophy - that the question naturally turned out to be: "And you?" I mean, will you leave for your brother from Tbilisi, where you have spent all your life working as a school teacher. 
Against social alchemy
Merab Mamardashvili believed that there is no plagiarism in philosophy - simply because different people can sometimes think the same way. Probably, after all, there was a share of condescending and cheerful slyness in this. After all, try to plug Socrates. Try plugging Merab - he did not have a philosophical system that could fit in a paragraph of a textbook, and he most often expressed his thoughts orally. And try to insert his thought into the thesis of the deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation! Mamardashvili is the only world-class Soviet public intellectual. He lived in the context of not Russian or Soviet, but world philosophy - mainly in the French, Italian, English language environment, because he spoke and read in these languages.
For the Soviet intelligentsia, he was a kind of pop figure. Probably because of his "Socratism", the oral tradition of transmitting philosophical knowledge: tapes with his lectures were circulated in the same way as recordings of songs by Okudzhava, Galich, Vysotsky. Their work was a way of critical understanding of reality, and Mamardashvili's lectures turned out to be the same attempt at public thinking, only in a different form. That in itself was a frond in a situation where a rigid state ideology dominated.
Although Mamardashvili considered invectives addressed to the dominant ideology to be a kind of oxymoron. The function of ideology is to "glue", to hold, and not so much to preserve, but to guard the established social order. Not accepting this order, remaining a free man, Merab Mamardashvili at the same time treated him calmly and analytically, puffing on his pipe and ironically looking through thick glasses.
Let us note in passing that the "socio-political" thought, including Russian and Soviet, the philosopher assessed as socio-utopian, called it social alchemy, which is unable to adequately describe reality or learn from history, because all the theses and terms of it pre-installed, pre-doctrinal formulated.
There is an important remark in Mamardashvili's notebooks: "Every ideology in its development reaches the point where its effectiveness consists not in the action of what it says, but in what it does not allow to say." Especially if ideology has nothing to say. 
Moscow intellectuals of the 1970s: scientist Sergei Khrushchev ( leftmost), sculptor Ernst Unknown ( second from left), philosopher Merab Mamardashvili ( far right), Moscow, 1976
Without a "distinctive cap"
In the mid-1980s, Mamardashvili went into a detailed philosophical analysis of the prose of Marcel Proust. It would seem, where is Proust, Descartes, Kant, and where is the Soviet regime? But for this very ability to think - not anti-Soviet, but simply non-Soviet - Merab Mamardashvili was expelled from all his works in Moscow and spent the last ten years of his life, from 1980 to 1990, in Tbilisi, in an unheated house on Chavchavadze Avenue, in a room overlooking the courtyard with a huge window. A window from which to this day is pouring, as in a poem by Arseny Tarkovsky, "evening, gray-winged, blessed light", recognizable even in the photographs of the philosopher.
And at the same time, thinking about Proust became possible because the Soviet government, preoccupied with suppressing direct political disagreement, missed something else: the opportunity for depth. It was possible to study Kant, Descartes, ancient philosophy. But also think about Kant, Descartes, ancient philosophy. That in itself sharpened the political regime from within: when you start to think deeply, to see the second, third layer - it suddenly becomes dangerous for the foundations of the system.
Merab Konstantinovich called himself a metaphysician, as if to say: I am engaged in the deepest things, do not look for the superficial and political in me. He was a loner, an individualist, which is partly why he could not become a dissident - in principle he did not accept the underground, he believed that culture can only be open. “Respect for laws and the lack of desire to necessarily wear any distinctive cap and go to protest demonstrations has always given and will give, imagine, the opportunity to think freely,” he almost passionately answered the questions of the readers of the Yunost magazine in 1988.
Here, too, he went against the stream, adhering to an almost Nabokovian position of non-participation in clubs and circles: “Do not participate in this either“ for ”or“ against ”- it will dissolve itself, crumble. You need to do your own thing, and for this you need to recognize the right to individual forms of philosophizing. " 
Merab Mamardashvili with a friend, 1950s
Mutual induction of thought
Mamardashvili is from the post-war generation of graduates of the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, with whom philosophy itself began in the USSR, in contrast to Soviet philosophy as part of ideology and agitprop. Well, and the sociology that spun off from it: Boris Grushin and Yuri Levada laid the foundation and founded the tradition.
Mamardashvili repeatedly stressed the importance of the 1950s, when, in his words, "a certain spiritual element" appeared at the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University. Ideologically Merab was not, for example, close to the Hegelian and Marxist Evald Ilyenkov. But with him Mamardashvili had, by his definition, "mutual induction of thought."
A comfortable environment for thought was created by the philosophers of the circle of the Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences and the journal Voprosy Filosofii under the editor-in-chief Ivan Frolov - it was in this team that Mamardashvili worked as the deputy chief, and the head of the department of foreign philosophy was the writer Vladimir Kormer, the author of the outstanding novel “Inheritance” about the dissident and the underground environment of the late scoop.
The status of a semi-official guru became almost universally recognized during the years of perestroika. But Mamardashvili did not really fall into the perestroika style of thinking either. When everyone around went crazy with the collapsed freedom, rushed from one extreme to another, turning now into superficial democrats, now into neophyte guardians (the tragic story that happened with Alexander Zinoviev), it seemed that Merab remained the only sober person.
And not just sober: he was not Russian, not Georgian, he was and remained a citizen of the world, as befits a philosopher of European tradition and world scale. He remained a stranger to the then Georgia, and partly remains today. Mamardashvili's anti-fascism and anti-Stalinism were combined with anti-nationalism. His words about the truth, which is higher than the nation, and that if the people follow Zviad Gamsakhurdia, they will go against the people, have become classics. Communicating with the nation turned into a real drama. And it cost him the conflict with the Zviadists, nerves and upset health. 
An effort
One of the main concepts of Mamardashvili's philosophy is effort. For a philosopher, man is "first of all a constant effort to become a man", "man does not exist - he becomes." Culture is "an effort and at the same time an ability to practice the complexity and diversity of life." The story is the same. And all this imposes on a person the responsibility not to become a barbarian. In order not to become a barbarian, you also need to make efforts: "A person only appears as an element of order when he himself is in a state of maximum exertion of all his forces."
