Часть четвертая. Имя рода (история, родословие и наследственность)

The text of the lectures was written down by Florensky himself in a special notebook (Archive of Priest Pavel Florensky), consisting of 30 numbered pages and 50 unnumbered (blank pages are not taken into account). In a number of cases, there is an author's correction of the text, which is accepted by the publishers as the last author's will and only in exceptional cases is the original version given. The author has written dates in the margins that are given in the main text. The Archive of Priest Pavel Florensky also preserved the typescript “Lectures at the MDA in the 1916/17 school year. d. On the principles of historical knowledge.” This text is a student's typewritten lecture notes. Although, in terms of accuracy and coherence of the text, it is, of course, inferior to the author’s original, it reflected the peculiarities of delivering the lecture, contains some formulations that appeared only at the time the lecture was delivered and is therefore of interest for publication (Appendix 1). The notebook also included a number of draft materials and extracts, some of which were used in the notes, and some in Appendix 2. Due to the fact that Appendices 1 and 2 were prepared upon completion of work on the entire volume, they are published before the notes. The text was prepared by S. L. Kravets, Abbot Andronik, S. M. Polovinkin; text of the Appendix - Abbot Andronik. Notes by S. L. Kravets (No. 6–8, 10, 11, 14, 17–21, 23–26, 29, 31–33, 35, 36), S. M. Polovinkin (No. 2–5, 12, 13, 15, 16, 19, 22, 25, 27–29, 37), Abbot Andronikos (76 9, 30, 34). On historical knowledge (Lecture notes) 1916.VIII.25. Evening. Sergiev Posad We must study the history of philosophy. But if any scientific knowledge requires awareness of what its subject is, what its tasks are, what characterizes its unique methods, then philosophical science, to which, of course, historical philosophy belongs, requires this intensely. What is philosophy if not the highest self-awareness of human mental life? Let us assume, temporarily, that we know what philosophy is, and for now we will focus our attention on the word “history” 2. The closest kind of our science is history. Our science is historical knowledge. And it is natural for us to ask ourselves, to examine ourselves, do we know what history is? What do we mean? First of all, we know how to give a definition. Definition requires genus proximum 3. Will there be a genus proximum of history?.. Judging by the fact that it is taught in this classroom, one has to say science. But is this true? The answer to the last question is apparently not difficult. Take any science, understand its characteristic feature as a science, and see if history has this feature. Well, for example, chemistry. This is undoubtedly science. The question is, why, for what attribute do we call chemistry a science? Let's see what we don't call science. – Science consists of judgments. Now, I express a judgment: “What a terrible heat! Iron can melt." Is this science? - No. Because, you say, the judgment is false. Okay, I'll say something else. "Pretty cool." This proposition is true. Is this science? - No. - Why? - Well, what about this proposition: “Water freezes at 0° C”? Or: “The acceleration of a body when it falls freely in vacuum = 981 c m / sec”? These are judgments related to science. Why? Because the first does not express any law, you say, but the subsequent ones do. If I say: “What muddy water,” then there is no law; if I say: “Chemically pure water is a non-conductor of electricity”; or “Chemically pure water is poisonous,” then the laws are expressed here. What is law? This is something that in general, not in this case, not here and now, but always and everywhere. Law is something that is unchangeable in the flow of time and is equal to itself in all places in space. This is a universal and necessary judgment, in Kant’s terminology. So, we seem to have discovered the characteristic by which chemistry is a science: it expresses truths that are universally valid, that is, those whose content is universality. Universality... and not... and not singularity. Consequently, science generalizes, generalizes (generalis) and thereby gives judgments that apply not to one case, but to all similar cases. Scientific judgment states that it occurs always and everywhere. But her “always and everywhere,” although they remain adverbs of time and place, stand to time and space in a unique relationship: “always” does not mean at every moment, “everywhere” does not mean at every point in space. “Always and everywhere, the cause A is followed by the effect a; this position only states that A invariably, not only in a given place and at a given time, but wherever and whenever A happens, is followed by a; but it does not say where and when A is carried out. Its “eternal” nature has nothing in common with the frequency of its implementation in specific cases. Whether the combination of circumstances that we mean by A actually repeats itself often or rarely, this does not affect the connection between A and a. Let A occur only once over the course of thousands of years; even if it never occurs; his connection with a, as it was, will remain “eternal” (cp. Naville - La notion du historique, p. 681–682). “It was, μ. b., a time when water did not exist in the world, there was probably a time when many of those substances that are now sold in pharmacies did not exist. It is possible that the time will come again when neither water nor antipyrine will exist” (Naville, Nouvelle Classification, p. 79) 4 . But this does not change the logical nature of the laws of chemical compounds; the eternal properties of H 2 O do not suffer from the fact that the compound H 2 O itself is not eternal and not omnipresent” (Chuprov, Essays on Statistical Theorists, pp. 83–84) 5. This ubiquitous and constant connection between A and a is called law, νομος. Chemistry, physics, biology, etc., etc. begin as sciences only with the establishment of laws. This is undeniable. Let us now ask ourselves: can we, while studying the history of philosophy, indicate laws that apply everywhere and always? Dr sl, are we generalizing historical phenomena? For example, we will engage in new and cutting-edge philosophy. What will be our task? Understand philosophical systems, their internal coherence, their connection with each other; show how the personality of its creator is reflected in the system; find out what exactly is the influence of the environment on a given thinker; show how a well-known concept from one philosopher was transformed into a corresponding concept from another. Will there be laws here? Let us explain our intentions with an example. We, for example, will show how Cartesian finite substances (extension and thinking), created by the Infinite Substance, turned into Spinoza’s natura naturata, which is his natura naturans 6, and became attributes from substances - thinking and extension. How, further, in Schelling's philosophy they turned into a subjective principle and an objective principle, and natura naturans - into the Absolute indifference of both of them. Or we could trace how 7 sensuality and reason in Kant were transformed into the masculine and feminine principles in Weininger, or into instinct and intellect in Bergson, etc., etc. Or we will see how Fichte, having adhered to the Kantian concept of transcendental apperception, makes it the beginning of his own system and develops a new concept of the absolute subject. Etc., etc. These and similar studies will be the focus of our studies, and in general, this is the focus of historians of philosophy. 5. Uniqueness of the historical So, will there be any law discovered here? The answer to the question of whether our history of philosophy, like all history in general, will be a science, apparently depends on the answer to this question. – Take a closer look at what we hope to study, understand, explain: what side of Kant’s philosophy was developed by Fichte, how Spinoza and Descartes are related to each other, what are the similarities between Bergson and Weininger and what explains this similarity. Please note that we use proper names here. When we talk about the properties of water in chemistry, we are talking about water in general. When we talk about Kant in history, we are not talking about Kant in general, for there is no “Kant” (with a small letter), but rather about “Kant” (with a capital letter), about the only one, and, moreover, not by chance the only one, like, for example, Archeopteryx pithecantropus erectus in paleontology, an instance, an example, but about a self-closed, unique unit. The meaning of water for chemistry is because it is not this water, but water in general, water, and not Water; The meaning of Kant for the history of philosophy is that he is this, and not in general, Kant, the only one, Kant, and not Kant. By studying water, from a given quantity of it, we spread our thoughts throughout the entire universe; by studying Kant, we from the whole, b. m., the universe is going to focus on Kant. And, since the law is precisely in expansion, in generalization, in generalization, then here, where we, on the contrary, individualize, narrow, fix our thoughts on the individual - there is no law. I said, "There is no law." And he said, you probably thought, hastily. And in your own way, you are right. Of course, in Kant, as in every historical figure, as in every historical phenomenon, there is a pattern, there is subordination to the law. But it is precisely this, since it exists, that does not interest the historian. Let me explain with an example. Kant is undoubtedly subject to the laws of physiology. But studying them is the job of a physiologist. But the physiologist has no reason to study them specifically on Kant, when he can study them with the same success on any specimen of the human race. Physiological laws operate in Kant, but there is nothing characteristic of Kant, nothing Kantian in them. Further, Kant is subject to the laws of psychology. Again the same reasoning. Weber-Fechner law, for example, memory and oblivion. Mechanics. The acceleration of Kant thrown from the Leaning Tower of Pisa would be equal to the same 981 cm/sec as that of any stone; but what is significant here for the historian of philosophy? Sociology. Political economy. All this could be studied using Kant. But it would not be worth disturbing a great man in order to find out what is universal and necessary, in which he, trace, among the insignificant children of the world, perhaps When studying Kant, we are interested in Kant’s, unique to him, an event that appeared in a certain place and at a certain moment in history, which was no longer repeated and cannot be repeated, Kant himself in his particularity and his, again, unique, exceptional, individual relations to other people, to all history, to the world, his connections with being, all imprinted by his uniqueness, and not connections in general or relationships in general. Where is the law here? Please note. If we were to deeply understand Kant’s personality, understand the connection between his individual thoughts, desires, and moods, and establish the influence of his upbringing, acquaintances, and life circumstances on them; If we were to define in the most precise, exhaustive manner all the influences made by Kant on the further history of philosophy, then we would consider our task of study to be completely achieved. This is undeniable. But it is equally indisputable that we would not have received any law here, and if we had received it by chance, then it would not have been characteristic of Kant, as Kant was, that is, it would not have been the subject of historical knowledge. The influence that Fichte experienced from Kant is precisely the influence of Kant on Fichte, and not of someone on anyone at all. What Fichte received from Kant is explained by the personalities of both. But outside of their personalities, this explanation makes no sense. Other philosophers took something different from Kant and interpreted his philosophy differently. Fichte took especially vividly the doctrine of transcendental apperception, Schopenhauer - about the illusory nature of the world, Maimon - about the thing in itself, Goene Vronsky - about the absolute steadfastness of a priori knowledge, Helmholtz - physiological idealism, etc., etc. Each of these “influences” of Kant is deeply significant for the historian, but none of them is a law. Each of the influences of an individual on an individual is itself an individual. And for us they are all individuals - and not individuals, unique ones - and not examples of the universal, monads - and not instances. So, in history, as such, there is no talk of laws, because there is no talk of the universal. 