Ideas and Ideals

The article is devoted to the processes of displacement of religion into the sphere of marginalized religiosity in the era of Modernity. The research based on various sources related to the given historical period. They include alchemical manuscripts, legal papers, scholarly writings as well as Russian and international studies of alchemy. The following scientifi c research methods were applied: textual, descriptive, comparative, biographical, systematic, etc. The article introduces the main fi ndings of the study. It shows that in Western Europe for a long time alchemical beliefs and practices were woven into everyday life. The marginalization of alchemy took a long period and ended only in the 18th century. This process of delimitation occurred despite the self-positioning of alchemists as pious believers, on the one hand, and despite their intellectual and social demand and actual support from the secular authorities, on the other. In the era of modern times pressure on alchemy came to be exerted both by offi cial Christianity, which did not accept alchemical teachings and practices that raised suspicions of witchcraft, and by scientifi c natural science, which rejected it because of its mythologized narrative and its attitude of secrecy about research. As a result, alchemy was marginalized not only in the religious sphere but also in secular cognition. The alchemical tradition is an eclectic combination of knowledge and skills, so it has a great capacity for adaptation. Because of these abilities, it was able to persist into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, when alchemical elements began to be incorporated into various esoteric movements, mystical cults, art historical concepts, and so on. Nowadays, alchemy is still a marginalized phenomenon, closely associated with religion but not reducible to it. The results of the study are important for understanding the history of religion and the evolution of the relationship between religion and science.

One of the relevant and demanded areas of modern philosophical knowledge is the philosophy of education. When education is considered within the framework of socio-philosophical analysis as a social institution and a cultural phenomenon, attention is paid to its role in the creation and development of culture. The philosophy of education focuses on identifying the goals and principles of the educational systems, on determining pedagogical methods and their impact on the individual and society as a whole. The problem fi eld of the philosophy of education defines the object of study of pedagogical anthropology, which consists in identifying the meaning of the relationship between teacher and student, in understanding the role of the dialogue component in pedagogical work, and finally, the conceptualization of the anthropological program for the formation of the spiritual and physical health of the student. All of the above is the subject of this article. The source study base used the classical works of the pedagogical and philosophical-anthropological nature of the ancestor of Russian pedagogical anthropology K.D. Ushinsky, works on the problems of the pedagogical philosophy of Free education and education of the great Russian writer and teacher L.N. Tolstoy, as well as modern research literature of a socio-philosophical and philosophical-anthropological nature. The theoretical and methodological toolkit of the article is based on the application of the general scientific principle of historicism, which makes it possible to identify the dynamics in the analysis of the problems posed of a philosophical and educational nature, as well as on the use of the method of cultures-comparative analysis, since the chronological period of Russian history covered in this work dates back to the time of the Alexander reforms before the formation of the era of the Silver Age of Russian culture and concerns a number of iconic figures of this time.

The subject of the research is a philosophical analysis of mythological narratives about artifi cial intelligent beings, considered as cultural prototypes of modern concepts of artifi cial intelligence (AI). It is proved that myths are archetypal matrices encoding fundamental philosophical questions about the nature of the mind, the limits of creation and the responsibility of the creator. The study thus hypothesizes that archaic myths do not contain intuitive predictions and guesses, but archetypal models that continue to implicitly structure the discourse around AI technologies. The focus is on the reconstruction and systematization of key mythologies that reveal fundamental anxieties and ethical dilemmas associated with the act of artifi cial creation, which remain relevant in the era of machine learning and autonomous cognitive agents. The methodology is based on a philosophical and comparative analysis of relevant mythological texts using a hermeneutic approach to identify stable archetypal structures and their subsequent projection on modern AI problems. The scientifi c novelty of the work lies in the systematization of four archetypal models for creating artifi cial intelligence – hybrid (Pandora), mechanical artifact (Talos), emergent entity (Sparta) and combined model (Golem) – and in demonstrating their direct connection with the current problems of AI. The correlation is traced between the unpredictable destructive actions of mythological characters with artifi cial intelligence and the shortcomings in modern AI systems being developed: the ‘black box’ (opacity of solutions), the ‘sinister valley’ (psychological discomfort from too realistic, but not living creatures), emergent behavior (unpredictability), loss of control and ethical risks. The main conclusion is that understanding the mythological heritage provides an indispensable cultural and philosophical toolkit for the responsible development of AI technologies, which sets a coordinate system for solving problems of interpretability, security and reconciliation of values, necessitating an interdisciplinary dialogue between engineers, philosophers and ethicists.