Consciousness changes only where the work was done. Nothing just like that, of course, does not arise. For example, the experience of representative democracy “happened” in European history, which could have ended in nothing. But work has been done. In Russia, "it did not happen that an articulated form of expression, discussion and crystallization of public civic opinion emerged." One day in 1981, the philosopher was late for a lecture and said that Descartes came to him in a dream, and when he woke up, blood began to flow from his throat. It was a joke. An almost literal reproduction of Emmanuel Swedenborg's story of Descartes' dream.
However, Descartes himself saw prophetic dreams.
On November 25, 1990, Merab Mamardashvili's friends Lena Nemirovskaya and Yuri Senokosov, in whose apartment he always stayed in Moscow, escorted him to the airport - the philosopher flew to restless Tbilisi with a heavy heart. He died in the Vnukov drive.
Mamardashvili could well have applied his own words from Cartesian Reflections to his life and his death: “Socrates was killed to get rid of him, like from smallpox, they killed by rejection, and Descartes, who was hiding more skillfully than Socrates, was killed by love , as if they crucified his own image, his expectations on the cross ”.
Photo: buzzquotes.com, The parliamentary library of georgia, burusi.wordpress.com
Merab Konstantinovich Mamardashvili(Georgian; September 15, 1930, Gori, Georgian SSR, USSR - November 25, 1990, Moscow) - Soviet philosopher, Doctor of Philosophy (1970), professor at Moscow State University.
Biography
He went out with an extinguished pipe, sat down in an armchair in the near corner of the stage, carefully examined those present, and began a quiet conversation about eternal metaphysical problems.
Born in the town of Gori, Georgian SSR, into the family of a career soldier Konstantin Nikolaevich (died 1970), mother - Ksenia Platonovna, came from an old Georgian aristocratic family Garsevanishvili. Before the beginning of World War II, he spent his childhood in the Ukrainian city of Vinnitsa, where his father served, where Merab went to first grade; before that the family stayed in Leningrad, where in 1934-1938. the head of the family studied at the Military-Political Academy, and after that - in Kiev. After the start of the war, the head of the family went to the front, and the family was evacuated to Tbilisi. There M.K. Mamardashvili studied at the 14th secondary school and graduated from it in 1949 with a gold medal. He entered the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, from which he graduated in 1954. The beginning of the friendship between M.K. Mamardashvili and Ernst Neizvestny, later a famous sculptor, dates back to the time of entering the university.
In the early 1950s, a number of heated discussions took place in Moscow on topical issues of philosophy associated with the death of I. V. Stalin. A number of informal groups appeared at the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, which played an important role in the development of philosophical thought in the USSR, including the so-called. groups of epistemologists (E. V. Ilyenkov, V. I. Korovikov, etc.) and the Moscow logical (later methodological) circle (A. A. Zinoviev, B. A. Grushin, M. K. Mamardashvili, G. P. Shchedrovitsky and etc.). M. Mamardashvili was one of the founders of the Moscow logical circle. In May 1954, a discussion was held on the "Gnoseological Theses" by Ilyenkov and Korovikov. The final formation of the circle of "dialectical easel painters" (A. A. Zinoviev, B. A. Grushin, G. P. Shchedrovitsky, M. K. Mamardashvili) takes place.
In the 4th year M.K. Mamardashvili fails the exam in the political economy of socialism. In the newspaper "Moscow University" of January 6, 1953, we read: "The excellent student Mamardashvili could not correctly understand the question of the dual nature of the peasant economy." Already during his studies at the university he was interested in human consciousness; the nature of thinking is a cross-cutting theme of his philosophy. He defends his thesis "The Problem of the Historical and the Logical in Marx's Capital".
In 1954-1957. studies at the graduate school of Moscow State University, which he graduated from, and in the same years participates in the work of a logical and methodological seminar under the direction of A. A. Zinoviev.
After graduating from graduate school (1957), he was a consultant editor in the journal Voprosy filosofii, where his first article, Processes of Analysis and Synthesis, was published (1958). In 1961, M. K. Mamardashvili defended his Ph.D. thesis "To the criticism of the Hegelian doctrine of the forms of cognition" in Moscow. Then he became a member of the CPSU.
In 1961, the International Department of the CPSU Central Committee sent Mamardashvili to Prague to work for the journal Problems of Peace and Socialism, where he was the head of the department of criticism and bibliography (1961-1966); the philosopher told about this period of his life in one of his numerous interviews during perestroika). By that time, he read the novel by M. Proust "In Search of Lost Time", which played a significant role in his future work. He had business trips to Italy, the Federal Republic of Germany, the German Democratic Republic, and Cyprus. Then there was a refusal to extend the trip to Paris, Mamardashvili was recalled to Moscow, becoming "restricted to travel abroad" for several years.
Mamardashvili worked in research institutes in Moscow, including in 1966-1969. Head of Department at the Institute of International Labor Movement of the USSR Academy of Sciences, together with such philosophers as P.P. Gaidenko, Yu. N. Davydov, E. Yu. Soloviev, A. P. Ogurtsov. In 1968-1974. Deputy editor-in-chief of the journal "Voprosy filosofii" IT Frolov, at the invitation of the latter. At the same time, he lectured at the Faculty of Psychology of Moscow State University ("Problems of the Analysis of Consciousness"). The beginning of his friendship with Yuri Petrovich Senokosov and Alexander Moiseevich Pyatigorsky dates back to that time. Also, M.K. Mamardashvili lectured at the Institute of Cinematography, at the Higher Courses for Scriptwriters and Directors, at the Institute of General and Pedagogical Psychology of the USSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, in other cities - in Riga, Vilnius, Rostov-on-Don at the invitation or recommendation of friends. These lectures, or conversations, as he called them, mostly recorded by him on a tape recorder, formed the basis of his creative legacy.
MAMARDASHVILI Merab Konstantinovich - philosopher, culturologist, doctor of philosophy, professor. Graduated from the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University in 1954. After completing his postgraduate studies in 1957 he worked in the journal Voprosy filosofii, and in 1961 - in Prague in the journal Problems of Peace and Socialism. Since 1966, Mamardashvili has been working in Moscow at first as head. Department of the Institute of the International Labor Movement, then at the Institute of the History of Natural Science and Technology of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, and from 1968 to 1974 - Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the journal Voprosy Filosofii. Since 1980 - Chief Researcher at the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of the Georgian SSR.