7. Significance of the historical But, you say, the facts and faces of history have some significance for us, for everyone. They are interesting, knowledge of them is considered important, even necessary. Can they be significant if they are only in themselves and about themselves. Doesn't this mean that they are general schemes? There is some truth in these words, which will be explained further. But now we must note that historical facts are interesting and significant precisely in their singularity. Kant is interesting to us precisely as Kant, and not as, in general, a professional philosopher, Napoleon - as Napoleon, and not as, in general, a conqueror, etc. The friendship of Schiller and Goethe interests us as such, and not as a special case of friendship in general. The significance of the historical lies precisely in its uniqueness, and not in what it has in common with everything else. And this is understandable. If we wanted to see in Kant what is characteristic of every professor of philosophy, then there would be no need to turn to Kant specifically. But by turning to him, we ourselves show and reveal that we are interested in him himself, in what can never be known anywhere except Kant. I said "nowhere and never." Here you hear a direct contrast to the “everywhere and always” law. Just as in this narrowing of attention to the singular you saw the opposite of the expansion of attention to generalization. So: History has as its subject not laws, but the individual; it does not generalize, but isolates—it does not generalize, but individualizes. In other words, its characteristic features are something opposite to those of such indisputable sciences as chemistry. And, therefore, a natural need arises for us to answer the question: is it science? And, to put this question more broadly, what is history? Here we come across a paradox. How can it be that history, this knowledge par excellence, judging by its etymon (ιστορέω–from the root ιστ–ιδ–οίδα) 9, this ancient knowledge is questioned, is it a science? One can doubt whether history has achieved lasting results? One can hope that the future will reveal patterns that previous history does not know about. Maybe this is what we want to say with our doubt? - No. History not only does not have knowledge of laws, but it does not want and does not assume to have it. Her attention is directed in a different direction. History fundamentally turns away from laws. And therefore, just as fundamentally, we pose the question of whether history is a science - now and always, in the essence of the matter. But, again, if history is not a science, then, consequently, historians are not scientists. Are we really going to exclude Mommsen, Ranke, Solovyov, etc. from the list of scientists? Doesn't this seem like a reduction to the absurdity of our reasoning? Maybe this is strange. But our reasoning is also solid - they are not ours - any historian will confirm them. Consequently, we find ourselves in an aporia. On the one hand, science recognizes that activity of the human mind that deals with laws, but history does not deal with them, and, therefore, is not science. On the other hand, Ranke, Mommsen, Klyuchevsky, etc. are scientists; scientists are people who develop science; but Ranke, Mommsen, etc., as scientists, studied history, and, therefore, history is a science. What's the matter? To resolve this aporia, it is necessary to make historical knowledge itself a problem and enter into a discussion of the processes of historical knowledge. This will be a logical introduction to the study of historical knowledge - part of Science 10 (Wissenschaftslehre) or the general theory of science, the logic of science. So our question would read: Or more widely: if history is a fact within our globus intellectualis 11, then what must be the nature of historical knowledge, in particular, and knowledge in general, for this fact to be possible? 11. Explanation of the previous one using an example Newton's apple. 1666 Sir Is. Newton 5 (6?) Jan. 1643, d. March 31, 1727 s., son of a poor landowner in Woolsthorpe in Lincolnshire, who died soon after his marriage. Premature baby. At school in Grantham from the age of 12 to 16, he studied poorly, was weak, constantly thought about it, and was religious. In 1660 a post in Cambridge was not prepared. He studied under the guidance of Barrow. 1669 – Barrow resigned his chair in favor of Newton. 1670 – in Cor. Ob about this time, fluxion calculus. He occupied the 30th chair in Cambre. In 1695, at the suggestion of a student, Lord Montagu, Earl of Halifax, keeper of the mint. 1703 - moved to London and was elected president of the Royal Observatory. 1705 – sir (nobility). 1725 – pneumonia. Died on March 31, 1727. Commentary on Daniel and the Apocalypse. Fire in the office. Moral character. Optics. Telescope... Apple. This, here... hence 2 lines of research: natural science and history. 1st point of view. An apple is an apple, but it’s not about it, it’s about the formula 2nd, historical point of view. If the formula is important, then Newton himself, who gave this formula and much more, is even more important. The formula is important in meaning, yes. But it appeared precisely in 1666, on a certain day, hour and minute, and, next, this certain day, hour and minute and this certain apple is somehow even more important than the formula generated by it. And so, on one apple, viewed from different angles, 2 research goals arose. In one it is made with an apple in general 12. 12. An example of historical knowledge Feature of Slavophil philosophy: the absence of a solid beginning. Everything is “by acquaintance” - in philosophy, in law, in church, everywhere. Why? The peculiarity of distribution is in a vicious circle. - Why? Relatives. [Table] 13. Everything here is unique. Slavophiles - as a group, unique, unique. They talk about neo-Slavs, but this is a completely special group. Everyone's face. The family ties of each one rest on the family ties of others... All this is deeply interesting to us. But maybe we need to look for laws? Well, we discover, for example, that the laws of association among the Slavophiles were the same as among the Westerners. What's interesting here? The elements of psychological life are the same. But the point is not that they are the same, but in their unique combination, in their unique relationship to a given place and time and in the uniqueness of this combination. That's the whole point, but it's not the law. Comte's classification. The requirement of the law, as a conditio sine qua non 14 of science, appears most clearly, as you will see, in Comte. Science is the ability to foresee (“savoir pour prévoir”) 15, but foresight requires knowledge of the laws, and therefore science is only as much a science as it knows the laws, i.e., as far as it generalizes. The degree of abstraction is the degree of scientificity. Six “Sciences fondamentales” – Mathematics → Astronomy → Physics → Chemistry → Biology → Sociology. Where is the history? History is only a science insofar as it is sociological. But sociological laws, for example, the laws of statistics. The number of births and deaths, marriages and divorces, the excess of the birth rate of girls is 16 over boys. In 1899, 43 foreigners combined with women from the city of Berlin - Chuprov, 247–8. There are more foreign women married to Berliners. ...the number of letters with unwritten addresses, without stamps, etc., etc. This is the monotonous side of history, its eternal happens. Without this “it happens” there could be no social life: the zemstvo established a network of schools. If the number of students were sharply variable, then instead of schools it would be necessary to organize 17 flying squads. Traders will gut geese and hams for Christmas... But what is important for history here? Statistics are an important thing, but, conceptually, everything that it says can be predicted. Well, of course, in China they got tangerines with sticks. It is not difficult to foresee this a priori, just as it is not difficult to foresee a priori. And if not. They will say that there are special reasons, something new, unprecedented, an increase in being. So, the meaning of the monotonous side of history is that when there are no special reasons or special conditions, when everything and everything remains the same, then everything is done in the old way. That's it. 14. New as the content of history 1916.VIII. 26. Night. Sergiev Posad We say that all these patterns exist and are naturally expected insofar as everything remains the same, since society as a whole does not change. And since it changes, it does not remain as before, since it moves internally, these laws flow, are canceled, disappear. It is as if the ice kingdom, under the living ray of the sun, began to melt and freed living beings, hitherto bound by ice, to move. Let's be more specific. Society is subject to the laws of statistics and sociology insofar as it vegetates and does not live. In other words, because there is no history, but there is everyday life. But only history comes, because history comes, where history comes - and then, and to the extent, and there these dead patterns are abolished. Let me explain with an example. In 1910 and 1911, the number of husbands who killed their wives while drunk was, of course, approximately the same, and an immoderate fan of statistics would say: these are the fatal laws of numbers. But there was no history in the drinking here. In 1911 they drank the same as in 1910. But in 1916 this number is undoubtedly completely different. The “fatal” pattern has been overcome. Why? Yes, because there was something new in drinking, they began to drink less, and there was a war - men were at the front. There was a pattern, but the pattern was not of history, but of the absence of history. And as soon as history begins, as life begins to move, as the historical process manifests itself, there is no pattern in the area in which there is something historical and new. History deals with this new thing, with this movement, for the subject of history is process, not stagnation, growth, not immobility, life, not death. So, we come to a new division of scientific objects: stationary, dead objects, and living, moving objects. In one case, we are dealing with being frozen once and for all, and in the other, with being in its process, in internal tension, in growth. Using Aristotle's terminology, we will say: in one case we are dealing with εργον, in the other with ενέργεια. The stone is εργον, but the poet’s inspiration is not εργον, it is a living process, it is ενέργεια. We understand the stone as semper idem, as always our equal; the poet’s inspiration is the appearance of new images, new insights, new perceptions. A stone that ceases to be what it is would be meaningless to the science that studies it. (I’m taking all these concepts approximately for now.) A poet repeating the basics and revealing what has long been known to everyone - in his own way, would also be nonsense. A poet, in order to be a poet, must constantly create, give something new; a stone, to be a stone, must remain the same. One is ενέργεια, the other is εργον. Of course, even in a poet there can be a stop, and the stone can change. But to that extent, a poet is not a poet, and a stone is not a stone, not a solid body. Of course, in every reality there is both a moment of εργον and a moment of ενέργεια. Because a poet gives something new, he is a poet, but because a stone has flowed, he is not a stone. But, predominantly, one is εργον, and the other is ενέργεια. And, besides, one science wants to deal with the side of immobility, and the other with the inner life. But you might say: “Isn’t mechanics, for example, concerned with movement? - is engaged, but in a movement that does not give anything new, going beyond what we know about it in advance - what is contained about it in its law. Yes, this is a movement, but it does not actually bring with it anything unexpected, nothing not taken into account in advance; ontologically it is not movement... A planet moving along an ellipse moves along an ellipse, showing nothing unexpected, nothing creative. On the contrary, life is continuous creativity, continuous overcoming of the immobile, continuous inspiration, continuous revelation of a new, not former, “” being, growth, profit, growth... 16. Εργον and Νομος, Ενεργεια and Ιδιον 19 From here it is clear that the starting point in the study of the being of the motionless should be such an εργον, which is εργον κατ’ εξοχήν - primarily, that is, εργον motionless, unchangeable, frozen, equal to itself, primarily. What kind of εργον is this? This is a solid body. The solid body is the primary object of study in the science of motionless being. Analysis of natural science shows that natural scientific research is entirely based on the concepts and postulates of the existence of a solid body and, if you like, is exhausted by this, for the entire further task is to understand the whole world, all of reality, as explicable from this concept. Yes, mechanics is the central discipline of natural science, and everything should be explained by mechanics. Any other explanation, one way or another, denies mechanics, denies the absoluteness, the immutability of a solid body, and thereby shakes the very principle of immobility. Then it cannot be said that there is nothing new. Then reality cannot be contained within a predetermined framework. Then reality begins to flow: πάντα ρεί 20. Then life explodes. Then the obstacles to the movement collapse. Then the story begins. The concept of εργον gives way to the concept of ένέργεια - although this is not the energy (in essence, εργον) that physics (energy) speaks of, but energy in the ancient sense of the word. So, we begin to outline - stretch - some kind of thread between the previously established opposition of the general and the individual with the now established opposition εργον - ένέργεια. Obviously, only that which is motionless, unchangeable, and predetermined in itself can be subject to a motionless, predetermined law. Let it not seem so right away. Let it seem mobile and varied. But we know that if it is subject to this νόμος’у, then by the same token, in its elements, in its truly existing moments of being, it is something motionless, Εργον. And vice versa, something that does not have immobility, a solid beginning, that is eternally new - ενέργεια, can be singular, and therefore unique. Let me put this bluntly. What can be foreseen, obviously, already in advance, in the essence of the matter is what can be foreseen about it, that is, it will not reveal anything truly new. And, therefore, it is one of many, foreseeable, identical copies, built according to the same model. Law, universality, as the content of the foreseeable, is, in essence, something solid, or a solid combination, which is seen in the apparently changeable. On the contrary, what lives, what is created and creates - what reveals the new - it is unforeseen. It simply exists, but is not subject to statement about itself in advance, that is, in general, but is stated only in its presence, in particular. It is not “in general”, but “in particular” – individual. But if it truly creates something new, then it does not have complete solidity. It is ενέργεια. A living process is something that is unique – precisely because it is alive. And if it were repeated, then there would be no longer the creation of a new one, but a repetition of the old, the former - it would be εργον. After all, what is repeated has a model, and this model is in it, that is, a solid beginning, εργον. Trace, because what is repeated is to the extent that it is general and solid. And, if the solid body is the limit of εργον and its true type, then spiritual life is the limit of ενέργεια and its true type. General and individual; εργον and ενέργεια; the