|
|
Russian Philosophy :
back
P. Florenskii
|
Florenskii Pavel
(1882 – 1937)
A philosopher, theologian, a priest of the Russian Orthodox Church and a martyr of the Stalinist period, a man of encyclopaedic intelligence. He was compared during his life to Leonardo da Vinci and Pascal. He was an expert in many areas of knowledge: from mathematics, physics, electrical engineering, through aesthetics, archaeology, ethnography, philology to poetry, painting, music and other fields.
His most known work, The Pillar and the Affirmation of Truth was to have an important influence upon the return of the Russian intelligentsia to Christianity (e.g. N. Losskii, S. Bulgakov).
The fundamental expression of his philosophy, cosignificance, links with Solovev’s idea of all-unity and also indirectly with the idea of sobornost’ of V. Khomyakov. He did not unreservedly share the views of the latter. He did not agree with their anti-Catholic slant, perceiving in them signs of Protestant democratism.
The idea of cosignificance was already expressed in a symbolic way in the title illustration to the work The Pillar and the Affirmation of Truth, the title page of which shows two angels standing on a pedestel with the inscription finis amoris ut duo unum fiant. In accordance with this idea every personality coexists with another for this is the work of the Holy Trinity (of the consubstantiality Divine Beings par excellence), that the Divine light reflects. Sin is the negation of the conception of cosignificance. Man, remaining in sin, does not leave the realm of his own ‘I.’ This egotistical concentration upon oneself leads a person in turn to his dismemberment. Man, instead of harmoniously developing, shuts himself up in darkness, opposing the realms of light. The highest stage of concentration upon oneself can result in neuropathic states. Florenskii, in sharing the views of certain psychologists (e.g. N. Osipov), indicated with the same the justification, to a certain degree, of attempts to reduce psychological illnesses to the moral failings of people.
He linked basic philosophical problems with the dogma of the Trinity and the idea of cosignificance. He maintained that between Trinitarian Existence and nihility, triunity was the one linking principle. Human thought – in accepting revelation – has, as if, doomed its very self in order to rise purified in the light of the trisolar truth fundamentally transcendental in relation to any philosophical concept. The thinker spoke on truth with the language of antinomy and paradox. For truth can not be reduced to the intellectual sphere. It is absolute reality realized upon the foundations of love, where love constitutes an exit from isolation towards cosignificance.
One of the most important tasks that Florenskii set himself was the development of an integral world view or at least paving the way for its creation in the future. With this aim in mind he attempted to overcome the dispersal that results from scientific specialization and to achieve his own synthesis between what the Church preaches and what is recognized by the world of science. Proceeding from semantic relations he enthusiastically conducted analyses in the search for links between the planes of faith and reason.
He proceeded in his description of reality from the fundamental law of thermodynamics – the law of entropy i.e. the dispersal of energy. Within his dialectic Chaos is the symbol of the process. There functions simultaneously to this law the law of ectropy involving the unity of what has been dispersed. For Florenskii the symbol of this process of ectropy is the synthesizing Logos-Christ present at its fullest in the Eucharist. This involves the idea of the ‘recapitulation’ (Latin caput ‘head’) of everything in Christ expressed by Saint Paul so that ‘all in heaven and on Earth might be brought into a unity in Christ’. In the language of Florenskii this represents the Eucharistic integration of all energies in the unifying energy of the Holy Spirit which takes place in Church liturgy. This allows equally for the comprehension of the value of human culture which finds its origin and sense in the cult of God. Florenskii also expressed his views on culture and aesthetics in the work Inverse Perspective. In undertaking an analysis here of the perspective of icon painting he was to become one of the precursors of research into the religious language of the icon.
Florenskii’s teachings on Sophia as the fourth hypostasis complicate an understanding of his thought. This is furthered by its mystical aspect which at the same time complicates it to a significant degree. According to Florenskii, Sophia is ‘The Great Root of all creation’, ‘the originally created nature of the creation, the creative love of God’. Sophia is cosmic reality gathered in one by the love of God and enlightened by the beauty of the Holy Spirit. There is also an interpretaton of Sophia as the Virgin Mary.
Florenskii, in linking to the idea of Godmanhood, worked upon the interpretation of theodicy and antropodicy which he recognized to be two fundamental elements in the Christian religion, which aimed for the deification of the human essence. His theodicy concentrated upon an apologia of God in the face of the evil existing in the world. The antropidicy was in turn an apologia for the divine creation – man within the context of the tendencies existing within him to sin and evil. This interpretation of the problem led to Florenskii’s polemic with N. Berdyaev.