The starting point in the cultural studies of Mamardashvili was the formulation of the question of what is the meaning of a person's elevation over himself. Mamardashvili believes that this is precisely the purpose of both European and Russian culture, which has two historical origins at its origins:
antique and Christian. If antiquity left as a legacy to European culture the belief in the omnipotence of reason, then Christianity introduced the idea of the moral ascent of man into the Western consciousness.
It is these two culturological prerequisites, historically changing meaningfully, predetermine the originality of European culture, serve as the basis for the elevation of the individual. In this regard, Mamardashvili constantly liked to repeat that a person is born twice: the first time as a natural, biological being, that is, from parents, and the second time as a cultural moral being.
This means that a person in a cultural context is not some empirically visual individual possessing certain natural properties - it is a “possible person” who is in a state of constant “re-birth”, who only by his own efforts manages to break away from the “wheel birth ”and thereby transfer yourself, your thought, your morality, your actions into a state of personal formation. This, as Mamardashvili believes, is impossible without culture, which, being the sphere of symbols, orders human states and meanings, thanks to which we can live like a human being.
Memory is not given to man. It would not exist if it depended on natural material: on our physical ability to preserve it over time. And then a person turns to culture. First, to myth, to philosophy, then to religion, to art, since it is these cultural forms that are ways of organizing and constructing human forces or the person himself. Therefore, a person as a person is an artificial being, born not by nature, but self-generated through culturally invented devices, the aspiration for which philosophers have designated the term transcending. Thus, the personality is something transcendental in relation to culture, in relation to society.
Acutely worried about everything that was happening in the cultural life of our country, Mamardashvili believed that there was no autonomous philosophy in Russia for a long time. She arises with Chaadaev. Then, after Vl. Solovyov, the phenomenon of secular autonomous philosophy appeared, although Russian philosophy was religious. Mamardashvili began his career with the study of the history of philosophy, and in the 70s. he formulates the idea of his philosophical discourse as an event of thought. Mamardashvili turns to the analysis of the transcendental foundations of European culture in the era of modern times and the Enlightenment. His organic genre was philosophizing aloud, for which he was called "Georgian Socrates". The publication of Mamardashvili's legacy, represented by numerous lectures that he read in Moscow, Tbilisi, Riga, Vilnius, Rostov-on-Don, is handled by a special Fund named after him.
Essays
1. Mamardashvili M.K. Forms and content of thinking. M., 1968.
2. Mamardashvili M.K. Classical and non-classical ideals of rationality. Tbilisi, 1984.
3. Mamardashvili M.K. As I understand philosophy. M., 1992.
4. Mamardashvili M.K. Cartesian reflections. M., 1993.
5. Mamardashvili M.K. The Need for Oneself), Moscow, 1996.
6. Mamardashvili M.K. The path to evidence. Lectures on Ancient Philosophy. M., 1997.
7. Mamardashvili M.K. Lectures on Proust. M., 1995.
Literature
1. Meeting with Descartes. Readings / Ed. V. A. Kruglikov and Yu. P. Senokosov. M., 1996.
2. V. L. Zinchenko Osip Mandelstam's staff and Mamardashvili's pipe: To the beginnings of organic psychology. M., 1997.
As I understand philosophy 1
<...>Culture is not an aggregate ... of ready-made values and products just waiting for consumption or awareness. It is the ability and effort of a person to be, the possession of living differences, continuously, again and again renewable and expandable: otherwise, one can fall from any heights. This is evident in today's anthropological catastrophe.<...>
<...>... Returning to culture, - in fact, its problem is not how to dispose of the existing and remembered achievements of the human spirit, human skill, but how we understand that all this is not self-sufficient, not self-ordained, that chaos, as I said, not behind, but surrounds every point of cultural existence within the culture itself. And an additional, all the time replenishing condition of culture is the accomplishment - always accidental - of precisely this kind of living states or living acts that are not valuable, useful in themselves, but are what Kant called "misunderstood values" or "aimless goals." ...<...>
<...>So, if these acts are not performed, if there are not enough people in the culture capable of maintaining this at the top of their own efforts, then there is nothing. And if there is something, then it is just a shadow, indistinguishable from the living.<...>
<...>If you destroy in the nation personal principles that are non-national, are the historical principles of a person as such, regardless of his ethnicity, then the best features of the nation will disappear. And yet this is the basis of any spirituality, for its essence is that truth always stands above the homeland (this, by the way, is a Christian commandment); only the personality is capable - above all else - of seeking it and expressing it in the last frankness.<...>
<...>But the main thing is to be worthy, no matter what happens. This is the foundation or foundation of the culture of modern times. The existence of a person one on one with the world, without any guarantees that would be external to a person and human consciousness, some open space in which only the path is drawn, your path, which you must do yourself.<...>
<...> After all, we constantly live in a situation that Platonov very accurately described in one phrase. One of his heroes, instead of the “voice of the soul”, hears the “noise of consciousness” pouring from the loudspeaker. Each of us, at our own peril and risk, in our particular case, inside ourselves must somehow resist this “noise”. For, as I have already said, a person with a feral consciousness, with stubborn ideas about social reality and its laws cannot live in XX century.<...>
About philosophy 2
<...>A person is not a thing, not a static state, but an event consisting of a set of events: such as human love, faith, honesty, thought, etc. Plato has a strange formula: a person is not this or that, a person is a symbol (separated by a hyphen!).