solid body and spiritual life are the poles of our understanding of existence, and between these poles are located all the intermediate stages. These poles can be designated by still other terms; thing and person are the most important. There is always a certain thing in general: you don’t care which glass of water you drink, this one or that one, as long as it is water. Personality is always in particular: you don’t care at all who you call your father or your son; a certain, unique, unique person is your father; a definite, unique, unique person is your son. And your relationship with a glass of water is a relationship in general, but your relationship with your father or son is the only relationship. Of course, a glass of water can also be treated as a person, as if it were the only thing: this is called idolatry. And the father can be treated as one of many, as a means of getting something “in general,” for example, a glass of water. This is called immorality. When you see uniqueness in a thing - in general - or in uniqueness - a person - in general - you pervert the order of nature, you sin against being. One is deeply connected to the other. Let me take a detour to make my point clearer to you. Look at the 50th conception of Romans. (Rom. 1:18–27). Read. Verse 18. Wrath... "Having truth in unrighteousness." Truth is being; untruth is a perverted order of being, a distortion of the divine order of being. Verse 19 Why? The true order of being is visible. Which? The singular - personality - Personality in its complete and final sense - God - in creations, things - we see. True order lies in seeing in things - έργα - ένέργεια, the starting point of which is δύναμις. This is obvious. But (21) the pagans saw God - the Person - as a Person, and things - as things, but did not put the Person in proper relation to things - ένέργεια to έργα - i.e., they did not glorify God. The pagans did not establish the true relationship of being in their minds, and as a result they became darkened and became confused. They understood the glory of God not as personal activity, but as things, as έργα. The absolute face was replaced by a thing. Reality has ceased to be transparent - it has become cloudy, coarsened, and denser. And then they stopped understanding secondary persons - human ones - and began to perceive them as things - hence sensuality. But natural sensuality, as pre-established, would not reveal the perversion of consciousness. That’s why their sensuality is unnatural—insane. So, the task of history is to understand energy as energy. But on earth the most striking expressor of energy is the human face. The human face is the subject of history, and everything is done with it, and for its sake, and from it, in contrast to the totality of things, nature. But how does human personality manifest itself? What is the characteristic manifestation of humanity? If we call nature the totality of things, έργα, then we call the totality of energies culture. The sciences of laws are the sciences of nature, or nature - natural. The sciences about the individual are the sciences about culture, or about the human spirit - or the humanities. For both, Windelband and Rickert offer names that we have adopted, in general, from Chuprov: nomographic sciences, i.e., describing laws, and idiographic sciences, i.e., describing the individual, τά ΐδια. Mb, and not entirely accurate, but the opposite spiritual sciences = cultural sciences = human sciences; and natural sciences = natural sciences 21 coincides with the opposite: idiographic sciences and nomographic sciences. If you like, you can add another contrast here: sciences about the face - sciences about things" 20. Cultural objects and natural objects But how to distinguish natural objects from cultural objects? Let's start with the simplest case. I go to the forest, pick strawberries (an object of nature). I go to the garden and pick exactly the same strawberries (a cultural object). What's the difference? We consider the forest to be an object of nature, the garden to be an object of culture. Let it be. But the strawberries here and there, as we said, are the same. A birch planted in a garden and a birch growing in a forest are the same birch. Why do we honor one as an object of culture, and the other as an object of nature? If the birch is the same, then, obviously, not in the birch as such, but in its relation to something. Yes. But why? To some general background - to the whole. This is expressed by the words: “planted”, “growing”. In one case, we are talking about a birch tree that grew against the will and intention of a person. In the second - in accordance with his will and intention. The relationship we are asking about is the relationship to man, and, therefore, it is not the birch tree, as such, that is an object of culture, but human labor makes it such. Is it hard? If a person worked a lot, for example, building trenches, and a birch tree grew on the loosened soil due to human labor, then it will still not be an object of culture. It's not about the work, but about its purpose. In other words, the goal-setting Will of man turns an object of nature into an object of culture. So, culture is not in things as such, but in the will of man, the feelings of man and his goals, which are uniquely refracted about them. The totality of volitional aspirations and goals characterizes the face. We said 22 that culture is determined by the goal-setting activity of a person. And here the answer to the paradox posed earlier opens up for us. The coherence of culture as a kingdom of goals. Hence unity is what replaces regularity. Culture is a whole, holistic. From here it is clear that everything in it should be individual and would be holistic. The individual serving a purpose is a type. It edifies our goal setting. We said that the subject of history is the individual, not the general. But there are infinitely many individuals. Does it mean that there are an infinite number of individual objects and, therefore, an infinite number of individual stories? No, for individual manifestations of the will of an individual person are organically united in the integrity of the person himself and can be understood through the unity of the person, in its unity, although this unity is not a community at all, but is a living unity, itself again individual, itself representing a unit of a higher order. Tears and smiles, joy and sorrow, sins and deeds of an individual person are not “similar” to each other and are not united in any “in general”; but they are not a simple disordered, ununited, uncoordinated multitude, but are precisely the energies of one person, they are one in the face, and in them, in these multi-faceted energies, the single δύναμις 23, the single spiritual power of the person is recognized. Goals are concentrated in the highest goal, and, being interconnected, the goals form a single organism of goals, the highest unity of goals, the kingdom of goals, headed by the Goal of all goals, God. Although occupied with the individual, history is not scattered in the infinity of its objects, for culture, as the realization of the kingdom of goals, itself forms a unity and is itself a single object of goals, at least in principle. The very contradictions and antinomies of culture, clashes, struggles, enmities, from a sufficiently high point of view, can be teleological, can be the implementation of tasks of higher persons or the Highest Person (cf. the words of the Apostle about the blindness of the Jews and the unbelief of the pagans), and what seems unnecessary from below turns out to be necessary, for it perfectly fulfills the highest task of Culture. The commonality (similarity) of nature through regularity corresponds to the living unity of culture through purposefulness. The sciences of culture are united not only no less, but even much more deeply than the sciences of nature. 21. The constancy of nature and the life of culture But here, as one might expect, a profound difference is noticeable. The sciences of nature, as has been said, talk about what is in general, that is, about what happens everywhere and always and, therefore, in principle excludes any creativity, something new. This explains their close connection with the mechanistic worldview, with the understanding of nature as a mechanism that eternally carries out its established cycle, once and for all. The idea of ​​eternal repetition, the cyclical nature of the world, paramnesia 24, characteristic of the ancients, developed by Epicurus and again ardently discovered by Fr. Nietzsche 25 - the melancholy idea of ​​the world as a crowd of repeating and self-returning processes is essentially connected with the natural-scientific worldview and it is secretly implicit in any scientific understanding of the world, that is, one that wants to talk about existence, and not about individual being. True, the 2nd law of thermodynamics seems to say the opposite, that is, about the uniqueness of world history. But the 26th 1st law of thermodynamics, i.e. that fundamental principle of the modern natural-scientific worldview, which asserts the immutability of the world's energy supply, mb, most clearly expresses the same idea about nature as immobility. The amount of energy in the world is constant - this means: “Whatever movements and redistribution of world energy occur; no matter how diverse and unexpected the processes in the world are; no matter how new and irreducible to a general law the phenomena of nature may seem - in fact, there is nothing new, nothing unexpected, nothing diverse: everything is subject to one law of immutability, everything is taken into account and calculated in advance, everything is reflected in one great thing in general - that there is no much, no new, no diversity, there is no creativity in nature. Nature is constancy and immutability - this is the main meaning of the natural scientific worldview. On the contrary, the sciences of culture talk about what is in particular, that is, about what is never repeated anywhere and, therefore, in principle excludes the possibility of subsuming oneself under a general law. Hence the connection, the closest union of the historical sciences with teleology, with the internally developing process of achieving goals, always fresh, always new, is clear. Not a single moment of the cultural process can be replaced by another; all of them are valuable, all of them are irreducible. The life of the spirit always moves toward something new, not because a new thing is better than an old thing, but because for activity, to be new means to be, and to be motionless means to be inactive—not to be at all. For the cultural sciences, everything is unique, and if a researcher does not see the uniqueness of historical phenomena and, especially, persons, this means that he does not know how to master the subject of his research. And, on the contrary, to grasp the uniqueness of a phenomenon means to understand it. So: nature happens, but man lives. 22. Main categories of natural science and cultural studies General and individual; immutability and movement 27; έργον and ενέργεια; thing and person; nature and culture - these are the main dialectically derived definitions of the subjects of natural science and cultural studies. The opposition of these definitions leads to the opposition of the sciences that study these subjects. But these sciences themselves are integral: according to the unity of the corresponding subject. What unites the objects themselves? The subject of natural science, nature, is a connection of a single necessity, closed in itself; culture is the organization of a unified teleology. But the unity of teleology means that the kingdom of goals is organized, i.e., that lower goals are subordinated to higher ones, those to even higher ones, etc. The goals are in ascending order, i.e., they form a single hierarchy of goals. The individual, being such, does not exclude everything else from itself, but, on the contrary, includes it through its relationship to the goal. Consequently, the individual is not isolated from everything, but is connected with everything. We will now begin to explain this idea. We were born for inspiration, for sweet sounds and prayers 28. This is the side of culture that is apparently self-sufficient and wants to be self-sufficient. But it, by unity of goals, is connected with all technology, with everyday life... To carry out prayers, churches are needed, for example, and for them - architecture, i.e. the entire organization of knowledge, artists, i.e. the entire organization of art, for artists - chemists preparing paints, mining industries extracting dyes from the bowels of the earth, factories processing them, plantations delivering oil, rural owners providing wheat and wine, steel factories that supply farmers with tools for cultivating the fields, etc., etc. Each cultural object presupposes thousands of others, those again others, etc. The infinitely diverse fabric of culture turns out to be connected with such a factor, apparently alien to life, as prayer. And even then, we took it from the outside. And take it from the inside. Each word of prayer implies the existence of the entire sum of dogmatic concepts; Historically, this means that this includes the entire past of church life and, moreover, the religious life of humanity in general. In our prayers you will see the terms of philosophy, images of poetry, ideas, echoes of which we find throughout the millennia... Each thread of culture implies the entire culture, as an environment outside of which it cannot exist. But, you say, perhaps technical culture is not so connected with its whole. Let's see. Let's take... well, at least this pencil. We need to get graphite for it. This requires geological knowledge. They require faith in the unity of the laws of nature. And historically, it is a product of Christianity. “Strange as it may seem,” says du Bois Reymond 29, a man who is not at all inclined towards Christianity, “but we must admit that historically modern natural science owes its emergence to Christianity. And since it is Christianity, then at least it is the Gospel. It had to be written, it had to be “preached to all creation” 30... For this to be possible, the entire structure of church life was necessary. And for this we needed ideas of philosophy, etc., we