Ancient Understanding of Time and the Background of Contemporary Historicism
https://doi.org/10.24833/2541-8831-2023-2-26-7-18
Abstract
Contemporary changes in historical culture associated with various states of modernity actualize the problem of the foundations and prerequisites of historicism as a principle of thinking characteristic of modern societies. The ancient historicism background consists primarily in the advanced concepts of time and eternity, which contain the potential variability in the understanding of historicity in modern philosophy and culture. At the same time, the problem of the historical variability of the world remained on the periphery of ancient philosophy and culture, and classical historicism, which was established in the second half of the 18th century, was based on the rejection of some aspects of the ancient heritage. In opposing being and becoming, ancient philosophy preferred being, which was also manifested in the preference for truth over time, for one over multiple. Classical historicism of modern times is focused on the idea of becoming, which in a new way reveals the contradictions between truth and time, one and multiple. Relativism and plurality are becoming features of modern transformations of historicism, in which the structures of time are preserved, dating back to the ancient concepts of chronos, kairos, eon, etc. Of particular interest are modern ideas about time, which go back to the ancient concept of objectified chronological time and its correlation with other forms of time conceptualization. In the historical consciousness of modern times, the ancient concepts of time were transformed under the influence of the prophetic sense of time, characteristic of the biblical tradition, in which the historical process is considered in the context of the gradual revelation of the original intention and meaning of history.
About the Author
D. G. GorinRussian Federation
Dmitry G. Gorin — Doctor of Philosophy, Professor at the Department of Political Analysis and Socio-Psychological Processes
Office 340, 28-1, Stremyanny lane, Moscow, Russia, 117997 (Russia)
References
1. Akker, R. van den., Gibbons, A. and Vermeulen, T. (2017) Metamodernism historicity, affect and depth after postmodernism. London ; New York: Rowman & Littlefield. (Russ. ed.: (2020) Metamodernizm: Istorichnost’, Affekt i Glubina posle modernizma. Moscow: RIPOL Classic Publ.).
2. Badiou, A. (1997) Deleuze: La Clameur De L’Etre. Paris: Hachette. (Russ. ed.: (2004) Deleuze. Shum bytiya. Moscow: Pragmatika kul’tury Publ.).
3. Bakhtin, M. M. (2000) Epos i roman [Epic and novel]. Saint Petersburg: Azbuka Publ. (In Russian).
4. Berdyaev, N. (1990) Smysl istorii [The meaning of history]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ. (In Russian).
5. Boer, W. Den (1968) ‘Graeco-Roman Historiography in Its Relation to Biblical and Modern Thinking’, History and Theory, 7(1), pp. 60-75. https://doi.org/10.2307/2504266
6. Castoriadis, C. (1975) L’institution imaginaire de la société. Paris: Éditions du seuil. (Russ. ed.: (2003) Voobrazhaemoe ustanovlenie obshchestva. Moscow: Gnozis, Logos Publ.).
7. Couloubaritsis, L. (2011) ‘How else can we appropriate ancient the philosophy?’, Logos, (4), pp. 45–62. (In Russian).
8. Deleuze, G. (1969) Logique du sens. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit. (Russ. ed: (2015) Logika smysla. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt Publ.).
9. Finley, M. I. (1965) ‘Myth, Memory, and History’, History and Theory, 4(3), pp. 281–302. https://doi. org/10.2307/2504346
10. Habermas, J. (1985) Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne : zwölf Vorlesungen. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. (Russ. ed: (2003) Filosofskij diskurs o moderne. Moscow: Ves’ mir Publ.).
11. Heidegger, M. (1927) Sein und Zeit. Halle: Max Niemeyer. (Russ. ed: (1993) Vremya i bytie: stat’i i vystupleniya. Moscow: Respublika Publ.).
12. Khvostova, K. (2019) ‘Short historical time’, Dialog so Vremenem, (67), pp. 5–16. (In Russian).https://doi. org/10.21267/AQUILO.2019.67.30806
13. Losev, A. F. (2000a) Istoriya antichnoy estetiki: v 8 t. T. 3. Vysokaya klassika [History of ancient aesthetics: in 8 vol. Vol. 3. High classics]. Kharkiv: Folio Publ; Moscow: AST Publ. (In Russian).
14. Losev, A. F. (2000b) Istoriya antichnoy estetiki: v 8 t. T. 8. Itogi tysyacheletnego razvitiya: v 2-kh kn. Kn. 2. [History of ancient aesthetics: in 8 vol. Vol. 8. Results of millennial development: in 2 books. Book. 2]. Kharkiv: Folio Publ; Moscow: AST Publ. (In Russian).
15. Losev, A. F. (2001) Antichnaya filosofiya istorii [Ancient philosophy of history]. Saint Petersburg: Aleteiia Publ. (In Russian).
16. Losev, A. F. (2006) Gomer [Homer]. Moscow: Molodaya gvardiya Publ. (In Russian).
17. Lewis, K.S. (1995). The Discarded Image: An Introduction to Medieval and Renaissance Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Russ. ed: (2016) ‘Otbroshennyy obraz’,. in Izbrannye raboty po istorii kul'tury. Moscow: Novoye literaturnoye obozreniye. Pp. 633-839).
18. Mannheim, K. (1943) Diagnosis of our times. London: Routledge. (Russ. ed: (1994) Diagnoz nashego vremeni. Moscow: Yurist Publ.).
19. Meinecke, F. (1965) Die Entstehung des Historismus. Munchen: R. Oldenburg Verlag. (Russ. ed: (2004) Vozniknovenie istorizma. Moscow: ROSSPEN Publ.).
20. Olsevich, Y. A. (2012) Kognitivno-psihologicheskij sdvig v aksiomatike ekonomicheskoj teorii (Al’ternativnye gipotezy) [Cognitive-psychological shift in the axiomatics of economic theory (Alternative hypotheses)]. Saint Petersburg: Aleteiia Publ. (In Russian).
21. Rutkevich, A. (2018) ‘Historicism and its Critics’, Voprosy Filosofii, (12), pp. 24–36. (In Russian). https://doi. org/10.31857/S004287440002580-3
22. Sambursky, S. and Pines, S. (1971) The Concept of Time in Late Neoplatonism. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
23. Troubetzkoy, E. (1998) Izbrannye proizvedeniya [Selected Works]. Rostov-on-Don: Feniks Publ. (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Gorin D.G. Ancient Understanding of Time and the Background of Contemporary Historicism. Concept: philosophy, religion, culture. 2023;7(2):7-18. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24833/2541-8831-2023-2-26-7-18