Let us turn to the etymological analysis of the language, embodied in the word "symbol". The symbol is a plank split into two parts. Imagine that these parts are launched in a wide stream, in a circle along different trajectories and that somewhere they are connected ... Connection is an event - a person. This is what Plato had in mind when he said "man-symbol." Man is an act, not a fact.<...>
Need yourself 3
<...>Philosophers made one mathematically accurate move in philosophy, namely: if they substantiated something, say thinking, a person's ability to believe in something, to be, then the initial basis was freedom ... Freedom is a phenomenon that takes place there. where there is no choice. Freedom is something that contains a necessity in itself ... Something that is a necessity of itself is freedom.<...>
<...>You don't have to go far for examples ... What is conscience? One cannot get away from the voice of conscience, if, of course, there is one. And if it is, it is in its entirety. Is that so? Hence, the conscience does not make any choice. No choice! On the other hand, conscience is a phenomenon that in itself contains its cause; it has no external cause. Conscience is the cause of itself. Therefore, the act is called conscientious, and not any other.<...>
<...>There are personal foundations of morality and behavior that belong to a different space and time than the space and time of certain cultures or ideologies. And human dignity depends on whether there is this personal basis or not. In a person who has completely invested his soul in the fate of a social cause, the soul can be overwhelmed by the vicissitudes of this very business. We do not control him. If we have invested everything there, then it is not known what we will end up with. In other words, morality must have de facto some absolute grounds, timeless.<...>
<...>So, transcending means the ability of a person to transform, that is, to go beyond the boundaries and boundaries of any culture, any ideology, any society and find the foundations of his being, which do not depend on what happens in time with society, culture, with ideology or with a social movement. This is the so-called personality grounds ...>
<...>History is a very strange thing. I have already said that human life is imperfect because we are not capable of much. Indeed, often we are not even capable of an act of life in the true, strict sense of the word. And this inability is reflected in history. For example, the Enlightenment is known to be a struggle against church and religion. In reality, the Enlightenment is a continuation of the evangelical culture, the realization of the true meaning of the Gospel. What's the point? What is Enlightenment? This is the adult state of humanity or the adult state of a person, when he is capable and has the strength to think with his own mind, act and walk, without needing help and crutches.<...>
<...>Instead of loving the person standing in front of you, we love “humanity”, which is located at some mystical point, and therefore we do not love anything. We can always be pulled by the string, and we will submit to a completely different movement. Therefore, our "whole-heartedness" is in reality not "Inhumanity", but a constant non-coincidence with what is "real" and what is "now." This mismatch is always transcended in favor of some future.<...>
<...>This can be understood only by placing oneself in the field of long-term acting forces, in a certain spirit of history. And then ask yourself what has broken somewhere far away in the structures of Russian history, what has not been done and is not covered by eschatological passion. Not covered by the most essential passion, which tells man that the greatest ambition is to be fulfilled, to “abide” once and for all, and not to live in the bad repetition of the myth, which is prehistoric existence. Therefore, along with the personality and the human form, I introduced the problem of history. And it is the problem of history that is the problem "as such" for us. In other words, do we have a form called "history" or not?<...>
Lev Nikolaevich GUMILEV
GUMILEVa lion Nikolaevich - Russian ethnologist, historian, geographer, creator of the theory of ethnogenesis, was born into the family of the Silver Age poets A. Akhmatova and N. Gumilyov. In 1930 he graduated from high school in Leningrad and applied for admission to Leningrad University, but he was refused due to social origin. He goes to work as a laborer in the city's tramway department. He was registered at the labor exchange, which in 1931 sent him to work at the Geological Prospecting Institute as a collector on a search expedition to the Sayan Mountains. In 1932 Gumilyov became a scientific and technical employee of the expedition to the Pamirs. Here, on his own initiative, outside of working hours, he is engaged in the study of amphibians, which did not like the authorities, and he goes to work as a malaria scout at the local malaria station. He is intensively studying the Tajik-Persian language, mastering the secrets of the Arabic writing. In 1933, Gumilyov, as a scientific and technical employee of an archaeological expedition, took part in the excavation of the Paleolithic site of Aji-Kaba (Crimea). In 1934, Lev Nikolaevich entered the Faculty of History at Leningrad University, where he attended courses by V. V. Struve, E. V. Tarle, S. I. Kovalev, and others. In 1935 his first arrest followed. Akhmatova's appeal to Stalin saves Gumilyov and the arrested university students. However, he was expelled from the university. He independently continues to visit the Leningrad branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, where he studies written sources on the history of the ancient Turks. In 1937 he was reinstated in the Leningrad University, but at the beginning of 1938 he was arrested again; sentenced to five years. He is serving his term in Norilsk, working at a copper-nickel mine. In 1944 he received permission and took part in the Great Patriotic War, which he finished in Berlin. In 1946, Gumilyov passed exams as an external student, graduated from Leningrad University and entered graduate school, but after Zhdanov's report on the magazines "Zvezda" and "Leningrad" and the resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) on this matter, Gumilyov was expelled from graduate school. In 1947, he went to work at the Leningrad Psychotherapeutic Hospital as a librarian and, thanks to the positive characteristics of the hospital, was allowed to defend his thesis for the title of candidate of historical sciences. In 1948 he was accepted as a research fellow at the Museum of Ethnography of the Peoples of the USSR. In 1949 he was arrested again and, without any motivation, was sentenced by a special meeting to ten years in the camps. In 1956 Gumilyov was rehabilitated, he became the librarian of the Hermitage. Soon he completed and successfully defended (1962) his doctoral dissertation on historical sciences on the topic “Ancient Turks”. After his defense, he was invited to work at the Research Institute of Geography at Leningrad University, where he worked until his retirement in 1968. In 1974, the indefatigable researcher defended his second doctoral dissertation in geographical sciences on the topic "Ethnogenesis and the Earth's biosphere."
Gumilyov is the author of deeply innovative studies on the history and culture of the nomads of Central and Central Asia from the 3rd century. BC e. to the XV century. n. e., historical geography, the creator of the theory of ethnogenesis, etc. The beginning of the formation of the theory of ethnogenesis dates back to the pre-war period of Gumilyov's work and was associated with the idea of passionarity (understood as a phenomenon of energy abundance), which “in March 1939,” Gumilev wrote later, “penetrated to the brain ... like a thunderbolt. " Based on the methodology of biology and geography, Gumilev creates a theory of hexaphase ethnogenesis: lifting phase(stable growth of passionary tension after a passionary push); phase akmatic(maximum passionate tension of the ethnos); fracture phase(split of the ethnic field); phase of inertia(a smooth decrease in passionarity); obscuration phase(reduction of passionary tension to a level below homeostatic); memorial phase(transition to ethnic homeostasis). Gumilev sees the basis of the passionary impulse in the processes of cosmic origin. Gumilev applied his theory in full to explain the ethnic rhythms of Eurasia (Gumilyov was a follower of the historiosophy of the Eurasians) and to the historical interpretation of the Russian superethnos and its culture. In one of his last interviews, Gumilev argued that Russia, being open to the achievements of world civilization, "will be saved only through Eurasianism."