needed a language that would allow us to accurately express the dogmas of the teachings of the Church and its canonical norms... The entire organization of the Roman Empire is needed to facilitate the preaching of the Gospel - roads, shipbuilding... Next, mathematics is needed. It is necessary to develop aesthetic concepts. You need a diploma... And how many people go towards it - we can talk about this for several years. So, in culture, as in nature, everything is connected, everything is woven into a single fabric 31. This is true; but to stop at this point of our research would mean to destroy the possibility and, most importantly, the necessity of science, both natural and historical: if culture, like nature, is a homogeneous (“homogeneous,” as they say) environment that does not have its own structure, then it is obvious that its division would be inconsistent with the essence of the subject and, therefore, false. But science consists in dissecting its material in order to understand its structure. So, the fact of science, both natural and historical, shows that there is some kind of division of the corresponding objects, and, consequently, there are those methods by which this division is achieved. - What? 23. Causal series in natural science and genealogical series in history Nature is a single coherent whole. But let us break it down into things, and things are the fulcrum for further research. In smooth homogeneity, there would be nothing for the mind to cling to and, not being able to stop at anything specific, it would slide along nature... Thought is a mirror image of will. Bergson. Psychoanalysis. The delay of free will is a condition of thought. Thought is the equivalent of volition. If we walk along a smooth road, we don’t think about it, but we start thinking when we stumble. In this sense, we say that only people who are not very ethical themselves engage in ethics. The division of nature into things is a condition for thinking about nature. But then, it means that nature disintegrates and ceases to be unity. No, it is articulated into a single system of things. “If there is a thing “A”, then there is also a thing “a”, or “If there is a sign A in one thing, then there is a sign a in another thing” - these are the formulas of articulation. But this articulation of things, causal, is itself a problem, and a complex problem. We say that every thing, every phenomenon has its own cause. But, what is the reason? What should be called and considered the cause of this thing, this phenomenon? Example, lightning in the air, the cause of thunder, co-causes - conditions. How to limit yourself to some certainty? And, if in principle we admit that the entire previous state of the world is the cause of a given event, then the very possibility of study is abolished, because there is no point in studying causal relationships if everything is the cause of everything. Moreover, to extend causal dependence to the entire universe means to destroy it, for it is completely indifferent to say that a given phenomenon occurred by itself, without a cause, or to say that its cause is the present state of the entire universe. Analysis of the concept of causality shows that either we must reject causality, or admit that the causality of the world is realized in the form of many separate, intersecting causal series, causal threads, so to speak, and these threads of fate are already independent from each other in their course, although, b m, they come from one common node. So, the universe is divided into things connected to each other by threads of causality. And, moreover, the same analysis of causality leads to the belief that causal dependence is unambiguous, definite and irreversible. And there is a cause a - this means that only a is a consequence of A, and only A is the cause of a, and that A is precisely the cause, and not vice versa, not a consequence... A different understanding of causality cannot be maintained, due to its inapplicability to the dismemberment of the world. Let us now turn to culture. Culture is a coherent whole, a hierarchy of goals. But how is this whole divided? Where are the centers of goals and their implementation? We know that this is the essence of personality, face. If nature is divided into things, then history is divided into faces. And, if as a category of natural history we must recognize a common noun, the name of a thing, then as a category of history we must recognize a proper name, the name of a person. But what connects individuals into the unity of culture? In other words, what constitutes in the unity of culture an unconditionally given connection of persons, completely independent of our arbitrariness? Such a connection must be sought, of course, in what constitutes the conditions of the very existence of the objects of a given science. The science of nature deals with things, and, therefore, the necessary connection of things is one that is connected with the very existence of things and, therefore, would be destroyed, erased only with the destruction of things. This connection is the causality that posits things. Consequently, in the sciences of culture, which are concerned with persons, such a connection of persons, without which it is impossible to understand the person and with the destruction of which the persons themselves would be destroyed, is the connection of birth. Any relationship of persons can be changed, but not the relationship of birth. “Abraham begat Isaac...” 32 - this connection between Abraham and Isaac could be destroyed only with the destruction of these persons, - not otherwise, any other - could be destroyed without the destruction of the existence of the persons connected. This is a series of spatial, and temporal, and other relationships of things that can all be destroyed, but only the causal connection is irreducible. “For the general public, genealogy is a boring, arrogant, empty activity,” says Nikol Petr Likhachev. – But in fact, it follows from the great commandment to honor parents, on the assimilation of which the mighty vitality of the Jewish tribe is almost based. Those who did not have the good fortune to love their parents do not need to study genealogy. To them she is dead. For those who had a happy childhood, the parents of the parents, with mental deepening and study, become close, understandable, loved.” (N.P. Likhachev, - Genealogical history of one landowner’s library. “Russian Bibliophile”, No. 5. September. 1913, p. 96, note 1). Why didn't you do genealogy? a) Violation of traditions, connections, childbirth in the 60s. Nihilism. Or, more precisely, this is nihilism in the most precise sense of the word. b) Destruction of the way of life, way of life, nest, settlement. Everything was forgotten. c) A bad feeling of envy of noble families. Instead of studying the past, they envied those from whom it was studied. Instead of becoming ancestors, they hated those who had them. d) Break with fathers. They did not like fathers and grandfathers and wanted to deprive their children of their family property, genealogy, traditions... They renounced their titles, their ancestors, their names. (V. Frey; Kryshtanovich 33. Tell about them: examples of nihilism.) a) The feeling of connection with the family, duty to ancestors, to parents obliges us to know them and not turn away. The latter is rudeness - “I don’t know you, like my parents, ancestors...” b) You need to feel yourself not lost in the world, empty and cold, not to be homeless, rootless; you need to have points of support, know your place in the world - without this you cannot be cheerful. You need to feel your past, culture, family, homeland. He who does not have a family does not have a homeland or a people. Without genealogy there is no patriotism: cosmopolitanism begins - “international clinging”, in the words of Dostoevsky. The more connections, the deeper the soul has grown into the past, the richer it is in overtones, the more cultured it is, the more cultural the mass of the personality: the more the personality carries within itself that which is more than itself. c) Ideas, to be alive, must have a foundation, a past; we must feel that we are not composing our own theories (writing, playing with life), but that we have what has grown, what is grounded. What is the difference between clothes on a hanger and the same clothes on a living body? The same between an idea taken abstractly, outside the cultural environment, and an idea in its living connection with culture. d) The material is necessary for history. We need to collect it. It is the duty of everyone living in history to contribute to the knowledge of history. It is impossible to say in advance what is important and what is unimportant. Sometimes the little things turn out to be precious. e) Responsibility to children, to younger generations. Genealogy is a family property, not personal, and it must be preserved. Just as you have no right to squander your primordial estate, you must keep information about your ancestors in your memory, even if you yourself are not interested in it. Future generations can always pose the question: where is our heritage, where is our past, where is our history. In the 18th century and until the half of the 19th century, they squandered estates, and in the 2nd half of the 19th century, they squandered spiritual property - the past. This is worse than squandering your estate. f) Law on the preservation of cultural and public values. It belongs here too. g) Religious duty of thanksgiving. How to give thanks for life? - if not by remembering it. How much is instructive, how much is edifying for education. I expressed to you my conviction about the tasks of the family and its life. Refusal of the life task of the family leads to death... It can undermine. What should those who “don’t have” a genealogy or a past do? a) First of all, this is nonsense. “No” genealogy, this cannot be. Everyone was born from someone and, therefore, has a genealogy. Even in foundlings it can be installed, but not immediately, with difficulty. But the rest are not foundlings. Words by Yves Nik Elchaninov 34 - that he undertakes to find out the genealogy of any peasant before 1/2 of the 16th century, as long as his family did not come from afar and lived in the central provinces. This seems strange at first, but it is understandable. We live in a state, in a culture. The essence of culture, first of all, is that persons are considered as persons, that is, they cannot get lost among things, that is, they are registered as persons, that is, they have proper names, not common nouns. But for a person to be registered means to be registered. Other words, the name and basic data of the person are certainly written down somewhere, there’s no way it would be otherwise. – Next, the person comes into contact with others; these contacts are recorded officially. On the other hand, since we live in a cultural environment, then everything more or less worthy of attention is somehow recorded by historical tradition; there are records of any significant person somewhere; the point is to find them. It is not necessary to compose historical data, but to find it, just as we find the products of nature. Understand. The kingdom of culture is no less than the kingdom of nature, and our task is to develop it, just as we develop fossils 35 . My cherished feeling of life, my deepest feeling and my faith, repeatedly confirmed by experience, is that there is a fundamental axiom of history: nothing is wasted.” I express this to you not as an abstract proposition, but as the most solid point of my inner life: nothing is lost. Neither good nor bad. There will be retribution for everything, and not only at the Last Judgment, but also at the court of history. Remember, “there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed, and nothing hidden that will not be known” (Luke 12:2). Remember that “what you said in the dark will be heard in the light; and what was spoken in the ear within the house will be proclaimed on the housetops” (Luke 12:3). Remember, this is not only a moral axiom, but also an epistemological premise of history. History is alive only as long as you are convinced that there could be nothing that in principle would not be possible to find out about, not today, then tomorrow, not tomorrow, then in a month, in a year, in 100 years. You told one - but he wrote down your words or told another. You think you were alone - but someone saw you under the fig tree. But no one saw - nature itself took care to capture your life, nature itself took care to record your, at least, trace. And now, for the subtle researcher, for the historical bloodhound, there is already enough material. The most interesting example of this kind - which brought me to many thoughts - is the famous Shroud of Turin (tell about it; show a picture). The Lord is in the grave! Who saw Him? Nobody. Understand, no one saw, there were no photographs... His image, “of course,” disappeared hopelessly. And here it is before us. After 1871 1/2 years we see with our own eyes the Lord in the tomb. It evokes both awe and fear. A! And we, not in a single word, not in a single gesture, not in a single bad movement, will escape judgment: And you will not escape the judgment of the world, how can you not escape from God's Judgment! 