The article presents an analysis of the original concept of heliocentrism by A.L. Chizhevsky, set out in his scientifi c works. The scientist correlates the infl uence of solar energy with the factors of historical and social processes. According to his concept, the state of predisposition to the behavior of human masses is a function of the energetic activity of the Sun, the regular sharp rises of which transform potential psychic energy into the energy of action. Under the condition of mutual complementarity of natural and social factors, when a situation of “imaginary chaos” arises and certain laws begin to play a dominant role, heliotaraxis creates history. The article expresses the idea that Chizhevsky’s heliocentrism allowed not only to look at the Sun as the “pulse of the Earth”, but also to combine love for the subject of scientifi c research with poetry. His worldview is a cosmoplanetary all-unity, embodied in the integration of scientifi c ideas about the energy of the world with its artistic refl ection. The methodological basis of the study was the analysis of Chizhevsky’s theory of heliotaraxy, his idea of t he infl uence of solar activity on the course of the historical process. The fi rst and main conclusion is that despite the ambiguous attitude to Chizhevsky’s scientifi c works, he is the author of original philosophical works. Analysis of the scientist’s heliocentric ideas contributes to the understanding of his worldview, and, consequently, his entire creative heritage. This idea has every right to be recognized as one of the methods of understanding the world around us. It is worth noting that the interpreted philosophical views of Chizhevsky are not only of interest in themselves, as scientifi c theoretical research, but also have heuristic value for modern science. One of the main conclusions is the conclusion about Chizhevsky’s scientifi c courage, his devotion to his scientifi c ideas, his ability to search and assume, without fear of being caught in gross ignorance and ridiculed. 

The purpose of this article is to clarify the political views of the Eleatics. The relevance of this work stems from the paucity of research on this topic. Signifi cant gaps in the sources hinder the study of the political views of Xenophanes, Parmenides, Zeno, and Melissus. This article provides a historical reconstruction of the Eleatics’ political views based on biographical analysis and a contextual approach. It has been established that Xenophanes’ poetry contains criticism of tyranny and oligarchy. The arguments in favor of two versions of Parmenides’ party preferences are considered. The version of Parmenides’ democratic orientation is based on the reports of Strabo and Aristotle. A parallel is drawn between Elea and Taranto. Similarities in the social structure of both policies are noted. Based on information about the democratic structure of Taranto, an assumption is made about the democratic orientation of Parmenides’ state activities. The version of Parmenides’ aristocratic orientation is supported by Strabo’s report on the aristocratic state structure of Massalia. It is noted that this polis, like Elea, was founded in the Western Mediterranean by people from Phocaea. It is suggested that there were similarities in the state system between Elea and Massalia. It is shown that Parmenides’ legislative activity could have been aimed at creating strict laws in the sphere of morality and legal proceedings. It is established that reports of Zeno’s struggle against tyranny do not allow us to draw an unambiguous conclusion about his party affi liation. The version of Zeno’s commitment to the aristocracy does not have an advantage over the version of his democratic orientation. Based on the analysis of the political situation on the eve of and during the war between Samos and Athens, it is concluded that Melissus was a supporter of oligarchy or aristocracy. It is established that the idea of continuity in the party preferences of the Eleatics looks weak and unconvincing. At the same time, it is shown that all representatives of the Eleatic school were characterized by commitment to polis values. The views and activities of Xenophanes, Parmenides, Zeno and Melissus manifested polis patriotism, a high level of political activity, and the priority of the interests of the state over the interests of the citizen.