Essays
1. Gumilev L.N. Ancient Turks. M., 1967.
2. Gumilev L.N. Hunnu. M., 1960.
3. Gumilev L.N. Search for a fictional kingdom. M., 1970.
4. Gumilev L.N. Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe. M., 1993.
5. Gumilev L.N. Ethnogenesis and the Earth's biosphere. L., 1990.
6. Gumilev L.N. The geography of the ethnos in the historical period. L., 1990.
7. Gumilev L.N., Panchenko A.M. So that the candle does not go out: Dialogue L., 1990.
8. Gumilev L.N. From Rus to Russia: Essays on Ethnic History M., 1992.
9. Gumilev L.N. Rhythms of Eurasia: Epochs and Civilizations. M., 1993.
10. Gumilev L.N. Ethnosphere: History of People and History of Nature. M., 1993.
11. Gumilev L.N. Compositions: Ancient Tibet. M., 1993.
12. Gumilev L.N. End and start again. M., 1994.
Literature
1. Lev Nikolaevich Gumilev. Bibliographic index. Kazan, 1990.
2. L.N. Gumilev. Biography of scientific theory, or Auto-necrologist // Gumilev L.N. Ethnosphere: History of People and History of Nature. M., 1993.
3. "Arabesque" stories: collection. M., 1994.
4. Last Eurasian: Life and Books of L. N. Gumilyov. M., 1997.
Geography of the ethnos in the historical period 1
<...>Passionarity is a characterological dominant, an irresistible inner striving (conscious or, more often, unconscious) for reality, aimed at achieving a goal (often illusory). Note that this goal seems to be a passionate individual sometimes more valuable even than his own life, and even more so the life and happiness of his contemporaries and fellow tribesmen. The passionarity of an individual can be matched with any abilities: high, medium, small; it does not depend on external influences, being a feature of the mental constitution of a given person; it has nothing to do with ethics, equally easily giving rise to feats and crimes, creativity and destruction, good and evil, excluding only indifference; it does not make a person a “hero” leading the “crowd”, for most of the passionaries are part of the “crowd”, determining its potential in one or another epoch in the development of an ethnos. The modes of passionarity are varied: here is pride, stimulating the thirst for power and glory for centuries; vanity, pushing for demagoguery and creativity; greed, which gives rise to misers, money-grubbers and scientists who amass knowledge instead of money; jealousy, entailing cruelty and the protection of the hearth, and applied to an idea - creating fanatics and martyrs. As far as energy is concerned, moral judgments are inapplicable: deliberate decisions, not impulses, can be good or evil.<...>
<...>... An explosion of passionarity (or its fluctuation) creates in a significant number of individuals living in the territory covered by this explosion a special neuropsychic mood, which is a behavioral sign. The emerging sign is associated with increased activity, but the nature of this activity is determined by local conditions: landscape, ethnocultural, social and unique, although the processes of ethnogenesis are similar. That is why all ethnic groups are original and inimitable, although the processes of ethnogenesis are similar.<... >
<...>... Social and ethnic history do not replace each other, but complement our understanding of the processes taking place on the surface of the Earth, where "the history of nature and the history of people" are combined.<...>
<...>... The starting point of any ethnogenesis is a specific mutation of a small number of individuals in a geographical area. Such a mutation does not affect (or only slightly) the phenotype of a person, however, it significantly changes the stereotype of people's behavior. But this change is indirect: it is, of course, not the behavior itself that is affected, but the genotype of the individual. The sign of passionarity that appeared in the genotype as a result of mutation causes an individual to absorb energy from the external environment, which is increased in comparison with a normal situation. It is this excess of energy that forms a new stereotype of behavior, cements a new systemic integrity.<...>
<...>In the energy aspect, ethnogenesis is the source of culture. Why? I explain. Ethnogenesis proceeds at the expense of passionarity. It is this energy, passionarity, that is wasted in the process of ethnogenesis. She goes to the creation of cultural values and political activities: government and book writing, sculpture and territorial expansion, the synthesis of new ideological concepts and the construction of cities. Any such work requires efforts in excess of those that are necessary for the normal existence of a person in balance with nature, which means that without the passionarity of its carriers, who invest their excess energy in the cultural and political development of their system, no culture and no politics would simply exist. There would be no brave warriors, no scholars thirsting for knowledge, no religious fanatics, no brave travelers. And not a single ethnos in its development would go beyond homeostasis, in which industrious inhabitants would live in complete satisfaction with themselves and the environment. Fortunately, the situation is different, and we can hope that for our time there will be enough joys associated with ethnogenesis and culture. However, all energy has two poles, and passionary energy (biochemical) is no exception. Bipolarity affects ethnogenesis by the fact that the behavioral dominant can be directed towards the complication of systems, that is, the creation or simplification of them.<...>
<...>The decline in the passionarity of ethnic systems manifests itself slowly. In the dying system, passionate individuals appear for a long time, disturbing their fellow tribesmen with unrealizable aspirations. They interfere with everyone, get rid of them. The level of "golden mediocrity" is gradually approaching.<...>
<...>The breakdown phase is an age-related illness of an ethnic group that must be overcome in order to gain immunity. Ethnic collisions in the previous - akmatic and subsequent - inertial phases do not entail such severe consequences, because they are not accompanied by such sharp changes in the level of passionarity, as in the case of a breakdown, and a split of the ethnic field does not occur in these phases.<... >
Notes (edit)
1 The work was first published in Leningrad in 1990.
Dmitry Sergeevich LIKHACHEV
LIKHACHEV Dmitry Sergeevich - philologist, historian of Russian culture, public figure, academician of RAS.
Likhachev graduated from Leningrad University in the Faculty of Social Sciences in 1928. In the same year he was arrested and exiled to the Solovetsky Special Purpose Camp. Released in 1932, Likhachev worked as a literary editor, and in 1937 he transferred to the Department of Old Russian Literature of the Pushkin House, with which his whole future life would be connected. In the spring of 1943 Likhachev and his family were deported to Kazan. In 1947 he prepared and defended his doctoral dissertation on the history of Russian chronicle writing.
The range of his interests is huge: this is the study of Russian literature from its inception to the present day, the problems of art history. Known for his numerous works on ancient Russian art and written on the material of European cultures of the Middle Ages and modern times, the book "Poetics of Gardens" (1982). Likhachev also professionally deals with cultural problems: he owns the concept of "ecology of culture". Likhachev understands culture in a very broad sense: it is literature, architecture, musical heritage, moral culture and folklore. Protecting cultural monuments is one of the main concerns of Likhachev, the permanent chairman of the Culture Fund.
In the field of the history of Russian culture, he put forward a bold and therefore often contested hypothesis of a Russian pre-revival. He found an explanation for the "return to its antiquity" and the emergence of the "second monumentalism" of the 16th century.