36 I repeat, neither our good nor our bad will be lost. The past, ever elusive, running like a fleeting shadow, is eternal itself. “The Immortality of the Past” - Flammarion, Herschel, S.S. Glagolev 37. – Like a light painting rushing through space. "The Black Monk" by Chekhov. Law of relativity: time itself is relative. So, back to the topic: therefore, we must not be lazy in our search. We have to work hard to find traces of the past. They will stay, yes. But remember that traces of our carelessness towards the past, our spiritual bad manners, and our isolation within ourselves will also remain. About what does not disappear irrevocably - an example: the birth hours of my ancestors. The fact that nobility and birth are not the same concepts: peasants - Rurikovich (sold into slavery), were referred to. Noble families are of little birth, while well-born families are seedy and driven. - The generosity of the peasants. Example: Artynov. In the “Readings in the Imp. General History and Ancient Russian at the Moscow University” (1882, I 38) published “Memoirs of the peasant of the village of Ugodich, Yaroslavl province, Rostov district, Alexander Artynov” with a foreword by A. Titov. When Titov suggested that Artynov publish his “Memoirs,” Artynov refused: “I’m afraid,” he said, “what will they say about this? So, they say, a man wanted to write his memoirs!.. And then, in my life I got quite a lot for scribbling paper. They mocked me, considered my writings a great sin or trifles, and now, perhaps, they will consider them the same thing...” (p. II). “Devoting more than half a century, all his free time from rural activities, to collecting fairy tales, traditions, legends, etc., A. Ya. Artynov acquired rich materials for studying his native area. He devoted himself to this venerable work at a time when there was almost no literacy among the people...” (p. II). – A. Ya. Artynov August 22, 1813 (his father died January 17, 1813) 39 . Page 10: “I dare, although not without fear of reproach for pride, which is inherent in everyone’s nature, to mention here the former ancient surname of my ancestors. Our surname “Artynov” is new, and comes from Martynov. One of my ancestors, Vaska Vikhor, took the river alive. The face of the traitor, ataman of the Don troops, Ivan Martynov Zarutsky, for which he received the nickname “Martynov”. Our real surname is “Altina”. Evidence of the Altins, Artynov's ancestors, goes back 500 years - one of the messengers of the death of Prince Boris received the nickname Alta (from the river). Altina is mentioned during the reign of Ivan the Terrible. They were the kissers of the Rostov Tsar, and one of them paid with his life for his closeness to John - he supplied him with wine.” A peasant knows his family for 500 years. And here is an example of intellectuals. Rarely does anyone know their genealogy further than their grandfather; and it’s not bad that he doesn’t know, but also doesn’t want to know, doesn’t try to find out, neglects. Imagine a person who spends his whole life pondering questions of culture and history, and does not know, does not want to know, his own past. Can it really be said about such a person that he understands what he does? 40 This is the complete opposite of the ancient interest in genealogies, conceit of genealogies, and hence the falsification of genealogies. But the falsification of genealogy shows that people are interested not in the essence of the matter, not in the past, but in what they will say about it. (As an example of falsified genealogies - the genealogy of the Korsakovs - from Saturn and Iovish) 41. We will begin with what logically comes at the end, but which must be said in advance in order to facilitate further reasoning: the method of recording information already obtained. The question is how to record the information found in the most concise and easily understandable form? You can see examples of handling genealogical material in Rummel and Golubtsov, in Prince. Lobanov-Rostovsky, from the book. Dolgoruky, Petrov 43, Elchaninov. When we talk about a way to record genealogical material in order to record it and, together 44, make it easily observable, then, first of all, we need to determine exactly what we want to capture. I say what exactly, meaning by this: “What kind of combination of genealogical “rodi”, what kind of bundle, what kind of bundle of these elementary relationships do we want to study?” Which one is determined by where our attention is directed, i.e., what is considered as a complex object of our research. These could be: 1) an individual in his genealogical structure, 3) connection of two or more genera, 4) a band of relatives and relatives, more or less modern, that is, a known social group that is part of the fabric of social life as one, more or less coherent whole. Let's start with the individual. To study a genealogically individual person means to study the genealogical composition of his blood, to know the complex nature of his seed. You, of course, understand that each person can be considered as a genealogical node of many lines. Biologically, each person carries out within himself a complex combination of hereditary influences; there is a complex hereditary formation in which some hereditary elements are expressed clearly, others dimly, and others not at all. But remember that according to the laws of heredity, “do not affect” - this does not mean “do not exist.” No, nothing disappears even until the seventh (according to the Bible) generation, that is, until completeness (7 is a number symbolically meaning completeness), properties acquired through heredity can lie dormant, and then still have an effect. In particular, the jump in heredity from grandfathers to grandchildren, through fathers and mothers (lues 45, alcoholism) is especially obvious. To explain to you the complexity of the transmission of hereditary properties, I will point out to you, for example, the heredity of hemophilia (Haemophilia), i.e. bleeding (this is “a painful condition in which the slightest cause causes prolonged and persistent bleeding that threatens life. It often happens that spontaneous bleeding, for example, nosebleeds... give rise to significant blood loss. Blood also appears inside the tissues, so that a large number of bloody spots can appear on the body. Typically, such spots appear as a result of prolonged pressure on some part of the body, for example, when sitting... All hemorrhages and even small operations should be avoided" ("Great Encyclopedia", vol. 11, p. 568) and color blindness (explain what the matter is: color blindness). Thus, male members of a family may have a tendency to bleed or suffer from color blindness, but they do not pass on these painful conditions to their offspring if they marry women who are not hemophilic or do not exhibit color blindness. Particularly famous is the Mampel family in Kirchheim, near Heidelberg, four generations of which were under medical supervision. Of the 111 male representatives of this family, a third suffered from bleeding, and of the 96 female representatives, none” (G. Bushan, Science of Man. T. 1, 1911, p. 46). Therefore, if your daughter does not have hemophilia, this does not mean that hemophilic heredity is not dormant in her, which will affect her sons. According to the theory of heredity, the germ plasm is continuous, and, therefore, the entire complex of hereditary qualities is transmitted from parents to children, becoming more complex with each new generation - through the merging of the flow of paternal heredity with the flow of maternal heredity. It is a complex mosaic, the individual elements of which - biophores, gemmules, plastidyls, pangenes, biogens, etc. (according to different authors) - can become obvious or hide in the generative depths of our being. According to Weisman 46, “the germplasm is an extremely thin, skillful mosaic. From the numerous and varied combinations of these building units, all variations of hereditary qualities in the offspring can be deduced" (Bushan, ib., p. 36). An example is pink flowers obtained from crossing white and red. Pink with pink - give pink, white and red. (Mendel's law. A chromosome of quality a and a chromosome of quality b are produced by crossing a b. But when germ cells mature, they have one chromosome each, one a, the other b, and therefore give combinations So far I have talked about the biological dependence of an individual on his ancestors. But genealogy means something more - not only biological heredity, but also the entire sum of qualities inherited from ancestors, be it biologically, or pedagogically, or morally, spiritually, etc. In this case, it doesn’t matter to us how or why. Ancestors leave indelible marks on their descendants in many ways, but the important thing is that this influence, in every way and in every possible way, is undeniable, and therefore genealogically must be taken into account. The genealogical “birth” contains much more than the concept of fertilization, although fertilization is a great mystery, namely, the whole sum of influences coming from parents to children. Each clan has its own habits, its own traditions, its own moral characteristics, its own tastes, its own thread of culture, connections with history, its own understanding, and all this, in powerful, although (and even because) unconsciously perceived strokes, determines the soul of an individual member of the clans, intersecting their influences in a given person. How, I repeat our question, can we fix the sum of these influences? – The most convenient way to do this is using a table or diagram of “ascending mixed pedigree.” Since here we are talking about the genealogical roots of a given personality, considered as a subject of study, I consider it appropriate to call this diagram the Idiological Tree (see Fig. 1). It is clear that the ABVG line... (i.e., without indexes) is the main line, if only because the surname is transmitted along it, the rights of the state are transmitted through it, primarily, property is transmitted from generation to generation and, finally, since paternal heredity is considered by most researchers to be stronger than maternal (p. 44, Bushan), and, in any case, more valuable (the ability to logical thinking and the gift of formulating and expressing thoughts, traits that characterize the manifestation and movement of feelings, accuracy and honesty, talent (Bushan, pp. 44–46). Therefore, the line on the extreme left (for the person depicted) is the least influential and least valuable. The intermediate lines go in increasing strength and value from the left (from A) to the right. I will say moreover, the more to the left the line, the more times the surname changes from branch to branch. But, because every time the female influence is somewhat weaker than the male biologically, not to mention the moral disposition, habits, etc. etc., in general, about all non-biological heredity, then with each change of surname there comes a turning point in the life of this line and, consequently, the influences are mutually weakened, so that the lines on the left turn out to be poorly defined, little stable, little connected by traditions and biological heredity. On the contrary, the further to the right the line, the more definite the characteristics of the line, the more stable its content, the stronger its traditions. Consequently, the ideological 47 tree should be depicted with lines of different thicknesses - thick on the right, and increasingly thinning to the left. As an example of this emerging mixed genealogy, one can cite the genealogy of D. A. Khomyakov, the son of the famous poet and theologian, and the brother of the famous Chairman of the State Duma Nick Alex. Khomyakova. Idiological tree (Fig. 1) Genealogy of N. A. Khomyakov. Rice. 2. As is known, the symbol of the clan is the coat of arms. In ancient times, peasants also had their own coats of arms. Totems, totemism - as an expression of the essence of the clan. Names – ideas – angels – totems. Hence the interest in combining in a visual table all the coats of arms of a given person - actual and potential - (he can inherit them if the senior male lines cease) and then his potency will manifest itself. Rice. at Lukomsky's. – Russian heraldry 48. Application of the ideological tree to the study of persons and phenomena in their spiritual and cultural dependence on the past. As a means of self-knowledge. This table is irreplaceable and priceless. I strongly and friendly recommend that you apply it to the study of yourself - biological, genealogical and spiritual. I strongly recommend that you apply it to the study of your ideas, thoughts, and writings. If you want to acquire clarity of thinking, if you want to clearly imagine what is around you, if you want to understand yourself and your own and other people’s thoughts, use this method of research more often, and, moreover, on a piece of paper: it shows you clearly what you have not yet understood for yourself, and, therefore, encourages you to search, pushes ignavam rationem 49, puts it within a certain framework, demands accountability... Application of the same technique to the study of the genesis of concepts. Wednesday 1916.IX.21 Ser Pos. Night. Until now we have talked about the study of an individual, a system, a concept and, in relation to it, a genus, previous systems, particular or preliminary concepts. – Now we will begin to talk about the very connection of individuals, systems, concepts, etc., that is, we will begin to consider the totality of them, their succession, their sequence in its individuality, as a single whole. Previously, we started from a unit and went deep into its structure, so to speak, studied its decimal parts Now, starting from the same unit, we consider its decimal multiples, i.e., in other words, we consistently consider it as decimal parts of units of higher orders. The primary connection of history, applied sequentially according to the type of soffit, forms a genealogy or genealogy, schematically represented in the form of a well-known family tree, or genealogical tree. There is no need to talk about this well-known scheme. But, perhaps, it is not useless to note several technical techniques that make recording easier and more visual. 