UDC

101.9

Authors

Gennadiy P. Men’chikov
Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University; ul. Kremlevskaya 35, Kazan, 420008, Respublika Tatarstan, Russian Federation;
e-mail: menchikovgp@mail.ru

Abstract

In order to clarify what the human is as a human being, the author of this article performed a comparative analysis of human essence according to three types of philosophical worldview: classical, non-classical and neo-classical. It is argued here that the classical and non-classical types, due to the prevalence of the absolutist worldview, adopt the functional approach, i.e. the nature and essence of man are considered to be identical. According to the neoclassical type, there is a gap between human nature and essence; hence the nonfunctional definition of the essence of man, revealing his uniqueness that is hard to comprehend. The latter is manifested through important permanent features that are realistic and unprecedented in the reachable space. Human essence cannot be reduced to animal essence; the unforgivable attitude of man to other humans and to himself is also eliminated. The key argument of ontological differentness is based on a radically different determination: while animal essence is determined by instincts and environment, humans are affected but not determined by them. Determining and impregnating all the others in any human, consciously or unconsciously, are existential determinations (especially the meaning of life, the meaning of human life). When an animal is already satisfied, the human has just started. The main conclusion of this article is as follows: a human is not a bio-social being, but a subject and object of culture, a cultural being, each in his own way.

Keywords

classical discourse, non-classical discourse, neo-classical discourse, human essence, existential determinations, the third house of being, functional approach, non-functional approach

References

1. Smirnov S.A. Chelovek posle Osventsima i GULAGa, ili Kak vozmozhno voproshat’ o cheloveke [A Man After Auschwitz and Gulag, or How Is It Possible to Inquire About a Human?]. Filosofskie nauki, 2016, no. 6, pp. 77–91. 
2. Men’chikov G.P. Neoklassicheskaya filosofiya: sushchnost’, soderzhanie, znachenie [Neoclassical Philosophy: The Essence, Content and Significance]. Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye nauki, 2013, vol. 155, no. 1, pp. 105–116. 
3. Prigogine I., Stengers I. Order out of Chaos: Man’s New Dialogue with Nature. London, 1984 (Russ. ed.: Prigozhin I., Stengers I. Poryadok iz khaosa: Novyy dialog cheloveka s prirodoy. Moscow, 2003. 312 p.). 
4. Foucault M. Istoriya bezumiya v klassicheskuyu epokhu [The History of Madness in the Classical Period]. Moscow, 2010. 698 p. 
5. Solodukho N.M. Metodologicheskie printsipy postroeniya situatsionnoy kartiny mira [Methodological Principles of Constructing a Situational Worldview]. Situatsionnye issledovaniya. Vyp. 4. Situatsionnaya kartina mira [Case Studies. Iss. 4. Situational Worldview]. Kazan, 2011, pp. 6–11. 
6. Sloterdijk P. Kritik der zynischen Vernunft. Frankfurt am Main, 1983 (Russ. ed.: Sloterdayk P. Kritika tsinicheskogo razuma. Yekaterinburg, 2001. 583 p.). 
7. Rubtsov A.V. Arkhitektonika postmoderna. Vremya [Architectonics of Postmodernity. Time]. Voprosy filosofii, 2011, no. 10, pp. 37–47. 
8. Menchikov G.P., Sharifullin B.Z. Global Evolutionism and Heterarchical Thinking. The Soc. Sci., 2015, vol. 10, no. 6, рр. 1250–1254. 
9. Aksenov G.P. Rassimvolizatsiya Absolyuta [Desymbolization of the Absolute]. Voprosy filosofii, 2015, no. 8, pp. 53–63. 
10. Baydachnaya E.V. Sushchnost’ ekzistentsial’nogo povorota v kul’ture: na puti k osoznaniyu [The Essence of the Existential Turn in Culture: Toward Awareness]. Voprosy kul’turologii, 2013, no. 6, pp. 60–64. 
11. Saykina G.K. Trudno byt’ chelovekom… (Metafizicheskie marshruty cheloveka) [Hard to Be a Human... (Metaphysical Routes of Man)]. Kazan, 2012. 428 p. 
12. Men’chikov G.P. Determinizm XXI: problemy i resheniya [Determinism in the 21st Century: Problems and Solutions]. Moscow, 2015. 96 p. 
13. Men’chikov G.P. Dukhovnaya real’nost’ cheloveka (analiz filosofsko-ontologicheskikh osnov) [Spiritual Reality of Man (Analysis of Philosophical and Ontological Foundations)]. Kazan, 1999. 408 p. 
14. “Realisticheskiy povorot” v sovremennoy epistemologii, filosofii soznaniya i filosofii nauki? Materialy “kruglogo stola” [A “Realistic Turn” in Modern Epistemology, Philosophy of Mind and Philosophy of Science? Round Table Proceedings]. Voprosy filosofii, 2017, no. 1, pp. 5–38. 
15. Frankl V. Doktor i dusha [The Doctor and the Soul]. St. Petersburg, 1997. 285 p. 
16. Urmantsev Yu.A. O formakh postizheniya bytiya [On the Forms of Understanding Being]. Voprosy filosofii, 1993, no. 4, pp. 89–105. 
17. Vorontsov V. Priroda pervoy maski i ee rol’ v antroposotsiokul’turogeneze [The Nature of the First Mask and Its Role in Anthropo-Socio-Cultural Genesis]. Filosofskaya antropologiya, 2017, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 151–167. 
18. Kostina A.V., Flier A.Ya. Tri tipa kul’tury – tri funktsional’nye strategii zhiznedeyatel’nosti [Three Types of Culture – Three Functional Strategies of Life Activities]. Vestnik Chelyabinskoy gosudarstvennoy akademii kul’tury i iskusstv, 2009, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 23–36.