Концептуальные представления о природе человека восточной патристики в контексте современной антропологии

Долин Вячеслав Александрович

doi:10.7256/2454-0757.2015.8.14885


	Journal Menu > Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial board > Peer-review process > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Online First Pre-Publication > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Article Processing Charge > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy > Editorial collegium


	Journals in science databases


	About the Journal

MAIN PAGE > Back to contents

Philosophy and Culture

Reference:

Dolin V.A. Conceptual Perception of Human Nature in Oriental Patristics in Terms of Contemporary Anthropology // Philosophy and Culture. 2015. № 8. P. 1191-1198. DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2015.8.14885 URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=14885

Концептуальные представления о природе человека восточной патристики в контексте современной антропологии

Dolin Vyacheslav Aleksandrovich

PhD in Philosophy

lecturer of the Department of Humanitarian and Socio-Economic Disciplines at Belgorod Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia named after I. D. Putilin

308024, Russia, the Belgorod Region, Belgorod, Gorky's str., 71, room No. 150A

v.a.dolin@mail.ru

Article was published in rubric "Philosophical anthropology"

DOI:

10.7256/2454-0757.2015.8.14885

Received:

02-04-2015

Published:

1-3.84-2015

Abstract: In his article Dolin has identified and compared the substantial elements of platonism and aristotelism in concepts of human nature of oriental patristics, transhumanism and biological conservatism. The main purpose of the article is to define responses of the three concepts to contemporary problems of human nature: (1) the degree of importance of the biological component in human nature; (2) the equivalence of human nature to his mind; (3) the possibility of further evolution of human nature; (4) the level of perfection of human nature. The author bases his research on the methodological triad «structure – functioning – development» in addition to evaluation of perfection in terms of the historical dialogue of platonic and aristotelian perceptions of human nature. In their understanding of structure and functioning of human nature the oriental patristics and transhumanism refer to the provisions of platonism while biological conservatism refers to aristotelism. The mind functioning does not depend on epiphenomenal body in transhumanism. Oriental patristics sees the development of human nature based on the provisions of performationism (platonism) and transhumanism and biological conservatism views the development of human nature based on epigenetic ideas (aristotelism). Ttranshumanism advocates for further evolution of human nature by the means of technological tools (open human nature), biological conservatism and oriental patristics advocate against such tools (closed human nature). In oriental patristics and biological conservatism human nature is understood as perfect and transhumanism regards it to be imperfect. As a result, the author of the article describes the three versions of the conceptual perception of human nature: the perfect closed rational human nature (oriental patristics), the imperfect open rational human nature (transhumanism) and the perfect closed physical and rational human nature (biological conservatism). The research results allow to approach closely to understanding of human nature and to more adequate understanding of the challenges of modern time.

Keywords:

platonism, anthropology, human nature, human essence, oriental patristics, transhumanism, biological conservatism, preformationism, epigenesis, aristotelism