1) The knees must be distinguished a) or on horizontal, b) or on concentric circles, c) or on circles of the same radius, described not from h6С of the general center, but from the center placed each time at the point of the parent of the given offspring. Each of these schemes has its own advantages and disadvantages. The first diagram especially clearly represents the belonging of members of a clan to one “generation”, meaning this word in a sense that is not physical, ideological or spiritual - as a designation of a collection of persons, systems, concepts that directly depend on the collection that we recognize as previous. This scheme is also convenient in that, as the roots of genealogies are explored, it allows the inclusion of new research results found in it. It is inconvenient because in the case of abundant offspring (no matter how one understands this word), they hardly fit on the horizontal line or it is necessary to make the generation horizontal lines inconveniently and unobtrusively long. Here Malthus's law comes into play with particular poignancy: while the means of satisfaction grow in arithmetic progression 50 . The second scheme, while keeping the generations unentangled, greatly relieves the need to save space and makes the connecting lines not so long; but it, on the other hand, does not make it possible to continue the genealogy back into the depths of centuries. Finally, the last scheme, giving even more space and further shortening the connecting lines, suffers from the disadvantage of the previous one and, in addition, confuses the generations of the members of the gens drawn with its help. Investigator, only the first scheme is suitable in the research process; and the last 2 are only suitable for recording the final results of the study. A family tree acquires its meaning and becomes useful as this table is filled with concrete and, if possible, easily observable material. – For this filling, conventional signs are used, the number of which can be indefinitely increased, depending on certain properties of a given genealogy and certain purposes for which it is built. O – man, male, □ – woman, female. There should be signs for different professions, to indicate completion of a course, for different educational institutions, for initiation, tonsure, for different ranks and positions (at least, for example, according to the table of ranks), etc., for different diseases. I repeat, the more information is included in the genealogy table, the more compressed it is, the more appropriate the table is. But you can’t put all the information on a table. In addition, the table takes up a lot of space. Therefore, in most cases, genealogical research also requires recording genealogical information. How to make this recording? The difficulty here is that either generations or birth connections of individual lines are broken. If you trace a separate line, then there is nowhere to put the rest of the family members; if we focus on generations, it will be unclear in what relation the members of one generation stand to the members of other generations. So, the difficulty is to combine the order of relatives at once, so to speak, in the vertical direction and in the horizontal direction, that is, not to separate either the order of their coexistence or the order of succession. The usual technique is unconsciously based on a theorem from the theory of sets, according to which any doubly ordered set, even an infinite one, can be brought into unambiguous correspondence with a once ordered, countable set, that is, the entire linear series can be arranged in such a way that the previous order can always be restored. This is done by diagonally counting and numbering the elements of a doubly ordered set. In relation to genealogy, this is achieved by sequential numbering of the members of each generation, and the number of the parent of each member is placed in brackets, which makes it possible to find ancestors by descendants and descendants by ancestors. Here is an example of such a generational record. A. The offspring of Ivan The offspring of Nicholas But this method of recording is convenient only where the research has been completed and the researcher has already despaired of finding new information. It is suitable for publication of the final results of the study. But in the process of work, where there may still be links, both extreme and intermediate, it is unsuitable, because it does not allow amendments and additions, but requires writing the table again. For a working note, I propose a different method, which 1) allows you to make corrections and additions; 2) allows you to supplement the table with new generations going back centuries; 3) allows you to connect generational records that were previously incompatible; 4) eliminates numbers in brackets. This is, precisely, a letter notation, the only drawback of which is its cumbersomeness (a decimal classification would be convenient, but it is unsuitable, since there could be more than 9 children). Here is an example of such an entry: (or you don’t have to write it: the number of letters shows the generation number) So, Gregory is abba, we throw away a, what remains is bba. This means that Gregory is the son of Efimy; Efimy is the son of ba, i.e. Ivan, and Ivan is a, i.e. Ivan. What we are saying here about the connection between physical and mental birth also applies to spiritual birth. And here it is extremely important and interesting to understand the individuals and spiritual relatives who are connected to each other by the unity of spiritual life, that is, to study the spiritual family as one whole. You understand, of course, I mean, first of all, eldership as a message to another, spiritual son, being nourished (about the word nourishment from “feed”, and not from “food”; to nourish - κυβερνάω and εγκαθορμίζω 51. When in ancient Rus' they spoke “about sending governors to feed such and such a city,” this did not mean at all permission for them to take the city from their lives, but the duty to feed them, take care of them, gubernare 52 the city: they were governors) of smart work, spiritual contemplation, opening up new abilities and new life. You know that, according to the teachings of ascetics, spiritual life can, generally speaking, be received only from an old man who already has it. Generally speaking, it is not self-initiating. Paisiy Velichkovsky, somehow, in a way still unknown to me, joins the spiritual descendants of Gregory of Sinaite, which is located according to the following scheme: If we go even higher, we have another excerpt of genealogies: Theoliptus of Philadelphia (XIV century). Under Andronikos II Palaiologos, 1325. Gregory Palamas (Thessalonian) 1252, d. 1325. Even higher, in the 11th century, we find the passage: Simeon the New Theologian (XI century) → Anthony Abbot Apparently, all these generations converge on Mark the Ascetic. I am sketching out something for you that can be discussed without special investigation 53 . You, of course, understand that it’s not for me to do this; I only want to clarify for you the general methods of work, to explain the methodology of historical work, in order to thereby approach fundamental questions about the nature of historical knowledge, questions that already directly concern us. I will say, just in addition to what has been said, my conviction that all these scattered fragments of spiritual genealogy could be connected and that it would be worth working on this. We have something similar in ordination, that is, in liturgical continuity. It's much easier to trace genealogy here. We have pointed out to you the poles of genealogy – physical genealogy and spiritual genealogy. Between these poles there are other types of genealogies, that is, connections between generations in one or another respect of their existence. For you and me, due to the nature of our subject, it is especially important to note the ideological connection that establishes the dependence of one philosophical system on another, and one stage in the dialectical development of a concept on another. To make this idea more clear to you, let us consider, for example, the genealogy of new and contemporary philosophy. But before we talk about it, let us note that, just as in the physical, bodily realm no one can be born by itself, and just as in the spiritual realm no one acquires spiritual life through their own efforts, without spiritual guidance, without a spiritual homeland, so in the ideological realm, every system of thought, every link in the development of a concept certainly has its parents, and does not arise out of nothing, at the whim, at the desire of its author. And further, just as by physical heredity ancestors put their seals on their offspring, and just as in spiritual life we again deal with a kind of heredity, with the transfer of characteristic features to spiritual offspring, so in the field of thought, the characteristic features of thought from the ancestor of thought are passed on to his offspring, and, no matter how diverse and unexpectedly the basic methods of thought coming from a given philosopher are refracted, no matter what unexpected combinations they may form among themselves entered, a careful look always allows us to discover in these ideological descendants the features of their ideological ancestors. I repeat, if biologists talk about the continuity of the germ plasm, and asceticism affirms the continuity of the beginning of spiritual life, going from the spiritual ancestor to his spiritual offspring, then in the history of thought we can rightfully talk about the unity of the philosophical leaven, which makes genealogy in the history of thought not conditionally united, but the essence of the matter. That is why, just as we often learn a lot about the properties of physical organization by studying physical heredity, and for this we consider the ancestors of a given person, and just as in order to understand the characteristics of the spiritual life of a given person, much can be gained by looking at his elder and, in general, at his spiritual ancestors, just as accurately, to understand a philosophical system and, in particular, to evaluate its elements, it is very often necessary to look at its roots. On the other hand, the system can be understood and assessed according to the rule “by their fruits you will know them” 54, that is, through consideration of its ideological offspring. Consequently, one way or another - and the question of the historical connection of a system of thought with previous and subsequent ones is one of the main ones, not only because history is γένεσις, but also for understanding this link in γένεσις'e. – Now let’s look at an example of this ideological genealogy: the correlation of schools of ancient philosophy. We said that the task of genealogy, the family tree and the genealogical record is to understand the clan as a whole, that is, as a unique individuality, the features of which are visible in all representatives of the clan (this, firstly) and which has a meaningful, purposeful arrangement of its individual elements. Life is purposeful energy that realizes goals. The life of culture and, in particular, and especially, spiritual life, realizes the highest spiritual goals. To understand history in the wrong way, that is, outside of the goals it achieves, means not only to expel Providence from history, but, moreover, to make history a blind, fatal process, according to the law of causality. But such, as we have already seen, is a repetition of the same thing, something that still happens, but is by no means a new phenomenon, is by no means creativity and, therefore, is impersonal, has no persons in itself. This, as we have seen, is not history. If we recognize history as not just a monotonous mechanical process, then we are forced to recognize the existence of persons, and since there are persons, then there are goals. The existence of a genus (in one sense - bodily and spiritual) implies the unity of that principle that makes the genus one: bodily - germ plasm, spiritual - spiritual life, hierarchical - grace, philosophical - philosophical ideas... And, if there is a unity of life, then there is a unity of knowledge. Every genus is a genus because it has a ΤΕΛΟΣ 55, for the implementation of which it is called to work and for the sake of which it exists as a genus, as one whole. Observation outlines, and faith affirms, that refusal of this τέλος’a (cf. Onana 56) leads to the death of the one who refuses. If the clan refuses as a whole, then the clan is destroyed. For the time being, Providence does not require final self-determination from the species: and even allows one to evade a direct answer to the question of why it exists. But 57 How does a clan become unified while preserving the spiritual self-determination of individual members? – Because it is not a dead, motionless unity, but a living unity, rhythm. This rhythm is in the coexistence of thesis, antithesis and synthesis - grandfather, son, grandson. The life of the family, realizing its τέλος, through its grandchildren “returns the hearts of the fathers to the children” (Luke 1:17). Talk about Fedorov 58. Fundamental formulation of the question of genealogical schemes We have given you several schemes that serve certain genealogical relationships, in particular. I want to say that each of our schemes selectively presented to us a special network of connections uniting one or another set of persons related to each other by family relations of a certain nature (I mean this word, again, both in the narrow and in the broad, distant sense). But the question is what to do if, for some reason, it is necessary to combine the consideration of several systems of kinship ties, for example, to consider the relationship of the grandmother’s clan to the father’s clan, etc. When discussing issues of heredity, for example, such a discussion may be very necessary. The answer to this question can be drawing genealogical diagrams on very large sheets of paper. Then a very significant lengthening of one of the lines indicating a family relationship is possible, and thus the inclusion of a group of other relatives in the system depicted somewhere on the side, on the side. In this way, any combination of relatives can be identified and examined in detail in their relationship to the data 59 . But, given the impracticality of this method, it does not provide a fundamental solution to the question we have posed. This inclusion of a known group in our system depends on the already perceived need for such inclusion; meanwhile, it is often necessary to include different systems precisely in order to make such discretion possible for the first time. How can we know whether to include a given system or not if we do not clearly imagine its relationship in the main system. Obviously, more general methods are required. Considerations of this kind should serve as the basis for a fundamental decision. There is a known population of individuals. Between them there are various kinds of relationships and connections, past, present or likely to arise. How to depict the totality of all these persons with the fullness of their relationships? Or, more precisely, what kind of scheme must be given so that all relationships that can be studied can be included in the same scheme? – Here, in the formulation of the problem, we come across a contradiction. We said: there is a “known set of persons.” But, after all, the