This paper is a preface to the translation of Johann Eberlin’s “Wolfaria” (1521) – the fi rst utopian text in Early Modern Era of continental Europe. J. Eberlin von Günzburg (c. 1460–1533) – religious reformer and thinker, humanist, translator. The article brings the brief analysis of his biography, social and political activities, as well as his writings. His ideas are subjected to the research in the context of reformation and humanist movement, they are linked to the views of the Wittenbergian reformist circle, the views and practices of radical reformers and the theories of the emerging utopian tradition of early Modernity. We point out the main stages of the development of eberlinian thought from radicalism to moderate views. Eberlinian utopianism is compared to the ideas of T. More, Ulrich von Hutten, J. Reichlin, Erasmus of Rotterdamm. Attention is paid to his attitudes towards social justice, property, education, humanistic studies and connection to early Lutheran views on the Christian state.

The paper also outlines the principal stages of the research of Eberlin’s writings and thinking from late 19-th to early 21-st centuries. We give also a brief survey of the translations of “Wolfaria” into European languages. The translation is provided with commentaries. This is the fi rst critical translation of “Wolfaria” into Russian.

The paper examines Aristotle’s place in one of the most signifi cant public education projects in late 19th to early 20th century Russia – the “Home Reading Programs” (1894–1914), published by the Moscow Commission for Self-Education.
The University Extension movement emerged as an attempt to overcome the class, geographic, and fi nancial barriers that prevented broad segments of the population from accessing systematic university knowledge. The “Programs”
offered readers structured courses in core academic disciplines, accompanied by recommended literature, methodological materials, and a system for assessing comprehension. Contrary to the widespread view that Aristotelian philosophy had weak reception in Russia, within the “Programs,” Aristotle’s philosophy occupies a central position in logic, psychology, political theory, law, history, literature, and aesthetics. Logic essentially in its Aristotelian version is treated as
the foundation of philosophical and scientifi c thinking. His political treatises are
used in the study of history and law, providing criteria for analyzing contemporary
political developments, patterns of political evolution, causes of coup-d’etat,
and actual governmental mechanisms. The Poetics serves as a basis for analyzing
literary forms and aesthetic theories. In the context of the “Programs,” Aristotle
appears not merely as an ancient author but as a relevant source of theoretical
models used to analyze both classical and modern sociocultural experience.
The “Programs” shaped an image of Aristotle as a universal thinker, a systematizer
of knowledge, the founder of scientifi c rationality, and the creator of
a scholarly tradition that retains methodological signifi cance for modernity.
Plato’s role is far more modest – he is portrayed as a mere philosopher of the past,
a dreamy author of idealistic doctrines that align philosophy with religion, and
of utopian political models. His philosophy is inferior to Aristotle’s in terms of
maturity and analytical rigor. The paper’s results demonstrate the signifi cance
of Aristotle’s philosophy in promoting models of intellectual culture through
the popularization and democratization of university education. They also offer
a new perspective on the scale and nature of the reception of Aristotelianism in
Russian culture within the context of educational initiatives of the time, and contribute
to a deeper understanding of the history of national education.