The strength of the scientist's creative method lies in the ability to embrace the “spirit of the era” in all its manifestations. A brilliant example of such coverage is the monograph "The Culture of Russia in the Time of Andrei Rublev and Epiphany the Wise" (1962). Here you can find discussions about the development of the Russian Enlightenment in Russia at the turn of the XIV-XV centuries, about Russian-Byzantine relations, about literature and fine arts, about new features and customs and life of that era. All these themes are closely related to each other and, on the whole, create a relief characteristic of a turning point in the history of Russian spiritual culture. The golden fund of Russian philology also includes the collection of Likhachev's works "The Lay of Igor's Host and the Culture of His Time" (1978). Consistency and historicism are the main parameters underlying Likhachev's research.
In The Poetics of Gardens, Likhachev attempts to see in gardens and parks not just a source of beauty, but also specific literary texts reflecting public consciousness, philosophical views that have evolved in the Middle Ages, Renaissance, Baroque, Classicism, Romanticism. This gives rise to the idea of treating gardens and parks as monuments of national culture, and the problem as a whole acquires moral significance as part of the problem of man's relationship with nature.
Essays
1. Likhachev D.S. Architectural and artistic monuments of the Solovetsky Islands. L., 1980.
2. Likhachev D.S. Classic heritage and modernity. L., 1981.
3.Likhachev D.S. Poetry of gardens. L., 1982.
4. Likhachev D.S. Notes about Russian. M., 1984.
5. Likhachev D.S."The Word about Igor's Campaign" and the Culture of His Time. M., 1985.
6. Likhachev D.S. Selected works: In 3 volumes. L., 1987.
7. Likhachev D.S. The Great Path: The Formation of Russian Literature in the 11th-18th centuries. M., 1987.
8. Likhachev D.S., Samvelyan N.G. Dialogues about yesterday, today and tomorrow. M., 1988.
9. Likhachev D.S. Notes and observations: From notebooks of different years. L., 1989.
10. Likhachev D.S. Book of Troubles. M., 1991.
11. Likhachev D.S. Articles of the early years. Tver, 1993.
12. Likhachev D.S. Great Russia: History and Artistic Culture. M., 1994.
13. Likhachev D.S. Memories. SPb., 1995.
14. Likhachev D.S. The Great Heritage: Classical Works of the Literature of Ancient Rus. M., 1996.
15. Likhachev D.S. Russia. West. East. Counter currents. SPb., 1996.
16. Likhachev D.S. Essays on the philosophy of artistic creativity. SPb., 1996.
17... Likhachev D.S. No evidence. SPb., 1996.
18. Likhachev D.S. Historical poetics of Russian literature. SPb., 1997.
Literature
1. Russian selfless devotion / Sat. articles dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the birth of D. S. Likhachev. M., 1996.
2. O. V. Tvorogov Academician D. S. Likhachev II Izvestia RAS. Language and Literature Series. 1966. T. 55. No. 6.
Book of Troubles 1
<...>Latitude is characteristic not only of the space inhabited by Russia, but also the nature of the Russian people, Russian culture. The diversity of forms, the diversity of its own cultural heritage, the diversity of "regional" cultural nests and book centers to a large extent determined the exclusive freedom in handling cultural values of different times and different peoples.<...>
<...>Russian culture did not adopt, but creatively disposed of the world's cultural wealth. The huge country has always owned a huge cultural heritage and disposed of it with the generosity of a free and wealthy individual. Yes, precisely individuals, for Russian culture, and with it the whole of Russia, is a person, an individuality.<... >
<...>And yet there is one feature in Russian culture, which is clearly reflected in all its areas: this is the meaning of the aesthetic principle.<...>
<...>There is one more feature of Russian culture, which is inextricably linked with its peculiarity as a person, individuality. In the works of Russian culture, there is a very large share of the lyrical principle, the author's own attitude to the subject, or objective creativity.<...>
<...>The path along which the development of culture should go, it seems to me, is clear ... This is, first of all, a priority appeal to human values. Return to the humanities, art, moral wealth. Subordination of technology to the interests of humanitarian culture. This is the development of the individual characteristics of each person. Freedom of development of a person, of a human personality in the direction that most of all contributes to the identification of talents, always individual, always “unexpected”. Formation of a human personality, resistance to “mass culture” that depersonalizes a person. Hence follows another extremely important direction: the preservation of national individuality in all spheres of culture. The path to true internationalism lies through the recognition of the value and independence of all national cultures.
The Soviet Union, and Russia in it, were and remain state designations, whose culture developed through the exchange of cultural experience of a huge number of peoples and nations that became part of them. No other country in the world has such a diversity and such interpenetration of cultures as ours.<...>
You can't get away from yourself ...
Historical identity and culture of Russia 2
<... >Usually Russian culture is characterized as intermediate between Europe and Asia, between West and East, but this borderline position is seen only if you look at Russia from the West. In fact, the influence of the Asian nomadic peoples was negligible in settled Russia. Byzantine culture gave Russia its spiritual-Christian character, and Scandinavia mainly - a military-squad organization.
In the emergence of Russian culture, Byzantium and Scandinavia played a decisive role, except for its own folk, pagan culture. Through the entire gigantic multinational space of the East European Plain, currents of two extremely dissimilar influences stretched, which played a decisive role in the creation of the culture of Rus. South and North, not East and West, Byzantium and Scandinavia, not Asia and Europe.<...>
<...>We Russians need to finally find the right and strength to be responsible for our present ourselves, to decide our own policy - both in the field of culture, in the field of economics, and in the field of state law - based on real facts, on real traditions, and not on various kinds of prejudices associated with Russian history, myths about the world-historical "mission" of the Russian people and their alleged doom due to mythical ideas about some particularly difficult legacy of slavery, which did not exist, serfdom, which many had, on the alleged lack of "democratic traditions", which in fact we had, on the alleged lack of business qualities, which were super-sufficient (the development of Siberia alone is worth it), etc., etc., we had a history no worse and no better than that of other nations.
We are free - and that is why we are responsible. The worst thing is to blame everything on fate, at random, to hope for a "curve". The "curve" will not take us out!
If we preserve our culture and everything that contributes to its development - libraries, museums, archives, schools, universities, periodicals - if we keep our richest language, literature, music education, scientific institutes intact, then we will certainly occupy a leading place in the North of Europe and Asia.