totality of persons is determined by their relationships; and if we do not know in advance what kind of relationships we will be talking about, then we cannot call our totality of persons known. Consequently, in a theoretical formulation we should talk not about this or that group of persons, but about all persons, that is, about all people at once. So, theoretically, our task is transferred to all of humanity, which is understandable, because all of humanity participates in cultural life and arbitrarily singling out a part of it, without yet having the principle of highlighting, would be a violation of the continuity and integrity of culture. Between all 60 persons, further, it is necessary to depict all existing connections and relationships - starting from family ones: legal, economic, moral, ideological, etc., etc. This will give a picture of culture as a whole. But how, theoretically speaking, could such a scheme be implemented? – The life of each person should be depicted by a dot or, better, a vertical cylinder, the height of which would correspond to the life expectancy of this person. Connections and relationships between persons - lines connecting the corresponding (in time) points of these cylinders. For example, if we wanted to express that Schelling’s philosophy of the last period influenced Vl. S. Solovyov in the 2nd period of his philosophizing, then it would be necessary to construct a diagram: It is clear that different relationships must be denoted by lines of different types - thick, thin, dotted, winding, etc. The set of such cylinders and such connecting lines will present us with a “field” of cultural interaction. But in this field, genealogical relationships stand out with particular strength and significance. This is the canvas on which patterns of other relationships are embroidered and for the sake of which these latter are embroidered (explain). Therefore, it is natural to focus on these latter ones. Our task is to depict all existing family ties. But, since there are indefinitely many of them (everyone is related to almost everyone in some way), then when depicting all kinds of relationships, an indefinite number of lines were required for all possible degrees of relationship. We must limit this uncertainty by introducing the concept of types. We know that there are 2 of them: kinship and property. Now, further, let us remember that every relationship and every property, except two, is established not directly, but indirectly, through intermediate links and, therefore, should not be designated independently. Direct connections are: 1) parents with children - the root of all family ties, 2) husband and wife - the root of all inherent connections. These connections are no longer reducible to each other, they are primary. Consequently, our task of constructing a complete diagram of all family connections of all people is resolved with the help of two types (male and female) of elements (points, cylinders, etc.) and two types of connecting connections. The complete scheme is subject to the following rules: 1) No 2 communication lines can intersect with each other. 2) Each link line has an element at its ends. 3) No line can have more than one element at the end. 4) No pair of elements can be simultaneously connected by lines of different types. It follows that the elements must be located in three-dimensional space, and not in two-dimensional space, not on a plane: otherwise the lines cannot help but intersect, or, more precisely, the possibility of intersection cannot be excluded for them. So, our diagram consists of spatially located points or, depending on the need, thick lines, cylinders ... two colors, for example, connected to each other by lines of two types - two colors, for example. In practice, this could be done, for example, by means of a rack box in which many glasses are inserted, parallel to each other. On each of the glasses there are faces of related relationships, and parallel glasses can be rearranged, depending on need, to bring them into relation of properties. Connection of the proposed scheme with issues of cognition Kinship and property are the names of the main types of genealogical connections. But these connections are not always direct; they can be mediated by many links. What constitutes a direct connection? What mediates between the links that are spaced apart from each other? In other words, what constitutes the elementary, primary, fundamental connection of genealogy? – There are two of them: the root of kinship is sonship, the root of property is marriage. Father-son relations and marital relations are not reducible to each other. And, if the former, as we have seen, form a connection of generations in time, then the latter are a condition of unity in space. The network of properties and kinship forms the basis on which other temporal-spatial relations of phenomena are located. The coordinate axes are patronymic and marriage. I repeat, they are not reducible to each other. Patronymic and marriage are the deepest foundations for the idea of ​​time and space, that is, for all knowledge. All types of relationships are produced around these and are thought in the likeness of these. Every relationship is conceived either as a kind of parenthood-sonship, or as a kind of marriage. One is associated with the idea of ​​succession, the other with coexistence. One is with action, and the other is with interaction. The categories of causality and interaction, as demonstrated by Kant, are associated with patterns of temporal succession and coexistence. A clan (father, son) is time realized through a sequence of three generations. The wife is space. Please note that in all philosophical teachings, space is understood as the feminine, feminine principle, as αόριστος δυάς, as a formless principle, as a female conceiving, receiving womb. Remember that we talked about μή ὁν, about possibility (about potency, about δύναμις), which turned out to be space. The feminine principle is the potency of the creatures of time, of the race. A woman is not a genus, but the potency of the genus, the space in which the genus develops. Here we come into contact with the teaching about ontological place, as the feminine possibility of all reality, about the existence in God of mystical space - place (maqom of Kabbalah), about Sophia - that Beginning in Which God created heaven and earth. I do not have time now to discuss all these issues further in detail; I’m only outlining them so that you can see the connection, the closest connection, between genealogical questions and philosophical questions. So, I want to point out to you the special connection of genealogy with philosophical questions, that is, questions of the deepest knowledge. And we must a priori assume that Holy Scripture must somehow mark this connection. But we talked about the irreducibility of kinship and property (hence the fundamental exceptional horror of Oedipal themes: to marry a mother = to expose the nakedness of the father, which would be a combination of the incompatible, a combination of the irreducible). Hence, it is natural to expect that Holy Scripture will say separately about one and the other. – Where can one look for such judgments of Holy Scripture? Of course, not in judgments about kinship and property in general, in their empirical randomness, but, first of all, where they are elevated to the highest, unconditional level in Holy Scripture. Sonship, primarily, we know in God. Marriage, primarily in the first couple of a man and a woman, is with the ancestors. So, what does Holy Scripture say about this and that? At each prayer service to the Reverend, at the shrine, Fr. our Sergius, you hear the 43rd conception from Matthew (Matthew 11:27–30): “All things have been handed over to me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; no one knows the Father except the Son, and to whom the Son wills is revealed,” a parallel to which we read in the Evangelist Luke, in the 52nd chapter: “all things were handed over to Me from my Father: and no one knows who the Son is, except the Father; In the Greek text Matthew stands for the word “knows” twice with the verb έπιγινώσχει, although St. Justin the Philosopher transmitted the same text with the verb ἔγνω (see New Testament, ed. Nestle). The Evangelist Luke has the verb γινώσκει. But pay attention to the difference in constructions: Matthew says that “no one knows the Son” - έπιγνώσκει τον υιόν, and Luke says “no one knows who the Son is” - γινώσκει τίς έστιν about υιός. The preposition επί, corresponding approximately to our “by”, indicates the consciousness of knowledge - cognition. To know the Son is to know who He is. Therefore, both expressions are equivalent. So, the ontological sonship, the absolute sonship of I X is characterized by the depth of mutual knowledge of Him by the Father and the Father by Him. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son. So, knowledge in the highest degree is, namely, the knowledge of the Father by the Son and the Son by the Father. This is perfect loving knowledge. But we, the sons of our fathers, like Christ are His, and can become like Him in the knowledge of the Fatherland. History is the knowledge of the fathers. And no one except you can know your fathers as deeply in his personality as you can - no one except those to whom you want to reveal your knowledge. Nobody knows your sons except fathers. But fathers are the past; It is not their nature to reveal their knowledge to their sons. For the sons to be known, they themselves must become fathers - carnal and spiritual - and then their sons will reveal their knowledge of them. Infertility (physical and spiritual), loneliness is the absence of a face to the world. The face is the son-image. Words from M: “You will know them by their fruits.” The deepest knowledge of a person is possible only to her son and through her son 61. I repeat, history is, in the deepest sense of the word, the knowledge of the fathers. And, since this knowledge is knowledge κατ’ Εξοχήν, then the most ancient conviction of mankind is understandable that history is knowledge, science par excellence. But precisely because you neglect the knowledge of the fathers or do not want to reveal it to anyone, then the fathers will remain unknown, and, therefore, unremembered - unremembered. History - the remembrance of fathers - is nothing more than a side of the most ancient of cults - the cult of ancestors. Here we come to the circle of ideas of Nick Feod Fedorov, who recognizes that religion 62, and, therefore, the whole culture - a derivative of religion - was “born in a cemetery” and that the task of humanity is the common cause of humanity - the resurrection of ancestors, one of the moments of which is the knowledge of them. History, for him, is the knowledge of fathers by sons and the preservation of their memory. The entire philosophy of this mysterious thinker is the philosophy of a common cause, that is, the cause of the resurrection of the fathers. And he recognizes all knowledge as due and right only when it is for the sake of the resurrection of the fathers. I do not undertake to defend or justify to you this amazing philosophy, in which, no matter how we treat it as a whole, there is deep wisdom and significance (Soloviev speaks of it as “the first forward movement of the human spirit along the path of Christ since the advent of Christianity”). In essence, O. Comte walked around this thought in his “Positive Religion” - the cult of humanity, but without the courage and depth of Fedorov. – That the ancient religion was the cult of ancestors, the dead, see Spencer, Taylor, Fustel de Coulanges, Grand Allen, etc. – in general, animalism is a religion. I just want to emphasize to you that the questions we have raised are indeed extremely profound. But, before going further, let us delve into the term itself, the word used by the Writers. In this case they use the verb γινώσκειν and έπίγνώσκειν. But you know that in addition to this verb, there are also verbs in the Greek language to denote knowledge: 2) δαήναι, ειδέναι, έπαίειν, έπίστασθαι 3) συνιέαι with their derivatives 63 . Trace, the question arises, what is the peculiarity of this synonym, compared with all the others. In classifying these Greek verbs into groups, the degrees according to which the whole person takes part in knowledge must, as far as possible, be distinguished. It is the root ΓΝΟ or ΓΝΩ, from which the verbs of the first group are developed, that mean such cognition in which the subject and object of cognition equally communicate with each other and participate in each other. This is the most complete knowledge. The verbs of the 2nd group already mean a certain distance between the subject and the object, and, therefore, knowledge with a touch of subjectivity. So, δαήναι - from Δα - to teach, learn, be taught, recognize, εΐδέναι - from Fiς - actually, contemplate, see, έπίστασθαι, έπαίειν - from επι and ΣΤΑ - stand nearby (i.e. outside the object). Finally, the verbs of the third group mean knowledge, which is based on an innate view of the ability of the spirit, independent of experience with the essence of a thing. These are our beliefs, that is, something inherent in the subject. So, γινώσκειν of all the terms of knowledge denotes knowledge that most deeply penetrates into the essence of what is known, the most mystical, the most ontological knowledge. This is knowledge in the proper sense of the word. And, therefore, the results we have achieved can be expressed in words: the deepest of knowledge is the knowledge of the son by the father and the father by the son, and it is obtained (for others) only through the son. Any other knowledge is external knowledge and only conditionally deserves this name. Such is kinship. Let us now turn to the property. We need to look for the epistemological judgments of Holy Scripture in the narratives about that property, which is typological for all other cases of this kind. It is clear that, first of all, this is the story of the Holy Scripture about the marriage of Adam and Eve. What do we read here 64: 1) And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and said, “I have acquired a man from the Lord” (Gen. 4:1). 