SHESTOV Leo( existentialist philosopher)
Comments for SHESTOV Leo
Biography SHESTOV Leo
31.1/12.2.1866 - 20/11/1938
(real name-Schwartzman Yehuda Leib)
Graduated from the Faculty of Kiev Zap. From 1920 he lived in Paris. His thinking has developed in line with the ideas of Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, Nietzsche. The existence of orientation opposed to the rational knowledge, and obezdushennoe poraboschayuschee.Vyrazil protest against the general validity of the truths and moral norms. Rationalism in opposition to the revelation of the Old Testament. Unlike others. existentialists, "revolt" in the face of life, took it as a miracle, revealed to God.
Characteristic views Shestov thought the bounds of reason, which consequently lost its universality, and hence the validity. (Zamaleev п░.п╓. Course history of Russian philosophy. M., 1995. S. 138).
'While between an educated man and people are confronted with a conscience as the only possible intermediary, there can be no question of mutual understanding. Conscience requires the victims and only the victims. She said an educated man: you are happy, secured, and scientists - the people are poor, ignorant, unhappy. Renounce their welfare or cast a spell on his conscience flattering speeches. Only those who have nothing to sacrifice, who himself lost everything - only he can come to the people as an equal '.
Science and Philosophy
'The sick man we call the doctor to the dying man - a priest. The doctor tries to return the person to life on earth, the priest directs to eternal life. And as a matter between the doctor and the priest's affair has nothing to do, so there is nothing common between philosophy and science. They not only do not help and do not complement one another, as one might think - they are always at loggerheads with each. And the more intense hostility that she has to hide under the guise of love and trust.
(Sixth A. Coll. cit.: In 2 m. T. 2. M., 1993. S. 152).
'You say that not only questioning, but also to review all the beautiful things absolutely impossible, that life, even tens Mafusailov not enough for this venture. I myself know that it is impossible. But even I know that this is one of those rare cases of impossibility, when her greet warmly, as the most desirable. There is no need that anyone was preodalel "diversity" of beauty in the idea or how - in some other way, because in a time when diversity would be overcome, all dried up to the living source of beauty. Steel have nothing to ask, what is beauty. And he who loves beauty, and beauty looks, never questioned what he was looking for and what he likes. Tom nor justify or explain "before all, even before him there is no need. He knows he does not, it is important to value and love of beauty was a beauty, which everyone and always be seen. Even in the generally accepted best works of art are not detected with that clarity about which theorists are busy fine. Revealed only that all the same, - t. e. secondary. That's why - that of aesthetics, who sought the same for all, beyond the general seats did not go and "secret" beauty is not revealed. I will not reveal, of course. After interrogating all the wonderful things they would not: they can not overcome the variety. And what are they questioning it and identify it was not worth: not because it hides - is in front of everybody and for all '.
. 'The mortal sin of philosophers is not that they're after the absolute, and that when they see that it is absolutely not found, they would agree to recognize the absolute, no matter what it was from the created human beings - the science, the state, morality, religion and t
. n. Of course, both the state and science, and morality, and religion have value, and very valuable. But only as long as they do not claim to the throne of the absolute. Even religion, however sublime and profound it was, at best, only a vessel, storage, vestments for the absolute. And we must be able, if you do not want to fall into idolatry, to distinguish the sacred from the vestments, in which she dressed. But people are not what they do not know, do not want this. Idols why - it is closer and clearer to them than God. This much is told in CB. Scripture. Even the Jewish people, who had the calling of God to open half of the human race, tempted by idols, and only thanks to unprecedented strain on the calls of the prophets rose to the altitude, which opens up the eternal truth '.
(Sixth A. Coll. cit.: In 2 m. T. 1. M., 1993. S. 617).
Nature and people
'People, said Spinoza, imagined that they do not constitute elements or links to a single, which is termed nature, and want to form in nature as a state within a state. Does not the opposite? Not correct to say that people feel voiceless and powerless wheels of one big machine and forgot that the world was created for them? "
Major works 1 / Sobr.soch. V.1-6. Spb., 1898-1912, 2 / Power keys / Potestas clavium /. Berlin, 1923; 3 / Kierkegaard and existential philosophy. Paris, 1939; 4 / speculation and the revelation. Paris, 1964, 5 / Sola fide - by faith only. Paris, 1966.
Edition 1. Coll. cit.: In 6 t. SPb., 1911 2. Shakespeare and his critic Brandes. SPb., 1898. 3. Welcome to the teachings of gr. Tolstoy Fr. Nietzsche. Philosophy and preaching. SPb., 1900. 4. Dostoevsky and Nietzsche. Philosophy tragedy. SPb., 1903. 5. Apotheosis groundless. Experience adogmaticheskogo thinking. SPb., 1905 (Leningrad, 1991). 6. Beginnings and endings: Collection. Articles. SPb., 1908. 7. Great eves. , 1910. 8. Power key. Berlin, 1923. 9. On the scales of Job. Travels of a heart. Paris, 1929. 10. Kierkegaard and the existential philosophy: a voice crying in the wilderness. Paris, 1939; M., 1992. 11. Athens and Jerusalem. Paris, 1951. 12. Speculation and the revelation. Religious philosophy of Vladimir. Soloviev and others. Article. Paris, 1964. 13. Sola fide .- Only faith. Paris, 1964.
Literature Griftsov B. Three thinker: V. Rozanov, D. Merezhkovsky, L.SH. M., 1911; VF Asmus. Leo W. and Kierkegaard / / Philos. Science. M., 1972. ? 4; Erofeev In. Only one thing: tyranny: Philosophy of loneliness and literary-esthete. credo Leo W. Vopr. lit-ry. 1975. ? 10; Soprovsky A. Faith, struggle and temptation of Leo C.: Free book summary. 'Athens and Jerusalem' Vestn. RCD. 1982. ? 136; Baranova-Shestova H. Life of Leo C.: On the correspondence and memoirs of contemporaries: In 2 vols. Paris, 1983; Gertsyk E. Portraits of philosophers / / Our Heritage. 1989. ? 2; Motroshilova NV. Parabola life fate of Leo III. / NA. 1989. ? 1; Moreva LM. Leo W. L., 1991; Bibliographie des Etudes sur Leon Ch. / / Etablie par Nathalie Baranoff. P., 1978.