Notes (edit)
1 "The Book of Troubles", published in 1991, is a collection of articles, conversations, speeches and memoirs of D. S. Likhachev.
Moisey Samoilovich KAGAN
KAGAN Moisey Samoilovich. V 1938 graduated from high school in Leningrad, and in 1942 from the philological faculty of Leningrad State University. Kagan is a participant of the Great Patriotic War in the ranks of the people's militia of Leningrad. From 1944 to 1947, he was a postgraduate student in the Department of Art History, Faculty of History, Leningrad University, and since 1946, an assistant in the same department. In 1948 he defended his Ph.D. thesis on "French Realism of the 17th century", in 1966 - his doctoral dissertation based on the book "Lectures on Marxist-Leninist Aesthetics". Currently, Kagan is a professor at the Faculty of Philosophy of St. Petersburg State University, Russian State Pedagogical University named after V.I. AI Herzen and St. Petersburg Humanitarian University of Trade Unions. Member of a number of creative unions and associations. Vice President and Head of the Department of Cultural Sciences of the Academy of Humanities, organized in St. Petersburg. Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation. He has published about six hundred books, brochures and articles in our country and abroad - in Bulgaria, Hungary, Germany, Georgia, China, Poland, USA, France, Estonia, Japan, Cuba.
Essays
1. Kagan M.S. The beginnings of aesthetics. M., 1964.
2. Kagan M.S. Lectures on Marxist-Leninist aesthetics. 1st ed. L., 1963 - 1966; 2nd ed. L., 1971; 3rd revised Russian ed. - "Aesthetics as a Philosophical Science" (St. Petersburg, 1997), several translated editions.
3. Kagan M.S. Morphology of art. L., 1972.
4. Kagan M.S. Human activity. System research experience. M., 1974.
5. Kagan M.S. The world of communication: The problem of intersubjective relationships. M., 1979.
6. Kagan M.S. Systematic approach and humanitarian knowledge. L., 1981.
7. Kagan M.S. Music in the world of arts. SPb., 1996.
8. Kagan M. C. Philosophy of culture. SPb :, 1996.
9. Kagan M.S. The city of Petrov in the history of Russian culture. SPb., 1996.
10. Kagan M.S. Philosophical theory of value. SPb., 1997.
11. Kagan M.S. The history of the culture of St. Petersburg. SPb., 1998.
12. Kagan M.S. Art history and art criticism. Fav. articles. SPb., 1998.
13. Kagan M. S. Mensch - Kultur - Kunst: Systemanalytische Untersuchung. Hamburg, 1994.
Labyrinths of modern culture 1
Modernity in all its manifestations always presents the greatest difficulties for scientific study, so that often the possibilities of such a study are generally rejected. But it is especially difficult to recognize the study of the current state of society, man, culture at the end XX century, because it turns out to be many-sided, kaleidoscopic, contradictory to such an extent that it causes directly opposite judgments in those trying to understand what is happening; this is reflected with the utmost clarity in the literature on Postmodernism.
A systematic examination of modern culture reveals, in accordance with the criterion of necessity and sufficiency, the following features:
a) system external relations of culture has a synchronic and diachronic dimensions: this is the relationship of modern culture to the main components of its environment - to nature, To society, To a person and its relation to the cultural past of humanity, the highest level of which is called classics ",
b) the system of relations that develop inside modern culture, has the same two dimensions: its synchronic "cut" involves consideration of the relationship "West - East" on one level, and on the other - the relationship elite culture and mass; diachronic analysis involves the study of the relationship Postmodernism to Modernism, from which it directly grows, and the forecast of the further movement of culture from its clearly transitional postmodern state.
Born in Gori (Georgia) in a military family. Before the war he spent his childhood in the Vinnitsa region, where his father served. After the outbreak of the war, the family was evacuated to Tbilisi. Merab studied at the 14th secondary school in Tbilisi and graduated with a gold medal. Then he came to Moscow and entered the philosophy faculty of Moscow State University, from which he graduated in 1954. It should be said that despite the post-war difficulties and a very difficult political and ideological atmosphere, a real rise in philosophical education begins at Moscow State University, which was associated with the names of professors of the pre-revolutionary school, such as V.F. Asmus, A.F. Losev, A.S. Akhmanov, P. S. Popov, M. L. Dynnik, O. V. Trakhtenberg, A. R. Luria, S. L. Rubinstein. In the early 50s of the XX century, a number of heated discussions on topical issues of philosophy were held in Moscow, which coincided and in many respects were provoked by the departure from power and the death of I. V. Stalin. In this "nutritious broth" a number of informal groups appeared at the Faculty of Philosophy, which later played a very important role in the restoration of philosophical thought in the USSR as a whole and in Russia, first of all, the so-called. "Groups of gnoseologists" (E. V. Ilyenkov, V. I. Korovikov and others) and the Moscow logical (later methodological) circle (A. A. Zinoviev, B. A. Grushin, M. K. Mamardashvili, G. P . Shchedrovitsky, etc.). M. Mamardashvili was one of the founders of the Moscow logical circle.
Later he works at scientific institutes in Moscow, and also lectures at the Faculty of Psychology of Moscow State University, at the Institute of Cinematography, at the Higher Courses for Scriptwriters and Directors, at the Institute of General and Pedagogical Psychology of the USSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, as well as in other cities - in Riga, Vilnius, Rostov- on-Don, at the invitation or recommendation of your friends. In fact, these lectures, or conversations, as he called them - people usually recorded on a tape recorder - tape recordings of lectures form the basis of his creative legacy (compare with Vladimir Vysotsky). In 1970, in Tbilisi, Mamardashvili defended his doctoral dissertation, and two years later he was awarded the title of professor. In the same years, at the invitation of the editor-in-chief of the journal Voprosy filosofii, IT Frolov, he held the post of his deputy (1968-1974).
In 1980 he moved to Georgia, where he worked at the Institute of Philosophy and lectured on Proust and phenomenology at the University of Tbilisi. He did not receive any positions and honorary titles in Soviet Georgia. He was listed as a researcher at the Institute of General and Educational Psychology, always gave lectures and special courses on someone's personal initiative - at the university, at the Georgian Postgraduate Students' Union, at the theatrical institute. Friends, meetings, conversations - all this in a narrow, almost domestic circle. But he was already a world-renowned philosopher.
