注释,注释: The article deals with the apophatic interpretation of man that has taken shape in modern Western literature as negation of all known attributes and properties of Adam’s offspring. The main proposition of new apophaticism, according to the authors, is disappointment in man. He is no longer considered as a measure of all things, as a creature endowed with reason and morality, as an exponent of humanistic consciousness. Human characteristics acquire a negative arrangement. Man is the focus of sinful thoughts, cruel desires, nearly the whole anatomy of destructiveness. Man’s essence is found in his striving for death. In this context, there is a need for comprehension of this tradition, which, as appears, to a considerable extent is inherent in European philosophy in some form or another.The authors are guided by philosophical-anthropological approaches to interpretation of human nature. They use the methodology of classical and postmodernist philosophy.The novelty of the work is in description of the apophatic image of man that has taken shape in modern philosophical anthropology. Conceptions of F. Nietzsche, G. Bataille and other authors are analyzed. The notion of human nature and human integrity is discussed. Human integrity is not rejected by modern philosophical anthropology, neither is it postulated as a preset anthropological property. It is acquired through the incoherence, fragmentariness of human existence. As is shown, the failure of the enlightening model of the ideal man in European culture has caused an irresistible interest to negative, pathological traits in human nature.The authors come to the conclusion that the apophatic project of man has permitted to reveal many real problems of current human existence. At the same time, it turned out that man has an inherent secret desire to rid himself of the idea of his existence, of his essence. The very reproduction of man as a human being is being ousted by machines, clones, prostheses. J. Baudrillard in this context writes about the end of anthropology, which is surreptitiously withdrawn by machines and new technologies.

注释,注释: Almost half a century ago in Germany there appeared a book by Ulrich Dibelius. He put to the readers a number of polemically sharp questions. One of them is formulated as follows: is music composed of sounds or ideas? The author criticizes philosophers and aesthetic writers who, turning to music, try to hear in it an echo of social conflicts, political manifestos, modern mentality and illusions. The book was written in the mid-1960s, when a suspicious attitude to ideology was widespread among western writers. But now there questions remain topical, too. The authors of the article note that it would be naïve to dispute about Dibelius’ quite trivial idea that music is the art of sound. Certainly, far from always can we find a clear relation between music and topical political and social ideas, a realistic representation of reality. Beyond that, the article gives a wider rationale of the theme of correlation between music and ideas. The historical method is employed to compare interpretation of this problem half a century ago and nowadays. Phenomenological analysis of the problem is offered. The hermeneutic method is used to analyze a number of musical compositions. A new approach to the problem deals with dependence of music on the time period that produced it and the possibility to reexamine it under new social conditions. There should be no simplifications here. We remember that the ideologists of the Third Reich attempted to use works of Wagner and Beethoven for their anti-humanistic purposes. But this fact can also convince us that music, its place and role in society cannot be ideologically neutral, indifferent to real social dynamics, to alignment of opposing social forces.

注释,注释: Almost half a century ago in Germany there appeared a book by Ulrich Dibelius. He put to the readers a number of polemically sharp questions. One of them is formulated as follows: is music composed of sounds or ideas? The author criticizes philosophers and aesthetic writers who, turning to music, try to hear in it an echo of social conflicts, political manifestos, modern mentality and illusions. The book was written in the mid-1960s, when a suspicious attitude to ideology was widespread among western writers. But now there questions remain topical, too. The authors of the article note that it would be naïve to dispute about Dibelius’ quite trivial idea that music is the art of sound. Certainly, far from always can we find a clear relation between music and topical political and social ideas, a realistic representation of reality. Beyond that, the article gives a wider rationale of the theme of correlation between music and ideas. The historical method is employed to compare interpretation of this problem half a century ago and nowadays. Phenomenological analysis of the problem is offered. The hermeneutic method is used to analyze a number of musical compositions. A new approach to the problem deals with dependence of music on the time period that produced it and the possibility to reexamine it under new social conditions. There should be no simplifications here. We remember that the ideologists of the Third Reich attempted to use works of Wagner and Beethoven for their anti-humanistic purposes. But this fact can also convince us that music, its place and role in society cannot be ideologically neutral, indifferent to real social dynamics, to alignment of opposing social forces.

注释,注释: Почти полвека назад в Германии вышла книга Ульриха Дибелиуса. Он поставил перед читателями целый перечень полемически острых вопросов. Один из них формулируется так: из звуков или идей слагается музыка? Автор критикует философов и эстетиков, которые, обращаясь к музыке, пытаются услышать в ней отзвук социальных конфликтов, политических манифестов, современных настроений и иллюзий. Книга была написана в середине 60-х годов, когда подозрительное отношение к идеологии было широко распространено среди западных исследователей. Но и сегодня эти вопросы сохраняют свою актуальность. Авторы статьи отмечают, что наивно было бы оспаривать вполне тривиальную мысль Дибелиуса о том, что музыка — искусство звуков. Разумеется, в музыке далеко не всегда можно найти четкую связь с актуальными политическими и социальными идеями, наглядное изображение реальности. Вместе с тем в статье дается более широкое обоснование темы – соотношение музыки и идей. Использован исторический метод, позволивший сопоставить осмысление этой проблемы полвека назад и в наши дни. Осуществлен феноменологический анализ самой проблемы. Использован герменевтический метод для анализа ряда музыкальных произведений. Новизна постановки проблемы: вполне понятно, что зависимость музыки от эпохи, породившей ее, может оказаться переосмысленной в новой социальной ситуации. Здесь не должно быть упрощений. Мы помним, что творчество Вагнера и Бетховена идеологи Третьего рейха пытались использовать в собственных антигуманных целях. Но именно это и убеждает нас: музыка, ее место и роль в обществе не могут быть идейно нейтральными, безразличными к реальной социальной динамике, к расстановке противоборствующих общественных сил.