<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">mgimoconcept</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Концепт: философия, религия, культура</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Concept: philosophy, religion, culture</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2541-8831</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2619-0540</issn><publisher><publisher-name>МГИМО</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24833/2541-8831-2023-4-28-48-58</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">mgimoconcept-826</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ФИЛОСОФИЯ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>RESEARCH ARTICLES. PHILOSOPHY</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Радикальное выделение секулярного и проблема насилия в контексте философского осмысления современной культуры</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Radical Distinction of the Secular and the Problem of Violence in the Context of Contemporary Culture’s Philosophical Comprehension</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4657-2306</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Литова</surname><given-names>Д. С.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Litova</surname><given-names>D. S.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Дарья Сергеевна Литова — аспирант кафедры философии</p><p>119454, Москва, проспект Вернадского, 76 (Россия)</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Daria S. Litova — PhD student, Department of Philosophy</p><p>76, Prospect Vernadskogo, Moscow, Russia, 119454 (Russia)</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">Litova_D_S@my.mgimo.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>МГИМО МИД России</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>MGIMO University</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2023</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>23</day><month>12</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>7</volume><issue>4</issue><fpage>48</fpage><lpage>58</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Литова Д.С., 2023</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2023</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Литова Д.С.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Litova D.S.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://concept.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/826">https://concept.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/826</self-uri><abstract><p>Теория секуляризации продолжительное время находилась в авангарде философского дискурса XX в. Секулярное восприятие общественных процессов не могло не влиять на их динамику, на решения, принимаемые людьми на разных уровнях общественной жизни. Что дозволено человеку в мире, где религия более не составляет базис общественного поведения, а многовековые основы социальной жизни считаются отменёнными? Автор стремится проанализировать предпринимаемые ранее попытки осмыслить проблему насилия, существующего в современной культуре, средствами философских концепций, постулирующих «радикальное выделение секулярного» как едва ли не определяющее свойство «современности». При этом автор обращается в том числе к исследованию различных подходов к проблеме морального релятивизма, что заставляет привлечь к рассмотрению точки зрения теистической и нетеистической философии: с одной стороны, сторонников философского направления «Радикальная Ортодоксия» (Джон Милбанк и Аласдер Макинтайр); с другой — постмодернизма (Жиль Делёз, Жан Бодрийяр), постструктурализма (Джудит Батлер), фрейдомарксизма (Славой Жижек). Показано, что все эти философы так или иначе увязывают радикальный секуляризм и рост насилия в обществе. В результате исследования установлена точка пересечения взглядов на проблему насилия в секуляризованном обществе: отсутствие укоренённых в дискурсивной традиции коллективно разделяемых ценностей неизбежно порождает и поддерживает моральный релятивизм, распространённость которого в целом пропорциональна росту уровня насилия, включая латентное.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The theory of secularization has long been at the forefront of the philosophical discourse of the 20th century. The secular perception of social processes could not help but influence their dynamics, the decisions made by people at different levels of social life. What is allowed for a person in the world where religions no longer form the basis of social behavior and the centuries-old foundations of social life are considered canceled? The author seeks to analyze previous attempts to comprehend the problem of violence in modern culture through philosophical theories, which regard radical secularization as one of the key characteristics of modernity. At the same time, the author refers, among other things, to the study of various approaches to the problem of moral relativism, including the perspectives of theistic and atheistic philosophy: on the one hand, represented by Radical Orthodoxy of John Milbank and Alasdair McIntyre; on the other hand, postmodernism (Gilles Deleuze and Jean Baudrillard), post-structuralism (Judith Butler), and Freudo-Marxism (Slavoj Zizek). All the above-mentioned philosophers associate radical secularism with the escalation of violence in society. The study identifies the meeting point of perspectives on the problem of violence in secular society: the absence of collectively shared values rooted in the discursive tradition inevitably generates and maintains moral relativism, the prevalence of which is generally proportional to the growth in the level of violence, including latent violence. The article suggests ways to mitigate the risks of secularization and moral relativism and puts forwards an argument for the importance of tradition and community in shaping moral values. The author also emphasizes the importance of considering the role of religion, particularly Christianity, in addressing this issue.