The article is devoted to the consideration of the problem of the relationship
between M. Heidegger’s ‘anti-metaphysical’ project and the so-called ‘indictment’,
which, with the assistance of a signifi cant part of representatives of
modern Western philosophy, seeks to present his philosophy as a metapolitical
project of affi rming the priority signifi cance of German’s ideas ‘soil’, ‘blood’,
‘destiny’, ‘spirit’ for world history. The author of the article presents the thesis
that the ‘anti-metaphysical’ project is a marker of the fact that accusations of the
national-socialist character of M. Heidegger’s philosophical thinking are groundless
and may relate only to his personal views, which had a more or less long-term
nature. The development of this thesis is based on the consideration of the criticism
of the fundamental ontology of M. Heidegger by the French phenomenologists
J. -L. Marion and M. Henry.
In the fi rst part of the article the author presents a historical-philosophical
view of M. Heidegger’s ontology of intentionality as an ecstatic sphere of the being
of the beings, or ‘Logos’, which acts as the main element in the structure of
the fundamental ontology and metaphysics of fi nitude “Being-Logos-Beings”.
The second part of the article proposes to examine M. Heidegger’s Dasein
in the context of his doctrine of the ‘human-guardian’ of beings in its being.
This doctrine serves as a basis for radically questioning the assertions regarding
the metaphysical content implicitly present in the philosophy of M. Heidegger.
This allows us to remove accusations from fundamental ontology, the metaphysics
of fi nitude and the philosophy of the event in the presence of “national-socialist”
contents in them and to point out the inaccuracies contained in the criticism
of M. Heidegger by J. -L. Marion and M. Henry..

The article attempts to theoretically comprehend Gnostic worldview as an intellectual phenomenon that accompanies the history of mankind from ancient times to the present. Gnosticism will be presented as a real participant in social
progress, paradoxically guiding its trajectory along the path of improving the social system through the denial of life-affi rming teachings and practices. Determining the essence of Gnosticism, you can probably repeat after the classic that
he has always been part of the force that “wanting evil, does good.” However, here, of course, one should take into account the shades of this mysterious phenomenon,
which, if desired, can be counted more than a dozen. Some of them are initially painted in more or less noble tones, while some look ominous and destructive. Therefore, it is necessary to state the immense scope of the circulation
of Gnostic ideas that require accurate and thorough identifi cation and verifi cation in order to develop an adequate attitude to the state of affairs in the spectrum
from politics and economics, culture and religion to science and philosophy, mass media and everyday activities of people. Note that the insuffi cient recognition of Gnosticism as an agent of serious transformations in various fi elds, as well as its weak conceptualization, primarily in secular science, create a tempting horizon for promising research. However, it is worth warning against a superfi cial attitude towards Gnosticism as a cultural spasm or religious scam with Eastern characteristics, which fl ared up brightly and
quickly disappeared two thousand years ago. This approach makes it diffi cult to see the essential characteristics of some important processes that are developing
before our eyes today.

A characteristic feature of the consumer society is the cult of the body, which has replaced the cult of the soul. (J. Baudrillard). The author, wondering about the reasons for such a transformation, sees the explanation in the Hesychast controversies of the 14th century, the core of which was the famous theological controversy between Gregory Palama and Varlaam the Calabrian, the starting point for such a fi nale. The essence of this controversy was the question of the possibility of God’s Knowledge and its ways. The position of Varlaam the Calabrian was reduced to the impossibility of Knowledge of God due to Its absolute transcendence, while Gregory Palama, without denying this, in fact, defended the real possibility of living, direct communication with God, unthinkable for the Calabrian monk. To substantiate his position, G. Palama, based on the thoughts of previous fathers and teachers of the Church, as well as appealing to the experience of the Athonite hesychasts, wrote a number of works, primarily “Triads in Defense of the Sacred Silent” and “The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters”, which are the subject of analysis in this article. The theological discussion, having raised deep philosophical problems related to man’s place in the world, his destiny, and his relationship with God, revealed serious disagreements between the opponents. During the discussion, G. Palama turns to Orthodox anthropology, which goes back to the biblical understanding of man, whose purpose is theosis or restoring his original integrity. Varlaam the Calabrian, being a fan of ancient philosophy, adhered to the dualistic concept of man, which contrasted soul and body, in fact, reducing man to a rational principle. At the same time, both the dogmas of faith and the conclusions of ancient philosophers are equally authoritative and equally legitimate for him. V. the Calabrian, becoming one of the fathers of the Western Renaissance, thus opened the way to a secular New Age. The cult of the human mind and the autonomy of the human personality have brought the desacralization of the soul to its logical conclusion: replacing the cult of the soul with the cult of the body.