The scope of Russian studies in Poland has grown considerably since 1989. Many texts in this field published in the present decade are pioneer works on such writers as V. Solov’ev and K. Leont’ev, others present synthetic results of recent and current research, such as A History of Russian Thought from Enlightenment to Marxism , Russian Religious - Philosophical Renaissance. An Attempt at a Synthesis . Research centers publish regular series: “Jagiellońskie studia z filozofii rosyjskiej,” “Almanach myśli rosyjskiej,” “Idee w (...) Rosji”. A multi-volume Russian–Polish–English dictionary “Idee w Rosji,” fruit of research by Polish scholars has enjoyed considerable interest. (shrink)

Przedmiotem niniejszego artykułujest kluczowy fragment Lwa Tołstoja filozofii religii, mianowicie jego koncepcja tego, czym w istocie jest religia, Analiza prac tego autora pokazuje, że przedstawił on dwie częściowo różne definicje: pierwszą, zgodnie z którą religia jest to ogólna praktyczna relacja jednostki do świata, oraz drugą, zgodnie z którą religia jest pewnym konkretnym stosunkiem do świata, mianowicie takim, w którym jednostka wykracza poza jednostkowe i grupowe ograniczenia i dąży zharmonizowania swojego życia z całością życia świata, Tekst przedstawia rekonstrukcję i analizę tych (...) dwóch definicji, pokazując, że są one wersjami pewnej ogólniejszej, praktycystycznej koncepcji religii, jak również zestawia ewolucję poglądów Lwa Tołstoja z filozofią Sorena Kierkegaarda. (shrink)

The well-trotted path of interpretation of tragedy refers to a positive conflict of forces or values. In this article, we examine another possibility: to focus on a negative act involved in the tragedy, i.e., avoidance of essential goods and attachments. The avoidance makes the tragic hero live in a contracted world in which he cannot choose a good or save himself. The distinction between the positive and negative aspects of a tragic situation intersects with the distinction between the two layers (...) of tragedy. The first layer involves unfortunate events and the subject’s strategies of resistance and self-preservation. The second layer involves new interactions between the subject, and the new reality changed by the effort of resistance. The new interaction leads to tragic guilt and turns the subject into a tragic hero. Between these layers, there is a dynamic exchange of content as it is between the negative and positive aspects of the tragedy. The negative act (rejection of values and attachments) and the affirmative act (the stand taken in an actual conflict of values, rations, claims) are mutually entangled. Any viable interpretation of tragedy should be able to follow both directions of their interaction. It is natural for philosophical hermeneutic to start with the negative act because it shows the immersion of tragedy in the structure of existence. This approach does not, however, remove the need for another hermeneutics, starting with the tragic experience. We tried to show this possibility by referring to the philosophy of Lev Shestov. (shrink)

There lies at the basis of Leont’ev’s conception a clear distinction and fundamental division of two primary dimensions and rhythms of reality: history and eschatology. In the light of this Leont’evian perspective Dostoevskij’s conception was interpreted and critically evaluated through the prism of the absence in it, and the lack of awareness of the consequence thereof, of a similar, fundamental distinction. The centrality of Dostoevskij in the Russian and intellectual cultural tradition is, among other things, tied to his acceptance of (...) a series of fundamental and constitutive assumptions deeply rooted in a characteristic sphere of myths and illusions. The specificity of the place and significance of Leont’ev’s concepts within this tradition results from the fact that it takes a critical distance, giving thus the possibility of conceiving an essentially different problematization of the world extending beyond commonly established and naturalized obviousness of the principles and ‘prejudices’ of one’s own culture. (shrink)

There lies at the basis of Leont’ev’s conception a clear distinction and fundamental division of two primary dimensions and rhythms of reality: history and eschatology. In the light of this Leont’evian perspective Dostoevskij’s conception was interpreted and critically evaluated through the prism of the absence in it, and the lack of awareness of the consequence thereof, of a similar, fundamental distinction. The centrality of Dostoevskij in the Russian and intellectual cultural tradition is, among other things, tied to his acceptance of (...) a series of fundamental and constitutive assumptions deeply rooted in a characteristic sphere of myths and illusions. The specificity of the place and significance of Leont’ev’s concepts within this tradition results from the fact that it takes a critical distance, giving thus the possibility of conceiving an essentially different problematization of the world extending beyond commonly established and naturalized obviousness of the principles and ‘prejudices’ of one’s own culture. (shrink)

The rapid development of empirical science and theoretical grounds related with them, results in many theories on the origin, evolution and nature of the world, sometimes interpreted as contradictory to the theological conception. Consequently, under the influence of these achievements, within theology itself, an opinion about autonomy of both domains and their complementarity seems to be more and more popular. Facing this relation, it is theology that should present the possibility of such understanding of the revealed truths that they could (...) coexist with scientific discoveries. Based directly on biblical texts, the sophiological vision of origin and nature of the world seems to be very interesting among other theological conceptions regarding this topic. The present article attempts to confront the sophiology’s presumptions on the eternal creative Wisdom with scientific thesis on the world’s nature, its development and on human existence in order to demonstrate the possibility of coexistence of these discourses with no contradiction. (shrink)

The topic of this article is the convergence of the fundamental theoretical intuitions of two independent currents of Christian philosophy at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Italian Catholic spiritualism and the internally diversified current of the Russian religious philosophical Renaissance proved to be convergent in their ontological realism based on the metaphysics of cognition. This consonance undermines the stereotype about the total difference between the Russian Orthodox and the Western Catholic mentality. The article tries to show that (...) these two denominations both drew inspiration from the Patristic heritage and that, contrary to all appearances, Russian religious philosophy owes much to the Augustinian tradition. The paper reminds the discovery of this convergence made by Vladimir Ern, and discusses certain elements of the teachings of Vladimir Solovyev and Evgenii Troubetzkoy in comparison with the basic philosophical intuitions of the Italian philosopher Antonio Rosmini. (shrink)