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>генеалогия секулярного</kwd><kwd>секуляризация</kwd><kwd>постсекулярность</kwd><kwd>Радикальная Ортодоксия</kwd><kwd>насилие</kwd><kwd>терроризм</kwd><kwd>новый атеизм</kwd><kwd>религия</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>genealogy of the secular</kwd><kwd>secularization</kwd><kwd>post-secularization</kwd><kwd>Radical Orthodoxy</kwd><kwd>violence</kwd><kwd>terrorism</kwd><kwd>new atheism</kwd><kwd>religion</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Батлер Д. Сила ненасилия: Сцепка этики и политики. — Москва: Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», 2022. — 224 с. https://doi.org/10.17323/978-5-7598-2665-1</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Baudrillard, J. (1994) The illusion of the end. Stanford: Stanford University Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Бодрийяр Ж. Дух терроризма; Войны в заливе не было. — Москва: РИПОЛ классик, 2016. — 222 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Baudrillard, J. (2016) Dukh terrorizma. Voiny v zalive ne bylo [L’esprit du terrorisme. La guerre du Golfe n’a pas eu lieu]. Moscow: RIPOL Classic Publ. (In Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Докинз Р. Бог как иллюзия. — Москва: КоЛибри, 2021. — 560 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Boff, L. (1998) Caminhar da Igreja com os oprimidos. São Paulo: Editora Vozes.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Милбанк Дж. Теология и социальная теория: по ту сторону секулярного. – Москва: Теоэстетика, 2022. — 736 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Boff, L. (2011) Jesus Cristo Libertador. São Paulo: Editora Vozes.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Узланер Д. Конец религии? История теории секуляризации. — Москва: Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», 2019. — 240 с. https://doi.org/10.17323/978-5-75981963-9</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Borradori, G. (2003) Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Узланер Д. Постсекулярный поворот. Как мыслить о религии в XXI веке. — Москва: Издательство Института Гайдара, 2020. — 240 c.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bruce, S. (2002) God is Dead: Secularization in the West. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Холланд Т. Доминион. История об одной революционной идее, полностью изменившей западное мировоззрение. — Москва: Бомбора, 2021. — 714 c.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Butler, J. (2020) The force of nonviolence. An ethico-political bind. Brooklyn: Verso. (Russ. ed.: (2022) Sila nenasiliya: stsepka etiki i politiki. Moscow: HSE Publishing House. https://doi.org/10.17323/978-5-75982665-1).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Четыре всадника: эпохальная дискуссия, с которой началась революция атеистов / К. Хитченс, Р. Докинз, С. Харрис, Д. Деннет. — Москва: Эксмо, 2020. — 170 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Caputo, J. D. (2006) Philosophy and Theology. Nashville: Abingdon Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Baudrillard J. The illusion of the end. — Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1994. — viii, 123 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Casanova, J. (1994) Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Boff L. Caminhar da Igreja com os oprimidos. — São Paulo: Editora Vozes, 1998. — 352 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Clark, K. J. (1990) Return to Reason: A Critique of Enlightenment Evidentialism and a Defense of Reason and Belief in God. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Boff L. Jesus Cristo Libertador. — São Paulo: Editora Vozes, 2011. — 352 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Dawkins, R. (2008) The God Delusion. Boston: Mariner Books. (Russ. ed.: (2021) Bog kak illyuziya. Moscow: KoLibri Publ.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Borradori G. Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida. — Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003. — 224 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Foucault, M. (1982) ‘The Subject and Power’, Critical Inquiry, 8(4), pp. 777–795.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bruce S. God is Dead: Secularization in the West. — Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2002. — XVI, 269 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Finke, R. and Stark, R. (1988) ‘Religious Economies and Sacred Canopies: Religious Mobilization in American Cities, 1906’, American Sociological Review, 53(1), pp. 41–49. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095731 Gutiérrez, G. (1971) Teología de la liberación: Perspectivas. Lima: CEP.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Caputo J.D. Philosophy and Theology. — Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006. — 215 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Harris, S. (2004) The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason. New York: W.W. Norton &amp; Company.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Casanova J. Public Religions in the Modern World. — Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1994. — 330 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hitchens, C. (2009) God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. New York: Twelve.