The philosophy of M. K. Mamardashvili is usually called "Socratic", since he, like Socrates, practically did not leave behind a written heritage. At the same time, he read a lot of lectures (including about R. Descartes, I. Kant, M. Proust, consciousness, etc.) at various universities of the Soviet Union (Moscow, Rostov-on-Don, Tbilisi, Riga, Vilnius ) and foreign countries (France, Germany, USA). During his lifetime, his works could not be published for ideological reasons, in many respects this is why they were not written. However, tape recordings of his lectures have survived, which were published after his death and the collapse of the USSR.
It is quite difficult to understand such a “living” philosophy. To understand it requires an almost gem-quality reconstruction of both the life of the philosopher himself and the life of his philosophy. The latter appears in a sequential posthumous “transcript” of his ideas, which are presented in audio recordings of lectures, in interview materials for magazines and television, in reports at conferences and round tables.
In 2001, Mamardashvili erected a monument in Tbilisi. Officially, the portrait-monument to the great son of Georgia was commissioned by the Government of Georgia. In fact, this is a gift to Georgia in memory of a friend from Ernst Neizvestny. The opening of the monument caused ideologically colored street clashes. In 2010, a memorial stele with a sculptural portrait of Mamardashvili was also erected at the entrance to Gori.
Childhood and youth
1934 - the Mamardashvili family moves to Russia: Merab's father, Konstantin Nikolaevich, is sent to study at the Leningrad Military-Political Academy.
1938 - graduation from KN Mamardashvili Academy. Moving of the Mamardashvili family to Kiev, and then to Vinnitsa. In Vinnitsa, Merab goes to first grade.
1941 - the beginning of the Great Patriotic War. KN Mamardashvili goes to the front. Merab with his mother, Ksenia Platonovna Garsevanishvili, are returning to Georgia, to Tbilisi. Studying at the 14th secondary school in Tbilisi.
1949 - graduated from high school with a gold medal. Admission to the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow University. Acquaintance and the beginning of friendship with Ernst Neizvestny, later a famous sculptor.
1949-1954 - studies at Moscow State University. In the 4th year he fails the exam in the political economy of socialism. The newspaper "Moscow University" of January 6, 1953 published: "Excellent student Mamardashvili could not correctly understand the question of the dual nature of the peasant economy." Already during his studies at the university he was interested in human consciousness; the nature of thinking is a cross-cutting theme of his philosophy.
1954, May - discussion on the "Gnoseological Theses" by Ilyenkov and Korovikov. The final formation of the circle of "dialectical easel painters" (A. A. Zinoviev, B. A. Grushin, G. P. Shchedrovitsky, M. K. Mamardashvili).
Defense of the thesis "The Problem of the Historical and the Logical in Marx's Capital".
1954-1957 - studied at the graduate school of Moscow State University, in the same years M. K. Mamardashvili took part in the work of a logical and methodological seminar under the direction of A. Zinoviev
1955, April - checking the teaching of social sciences and ideological and educational work at the philosophy faculty of Moscow State University by the Department of Science and Culture of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Defeat of "gnoseologists".
Academic period of creativity
1957-1961 - editor-consultant in the journal Voprosy filosofii.
1959 - the birth of his daughter Elena Mamardashvili.
1961-1966 - head of the department of criticism and bibliography in the Zh. "Problems of Peace and Socialism" (Prague). Business trips to Italy, Germany, East Germany, Cyprus; after returning to Moscow, he becomes "restricted to travel abroad."
Acquaintance with M. Proust's novel "In Search of Lost Time"
1961 - defended his Ph.D. thesis "On the criticism of the Hegelian doctrine of the forms of cognition" (Moscow); becoming a member of the CPSU.
1966-1968 - head. Department of the Institute of International Labor Movement of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR
- Deputy editor-in-chief of the journal Voprosy filosofii I. T. Frolova.
- Reading courses of lectures:
- "Problems of the Analysis of Consciousness" (Faculty of Psychology, Moscow State University)
The beginning of friendship with Yuri Petrovich Senokosov and Alexander Moiseevich Pyatigorsky.
1970 - defense of his doctoral dissertation "Forms and content of thinking" (Tbilisi). Father's death from a heart attack.
1972 - received the title of professor.
1973, August - performance "Science and values - infinite and finite" at the "Round table" on the topic "Science, ethics, humanism".
- Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of the History of Natural Science and Technology of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR.
- Reading courses of lectures:
- "Problems of the Analysis of Consciousness" (Institute of General and Pedagogical Psychology, USSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences)
- (1978? 1980) (VGIK)
- (1979-1980) (VGIK)
- "Philosophy of Art" (Higher Directing Courses :)
- "Analytics of cognitive forms and ontology of consciousness" (1979-1980) (Riga, Rostov-on-Don, Vilnius)
1976 - Performance "Obligation of Form" at the "Round Table", organized by J. "Questions of Philosophy" on the topic "The interaction of science and art in the conditions of scientific and technological revolution."
1980 - moved to Tbilisi at the invitation of the director of the Institute of Philosophy of the Georgian Academy of Sciences, academician Niko Chavchavadze, worked at the institute as a chief research officer (until 1990).
Late period of creativity
- Reading courses of lectures:
(Moscow, Institute of General and Pedagogical Psychology, USSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences; lectures for graduate students of the IOPP and VNII).
- First course of lectures on Proust (Tbilisi State University).
- Participation in seminars and schools of the Interdepartmental Council on the problem of "Consciousness", created by the State Committee for Science and Technology of the USSR and the Council of Ministers of the USSR.
1983 - report at the II All-Union School on the Problems of Consciousness ("Classical and non-classical ideal of rationality"),
- Lecture course "Experience of Physical Metaphysics" (Vilnius)
- Second course of lectures on Proust (Tbilisi State University)
1984, February - Performance “Literary Criticism as an Act of Reading” at the Round Table on the topic: “Literature and Literary Criticism in the Context of Philosophy and Social Science”, organized by g. "Questions of Philosophy".
1987 - the first, after a 20-year break, travel abroad, to Italy. Report at the IV All-Union School on the Problem of Consciousness.
1987, December - report at the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of the CCCP "The problem of consciousness and philosophical vocation"
1987-1990 - active participation in the political life of Georgia. Speeches against nationalism and extremism Gamsakhurdia.
- participation in the conference "Man of Europe" in Paris,
- participation in the Dortmund conference in the USA.
1988, December - performance "Phenomenology - a concomitant moment of any philosophy" at the Round Table
Loading ...