Florenskii’s name, along with the names of three other Russian thinkers (P. Chaadaev, V. Solov’ev and V. Losskii) was mentioned by John Paul II in the encyclical Fides et Ratio (1998).
Piotr Przesmycki (Guy Russell Torr)
- Антоний романа и Антоний предания (1905).
- В вечной лазури (1907).
- Вопросы религиозного самопознания (1907).
- Соль земли (1908).
- Общечеловеческие корни идеализма (1909).
- О духовной истине (1912).
- Пределы гносеологии (Основная антиномия теории познания) (1913).
- Смысл идеализма (1914).
- Столп и утверждение Истины. Опыт православной теодицеи (1914). „Не восхищение неищева” (1915).
- Около Хомякова (1916).
- Первые шаги философии (1917).
- Троице-Сергиева Лавра и Россия (1919).
- Мнимости в геометрии (1922).
- Наука как символическое описание (1922).
- Философия культа (1922).
- Записка о христианстве и культуре (1923).
- Обратная перспектива (1919).
- Иконостас (1922).
- Имена (1924).
- Анализ пространственности в художественно-изобразительных произведениях (1924).
- Предполагаемое государственное устройство в будущем (1933).
A. de Lazari (ed.), Idee w Rosji. Leksykon rosyjsko-polsko-angielski, t. V., Łódź 2002
|
|
|
|
| Books
|
|
|
Акулинин В. - Философия
всеединства: От
В. С. Соловьева к П.
А. Флоренскому
, Новосибирск 1990 - ( A.A., ) |
|
|
Бердяев Н. - Русская идея.
Основные
проблемы
русской мысли
ХIХ века и начала
ХХ века
, Paris 1971 - ( A.A., ) |
|
|
Зернов Н. - Русское
религиозное
возрождение ХХ
века
, Paris 1991 - ( A.A., ) |
|
|
Кравец С. - О красоте
духовной (П. А.
Флоренский:
религиозно-нравственные
воззрения)
, Москва 1990 - ( A.A., ) |
|
|
Палиевский П. - Розанов и
Флоренский
, „Литературная учеба” (1) 1989 - ( J.B., R.S.-L., ) |
|
|
Палиевский П. - П. А. Флоренский: pro et
contra.Личность и
творчество
Павла
Флоренского в
оценке русских
мыслителей и
исследователей.
Антология
, С.-Петербург 1996 - ( J.B., ) |
|
|
Половинкин С., П. А. - Флоренский:
Логос против
хаоса
, Москва 1989 - ( J.B., ) |
|
|
Флоровский Г. - Пути русского
богословия
, Киев 1991 - ( M.W., ) |
|
|
Хоружий С. - Миросозерцание
Флоренского
, Томск 1999 - ( E.M., ) |
|
|
Хуторской А. - Отечественные
предпосылки
философии
виртуального
образования ,
www.eidos.techno.ru/books/virt_edu_ru.html, - ( E.M., ) |
|
|
Evdokimov P. - Le Christ dans la pensée russe
, Paris 1986 - ( P.P., ) |
|
|
Slesinski R. - Pavel Florensky: A Methaphysics of Love
, New York 1984 - ( P.P., ) |
| Artickles
|
|
|
Длугах Т. - Проблема
времени в
философии Канта
и П. Флоренского. ,
[w:] Кант и
философия в
России
, Москва 1994 - ( A.A., ) |
|
|
Игумен Андроник
[А. Трубачев] - Павел
Александрович
Флоренский
, „Литературная газета” (48) 1988 - ( A.A., ) |
|
|
Игумен Андроник
[А. Трубачев],
Половинкин С. - Флоренский
Павел
Александрович , [w:]
Русская
философия.
Словарь
, Москва 1995 - ( A.A., ) |
|
|
Кудрявцев П. - Идея Св. Софии в
русской
литературе
последних
десятилетий
, „Христианская мысль” (9) 1916 - ( S.J., J.B., ) |
|
|
Хоружий С. - Философский
символизм
Флоренского и
его жизненные
истоки ,
„Историко-философский ежегодник. 88”, Москва 1988 - ( M.W., ) |
|
|
Obolensky S. - La sophiologie et la mariologie de Paul Florensky
, „Unitas” (3 - 4) 1946 - ( P.P., ) |
|
|
Schultze B. - Zur Sophiafrage
, „Orientalia Christiana Periodica” (3) 1937 - ( P.P., ) |
|
|
of the