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Clark K.J. Return to Reason: A Critique of Enlightenment Evidentialism and a Defense of Reason and Belief in God. — Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990. — 158 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hitchens, C. et al. (2019) The Four Horsemen: The Conversation That Sparked an Atheist Revolution. New York: Random House. (Russ. ed.: (2020) Chetyre vsadnika: epokhal’naya diskussiya, s kotoroy nachalas’ revolyutsiya ateistov. Moscow: Exmo Publ.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Foucault M. The Subject and Power // Critical Inquiry. — 1982. — Vol. 8, № 4. — P. 777–795.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Holland, T. (2019) Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World. New York: Basic books. (Russ. ed.: (2021) Dominion. Istoriya ob odnoy revolyutsionnoy ideye, polnost’yu izmenivshey zapadnoye mirovozzreniye. Moscow: Bombora Publ.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Finke R., Stark R. Religious Economies and Sacred Canopies: Religious Mobilization in American Cities, 1906 // American Sociological Review. — 1988. — Vol. 53, № 1. — P. 41–49. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095731</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Iannaccone, L. R. (1991) ‘The Consequences of Religious Market Structure’, Rationality and Society, 3(2), pp. 156–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043463191003002002</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Gutiérrez G. Teología de la liberación: Perspectivas. — Lima: CEP, 1971. — 372 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">MacIntyre, A. (2010) ‘On Being a Theistic Philosopher in a Secularized Culture’, Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association, 84, pp. 23–32. https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc2010843</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Harris S. The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason. — New York: W.W. Norton &amp; Company, 2004. — 348 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Milbank, J. (1991) Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason. Oxford: B. Blackwell. (Russ. ed.: (2022) Teologiia i sotsial’naia teoriia: po tu storonu sekuliarnogo razuma. Moscow: Teoestetika.).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit21"><label>21</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Hitchens C. God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. — New York: Twelve, 2009. — 336 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Russell, B. (1967) Why I am not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects. Chicago: Touchstone.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit22"><label>22</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Iannaccone L.R. The Consequences of Religious Market Structure // Rationality and Society. — 1991. — Vol. 3, № 2. — P. 156–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043463191003002002</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Taylor, C. (2007) A Secular Age. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit23"><label>23</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">MacIntyre A. On Being a Theistic Philosopher in a Secularized Culture // Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association. — 2010. — Vol. 84. — P. 23–32. https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc2010843</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Uzlaner, D. A. (2019) Konets religii? Istoriya teorii sekulyarizatsii [End of religion? History of secularization theory]. Moscow: HSE Publishing House. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17323/978-5-7598-1963-9</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit24"><label>24</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Russell B. Why I am not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects. — Chicago: Touchstone, 1967. — 266 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Uzlaner, D. A. (2020) Postsekuliarnyi povorot. Kak myslit’ o religii v XXI veke [The Postsecular Turn. How to Think about Religion in the Twenty-First Century]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Instituta Gaiidara Publ. (In Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit25"><label>25</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Taylor C. A Secular Age. — Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007. — 874 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Weaver, R. (2013) Ideas Have Consequences. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit26"><label>26</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Weaver R. Ideas Have Consequences. — Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2013. — 224 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Zizek, S. (2009) First as tragedy, then as farce. London; New York: Verso.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit27"><label>27</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Zizek S. First as tragedy, then as farce. — London; New York: Verso, 2009с. — 157 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Žižek, S. (2009a) The Fragile Absolute: Or, Why Is the Christian Legacy Worth Fighting For? London: Verso.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit28"><label>28</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Žižek S. The Fragile Absolute: Or, Why Is the Christian Legacy Worth Fighting For? — London: Verso, 2009a. — 192 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Žižek, S. (2009b) Violence. London: Profile.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit29"><label>29</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Žižek S. Violence. — London: Profile, 2009b. — 218 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Žižek S. Violence. — London: Profile, 2009b. — 218 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