References

1. Chelovek i ego budushchee: Novye tekhnologii i vozmozhnosti cheloveka / Otv. red. G. L. Belkina. M.: LENAND, 2012. 496 s.
2. Gurevich P.S. Fenomen deantropologizatsii cheloveka // Voprosy fi-losofii. 2009. №
3. S. 19-31. 3. Fukuyama F. Nashe postchelovecheskoe budushchee: Posledstviya biotekhnologicheskoi revolyutsii. M.: AST, LYuKS, 2004. 349 s.
4. Gurevich P.S. Chto takoe negativnaya antropologiya? // Filosofiya i kul'tura. 2013. № 3. C. 275-278.
5. Khoruzhii S.S. Pereotsenka vsekh antropotsennostei // Filosofiya i kul'tura. 2010. № 1. C. 52-60.
6. Khoruzhii S.S. Pereotsenka vsekh antropotsennostei. Chast' 2. Okoncha-nie // Filosofiya i kul'tura. 2010. № 2. C. 10-19.
7. Novye tekhnologii i prodolzhenie evolyutsii cheloveka? Transgumanisticheskii proekt budushchego / Otv. red. V. Praid, A. V. Korotaev. M.: LKI, 2008. 320 s.
8. Global'noe budushchee 2045. Konvergentnye tekhnologii (NBIKS) i transgumanisticheskaya evolyutsiya / Pod red. D. I. Dubrovskogo. M.: Izd-vo MBA, 2013. 272 s.
9. Kutyrev V. A. Bytie ili nichto. SPb.: Aleteiya, 2009. 496 s.
10. Habermas J. The future of human nature. Cambridge: Polity press, 2003. 136 p.
11. Dunin-Barkovskii V. L. Neiroinformatika v Rossii i v mire // Mozg: fundamental'nye i prikladnye problemy. M.: Nauka, 2010. S. 220-223.
12. Medvedev D. A. Konvergentsiya tekhnologii – novaya determinanta razvitiya obshchestva // Novye tekhnologii i prodolzhenie evolyutsii cheloveka? Transgumanisticheskii proekt budushchego / Otv. red. V. Praid, A. V. Korotaev. M.: LKI, 2008. S. 46-84.
13. Shilov E. V. Uchenie Fomy Akvinskogo o dushe: starye problemy, novye resheniya. Predposylki tomistskogo sinteza // Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya I. Bogoslovie. Filosofiya. 2012. Vyp. 6. S. 81-102.
14. Davydenkov O. V. Kontseptsiya «individual'naya priroda» v khristologii Leontiya Vizantiiskogo // Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya I. Bogoslovie. Filosofiya. 2013. Vyp. 3. S. 7-17.
15. Nisskii G. Traktat ob ustroenii cheloveka // O cheloveke: Sbornik traktatov. SPb.: Azbuka, Azbuka-Attikus, 2011. S. 23-142.
16. Florovskii G. S. Vostochnye ottsy Tserkvi. M.: AST, 2005. 633 s.
17. Nazaretyan A. P. Mirovozzrencheskaya perspektiva planetarnoi tsivilizatsii // Global'noe budushchee 2045. Konvergentnye tekhnologii (NBIKS) i transgumanisticheskaya evolyutsiya / Pod red. D. I. Dubrovskogo. M.: Izd-vo MBA, 2013. S. 26-48.
18. Lokhov S. A. Antropologicheskii kholizm v vostochno-khristianskoi traditsii // Vestnik RUDN. Seriya Filosofiya. 2004-2005. № 1. S. 144-156.
19. Nesterov A. Yu. Problema cheloveka v svete ideologii evolyutsionnogo transgumanizma // Global'noe budushchee 2045. Konvergentnye tekhnologii (NBIKS) i transgumanisticheskaya evolyutsiya / Pod red. D. I. Dubrovskogo. M.: Izd-vo MBA, 2013.S. 183-192.
20. Platon. Fedr 246 b // Platon. Sobr. soch. v 4 t. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1993. S. 135-192.
21. Dubrovskii D. I. Priroda cheloveka, antropologicheskii krizis i kiberneticheskoe bessmertie // Global'noe budushchee 2045. Konvergentnye tekhnologii (NBIKS) i transgumanisticheskaya evolyutsiya / Pod red. D. I. Dubrovskogo. M.: Izd-vo MBA, 2013. S. 237-252.
22. Shishkin M. A. Evolyutsiya kak epigeneticheskii protsess // Sovremennaya paleontologiya. M.: Nedra, 1988. T. 2. S. 142-169.
23. Epshtein M. N. Tvorcheskoe ischeznovenie cheloveka. Vvedenie v gumanologiyu // Filosofskie nauki. 2009. № 2. S. 91-105.
24. Kurzweil R. The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. New York: Viking, 2005. 652 p.
25. Nitsshe F. Tak govoril Zaratustra. Kniga dlya vsekh i ni dlya kogo. SPb.: Lenizdat, Komanda «A», 2014. 352 s.
26. Demin I. V. Gumanizm i transgumanizm: problema sootnosheniya // Global'noe budushchee 2045. Konvergentnye tekhnologii (NBIKS) i transgumanisticheskaya evolyutsiya / Pod red. D. I. Dubrovskogo. M.: Izd-vo MBA, 2013. S. 193-202.

Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.