Gehlen (Gehlen) Arnold( German philosopher and sociologist)
Comments for Gehlen (Gehlen) Arnold
Biography Gehlen (Gehlen) Arnold
(29.01. 1904, Leipzig-30.01.1976, Hamburg) - It. philosopher and sociologist, one of the founders of the Philosophical. anthropology as a special discipline. Disciple X. Driesch. Been influenced by Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, H. Hartman, phenomenology, etc.. Prof.. in Leipzig (since 1934), Konigsberg (from 1938), Vienna (from 1940), Speyer (1947), Aachen (1962-1969). Anthropological views of Mr.. originally evolved in line with the philosophy of life inspired by the conservative critics of culture. Most fully formulated in the main work G. 'Man. His nature and place in the world '(1940) [I]. Philos. anthropology, according to his plan, must bring together the data of individual human sciences. G. followed by Scheler and Plesner seeks to identify the specific situation in the world of man as a special way of organized living being, but that Mr.. renounces the use of human studies 'ladder of beings', essentially maps the stepwise structure of the organic world ( 'plant' - ( 'zoofity') - 'animal' - 'man'). G. emphasizes the peculiarity of human organization as an interconnected system of functions. Following And. G. Herder, G. calls the man 'inadequate' essence. In contrast to the animal, it is deprived of high-grade instincts, t. e. no stable outside stimuli, and an equally resistant reactions in themselves, does not dwell on the birth in harmony with nature, is not in vzaimosootvetstvii the 'outside world', m. e. segment of the world as such, specifically a meaningful name for this type of living beings. The man opened around the world. Lack of specific significant 'outside world' fraught with internal. excess motives in humans. T. arr., a man lies with the unbearable burden of survival and self-determination. Therefore, the main thing for him is 'unloaded', enabling more indirectly, definitely relate to the environment and to himself. Excess motives makes it impossible for them simultaneous realization. Implementation of some delays etc.. There 'samodistantsirovanie', allows a person, in contrast to the immediate life of animals, not just 'live', but 'to life', systematically and carefully to change their actions themselves and the surrounding. Action as a unity - Basic. Anthropological characterization of human. In effect there is no duality of process and res-ta, subject and object, spirit and flesh, and t. n. Progressive unloading, understood as an active self-realization, more and more freeing effect of situational certainty and at a higher level of required function is performed by 'symbolic' way. Vision takes a lead role among the senses, allowing you to navigate without direct contact with things, the language even more removed from the particulars of the situation. Acting, man creates a culture to-heaven belongs to human nature and can not be 'otmyslena' from her. Action, matching etc.. actions and 'co-operative' with them, lets talk about different. types of 'community'. The concept of action can move from 'initial anthropology' book 'person' to the doctrine of in-max, t. e. fixed forms of anthropological organizations, to-Roe most fully described in the 'Primitive man and later culture' (1956) . The action is motivated by expediency, but its constant repetition can be useful in other respects. Unforeseen expediency can bring its objective utility motives for further stabilizing the resulting cut-ta. For example, archaic in-thou family, livestock, agriculture and m. n. - unsolicited cut-t relig.-ritual, visual action, satisfying the basic needs in maintaining the stability of the world through his ritual image-fixing. Difficulties t. arr. in-you do not just 'unloaded' rights against the dangers, but also allow him to act instinktopodobno, defining his mind and will. G. highlights in the history of three cultural periods: the culture of hunters, farmers and Culture sovr. industrial culture, which arose about 200 years ago. Following M. Weber, he describes the progressive rationalization of in-tov (led by GM, there is technology). But this in-you are more subject to the immanent laws, jurisdiction, linking the combined interpretation of the world, and regulation of behavior, as it was in the archaic era, no more. Lack of synergies between the in-tov among themselves and with the moral life of man meant to last a heavy burden necessary to decide at its discretion. Along with progressive liberation of people from the dangers of physical labor and t. n. it provokes the development of 'modern subjectivity'. Conservative social critic fully framed G. in the concept of 'pluralist ethics' (the book 'Morals and gipermoral', 1969, ). He postulates the existence of four independent from each other sources of morality, . 'ethos': the desire for reciprocity, . 'physiological virtues' (instinctive desire for the welfare, . passing into eudemonism), . tribal (clan) morality of brotherly love, . ultimate expression in the morality of humanity; institutional ethos,
. In the course of the rationalization of in-tov, forcing them to rely increasingly on their internal. order and solve the objective problems, consistent with the pressure of circumstances, the clan (GUM) universalizuetsya morality comes into conflict with the ethos of political in-tov. Situation exacerbated intellectuals behind the morality preached by the brotherhood of their own lust for power. In the 70-ies. G. was a leading ideologue of the neo-cons in Germany, prompting a new interest in and to his theoretical work.