2) In the same way, Cain “went from the presence of the Lord” after the murder of Abel: “And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived and gave birth to Enoch...” (Gen. 4:17). Knew – וידע. 3) And again, after the crime of Lamech: “And Adam knew his wife, and she gave birth to a son, and called his name Seth; because, she said, God has given me another son, instead of Abel, whom Cain killed” (Gen. 4:25). Knew – וידע. 4) In the 1st book. Kings tells that “the Lord shut up Hannah’s womb,” but behold, after visiting the church, “And Elkanah knew Hannah his wife, and the Lord remembered her. And it came to pass towards the end of the year that Anna conceived and gave birth to a son, and called his name Samuel” (1 Samuel 1:19–20]. I knew - again וידע. 5) In the 3rd book. Kings (1 Kings, according to the Hebrew account) it is told that when King David grew old and could not warm himself, the servants found him the virgin girl Abishag the Shunammite to warm the aged king. “But the king knew her not” (1 Kings 1:4): לא ידעה 6) The book of Judges tells about the daughter of Jephthah and her friends mourning her virginity. “And she did not know her husband - למידעה איש” (Judges 11:39). 7) When Tamar conceived from Judah, he “knew her no more” - לדעתה (Gen. 38:26). 8) When the Israelites swore not to give their daughters in marriage to the tribe of Benjamin, and then, having pity, decided to get wives for them, they sent 12,000 soldiers to Jabesh-gilead with the instruction to destroy “every man and every woman who has known a man’s bed” - יֹדַעַת מִשְׁכַּב־זָכָר (Judges 21:11). 9) “And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead four hundred maidens who had not known a man’s bed, and they brought them into the camp by force(?)” – לֹא־יָדְעָה אִישׁ לְמִשְׁכַּב זָכָר ( Judgment 21:12). 10) In the book of Genesis, Lot said to the Sodomites about his daughters: “Behold, I have two daughters who have not known a husband” - לא־־ידעו איש (Gen. 19:8). 11) And the inhabitants of Sodom, lusting after the Angels who visited Lot, demanded: “Bring them out to us; we will know them” – ונדעה אתם (Gen. 19:6). 12) Likewise, the New Testament says about Joseph: “And he did not know her, but at last she gave birth to her firstborn Son, and he called his name Jesus.” (Matthew 1:25) – καί ούκ έγίνωσκεν αύτήν ϊχος ου ετεκεν υιόν. Numerous examples of the use of יָדַע “to know” as applied to marriage are deliberately given here. The numerous cases of word usage prove that this is not a random metaphor, not a poetic turn of phrase, but an expression of a strong thought. There can be no doubt about what exactly we are talking about in all the examples given. And let's say moreover, in all those cases of speech about marriage and childbirth, when it is necessary to especially emphasize, namely, sexual intercourse, it is said, namely, the word to know, γίνωσκειν, יָדַע. So, the husband-woman relationship is considered by Holy Scripture as the husband’s knowledge of his wife. What is this, a metaphor? And, if it is a metaphor, then on what basis is the transfer of the cognitive relations of the subject to the object to the marital relations of the husband to his wife made? It should be added that in later Judaism there is no concept of subject and object at all, but only the concept of husband and wife in epistemology. This is all of Kabbalah 65. That this is not a metaphor, first of all, can be evidenced by similar word usage in other languages ​​66. Let's start with Old Russian and ts-Slavic (Dyachenko, - Complete ts-s dictionary, M., 1900, p. 207: “I know” and 445: “I know” = “I copulate with my wife or husband”). The very possibility of translating the verb יָדַע and γινώσκω in Russian and in the indicated sense through cognition and know proves that such use of words does not do violence to these languages. You can also point out, in the same way, the dogmatist of the 7th tone: “Thou art known to the Mother above nature,” that is, she appeared, turned out to be a Mother above nature, supernaturally (Dyachenko, ib., p. 445). According to Metropolitan Philaret (in “Notes on the book of Genesis”, when explaining Genesis 4:1); the word “pozna”, in the indicated sense, is explained by the fact that the virgin in sacred language is called the hidden one. This explanation, basically, is correct, however, it does not explain why the virgin was called hidden = not known = hidden for knowledge; and the wife was considered as unconcealed = known = accessible to knowledge. And this all the more requires clarification that the maiden was not covered with a veil (= veil), but the wife was covered, so that an everyday feature should rather have prompted the maiden to be called known, and the wife hidden. Obviously, here we are not talking about external knowledge, not about vision, but about something more metaphysical. I. I. Sreznevsky (Materials for the dictionary, T. 2, column 1088: “to know”) among the various meanings of the verb we are interested in “to know”, “I know” also distinguishes this: “to confess, to enter into a relationship, to get married.” Thus, in the “Rite of Election of Bishops of 1423” It is said: “Only a woman shall know the law.” Dahl (Tolk Dictionary) notes that in modern word usage such a meaning of the verb “to know” is not excluded. And now they talk about pigeons and animals living in pairs, “to get to know your friend” or “to get to know her” (st. 1688). The same, we add, is said about people: Once the architect came into contact with the bird house, A son was born - a child of dual nature. The son of an architect - he attempted to build, The son of a poultry woman, he only built chickens. In Greek, we see a similar use of the verb γινώσκει not only in the LXX translation and in Ev M, but also in pagan writers, especially in Plutarch in his biographies or the lives of Emil Herbius, the menaions of classical antiquity (Cat. min. 7: έν πολλοϊς, οις έβίωσε, χρόνοις μίαν... γνούς γυναίκα. 5, Pomp. 36, p. 212. Heliod. 629, 30). – The verbs γνωρίζω and είδέναι are also used in the same meaning, for examples of which see Fritzsche in the interpretation on Matt., 1. p. The same is the Latin usage: the verb cognoscere (Justin. 5, 2: uxor Aegidis regis, quam adulterio cognoverat [Alcibiades]. Cp. Fesselii adv. sacra II, 14). In Ovid (Heroid. 6, 133: Juppiter illa virum cognovit adultera virgo), in Trebellius (Trebell. Pollio trig. tyr. 30: Zenobiae ea casnitas fuisse dicitur, ut ne virum suum quidem sciret, nisi tentatis conceptionibus). In the eastern languages ​​- Arabic, Ethiopian, Syriac - we again find the same usage of words meaning knowledge (see Gesenii Thes. ling. Hebr. I, p. 521, יָדַע). In new languages ​​it’s the same again. In French (Uzbek), the word connoitre (= connaitre) and in Gallic conoscere is used in the marital sense. So, this usage is not accidental. But it can even be shown that it is a special case of a deeper phenomenon of linguistics - namely, the diverse convergence of concepts about birth with concepts about cognition 67. First of all, we draw your attention to the fact that the verbs gigno and (co)gnosco, γίγνομαι and γι(γ)νώσκω, and γεννάω γνώσκω are getting closer. This also includes: Thus, the activity of birth and the activity of cognition are in some relationship with each other. Next, pay attention to the teaching of all peoples, and, in particular, to the Gospel, to the word as a seed, and to the seed as containing within itself a reasonable meaning, Λόγος, a form of being. Pay attention to the Socratic-Platonic teaching about knowledge, as the conception and gestation of the spiritual fruit, about eros. (Chuprov, Essays on the Theory of Statistics, first essay) The infinity of the universe. Extensiveness, intensity, isotensivity. An explanation for it all. Cuts out reality. Intensity: book... inconsistency with its geometric shape, color... No specific type. The course is understated due to ignorance, not due to knowledge. We learn in the same way as an artist does - without drawing out all the details. Let's simplify. Let's stylize (nrzb.) The style of science is the principle of classification. Ideographic – nomographic (Chuprov, Windelband) ontological and nomological history - natural science (polytheic) is better for normative) knowledge of the science of the spirit Through natural science - simplification. What was the progress of Newton's law, compared with previous views (attracting the sun as a whole: different cases - Pythagorean multiplication tables: 36 cases. Writing system: 35 signs. Chinese literacy (no matter how numerous the cases of observation, as long as the canons: judge a by A and judge A by a). But the matter does not end there. You need to know a and A in concreto. The laws of nature are not enough. The idea of the law has blinded scientists practically: agriculture: it is not enough to know the laws, you need to know the properties of a piece of land. Shortage or shortage of bread. It is not enough to know the laws alone, but also the specifics - how to arrange it. Steam engine - you need to know where to get coal, and iron, and water. Initially, there is no need for nomography or idiography, but then sciences arise: history, statistics, geography... (cf. let’s lie about the high cost). Even in astronomy there is an idiographic, even in mechanics there are initial conditions, “the original distribution of causes” (Mill, cf. Poincaré, Conturut). The ideal of nomographic knowledge is a consistent formula. But it needs to be individual. What should you study? – or what we learn from nomography. Namely: a) concreteness, richness, picturesqueness (uniqueness) In relation to nature, the latter is especially important. Practice as the goal for navigation; the patient - for the doctor; “this” (right and left lying eggs). Identification in criminal law. The path of the criminal. Point of crime, alibi. The concept of aggregates is about sets, as whole systems, individual. The ideal idiograph of knowledge is to know the state of the world in all aspects. Fighting the infinity of the universe. Nomography fights by differentiation, distinction, simplification. Kills. Idiography - through integration, synthesis, unification into holistic images that live their own lives... Savelov "Lectures on genealogy". There are a lot of interesting quotes and information there. Whipper “On historical knowledge.” Depiction of genealogy in Egypt. B. Bogaevsky. According to the behests of the fathers. (ZHMNP. 1912, Sep., part XLI.) On the positive side of conservatism. Definitely use it. N.B. Finish 68. To the knowledge of the fathers. . Refer to Likhachev. . A note on historical knowledge 1911. IX. 21 Serg Pos (original sketch 1900.1.9 on the railway to Posad, between Bratovshchina and Sofrin. 9th - My birthday). 21st – Vasulka’s birthday. He is exactly 4 months old today. We want to study the history of ancient philosophy. But what does history, historical knowledge mean? We need to be aware of what we actually know and in what sense this can be called knowledge. For here amazing naiveties are possible and occur, which in themselves would be harmless or almost harmless if they were not used for malicious purposes. One often hears people say, usually not without malice, in order to point things out: “This is a historical fact.” But how is it possible to talk about a fact and in what sense? Every fact is given in actu, now, at the moment. Every fact is a fact because it constitutes the immediate content of consciousness and, therefore, eo ipso it cannot, as a fact, as a fact, be historical, that is, the past, the property of the past. In other words, either the historical is not a fact, or the fact is not historical. The historicity of a fact is not a fact already, but an addition to a fact, a certain way of considering a fact or, even more precisely, a certain method of arrangement among other facts, a modus coordinandi of facts. But this modus coordinandi is, as such, only one of many; he is a possibility, but far from a necessity. At most, he may turn out to be the only one, a necessity. Consequently, this or that historicity of a fact, this or that modus coordinandi is always a hypothesis, and not a fact - that is, something we (albeit, not subjectively, but objectively) attached to the facts. Free from historical hypotheses, the study of “historical” material should be ahistorical, although ahistoricity is not at all the same as bad historicity. This is the study of the types and eternal essence of historical facts. To create a non-historical study of the facts of religion is the task of the history of religion, “religiosity” as a science. And this radically defeats evolutionism, for which, on the contrary, there is nothing unhistorical, for which everything is historical and, therefore, everything is hypothetical. Evolutionism is the substitution of facts with their eternal, enduring meaning, a system of fictions and superstructures - a departure from the living core of reality to the empty shell of unreality. Evolutionism studies not the soil, but the scientific fictions on it, but does not want to admit its fictitiousness. Next - about the reliability of “historical facts”. “Mathematical” and “moral” expectation of this certainty. Examples... Current case: inheritance. The Florensky archive contains draft materials on the etymology of the word “history.” Here is one of them: “The meaning of the word ιστορία έκαλεΐο δέ ή γεωμετρία προς Πυθαγόρου ιστορία - geometry was called by Pythagoras tradition (Jamblichi. De pythagoria vita, ed. Kiessling, 89; Ansse de Villoison. Anecdota graeca, II, 216, lin 22–25; Jamblichus. De communi mathematica, (ed. Festa) 78, 1–5). More accurately it should be translated - ιστορία without a member through “Forschung”, study, cf. in Plato Phäd. 96a τής σοφίας ήν δή καλουσι περί φύσεως ιστορίαν (M. Cantor. Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Mathematik 3-te Aufl. Bd. I, S. 155). “Geometry from Pythagoras’ side was called research.” Closest (wider) genus (lat.) Naville Adrien. Nouvelle Classification des Sciences: Etude philosophique. 2 ed. Paris, 1901. Naville A. La notion de loi historique//Congrès internat. de philosophy. 2 session. Rapports et comptesrendus. Genève, 1905. Chuprov gives quotations from these books in French in notes; they were translated by P. A. Florensky. Chuprov A. A. Essays on the theory of statistics. St. Petersburg, 1909. Nature generated and nature generating (lat.). In the margin: “Locke’s external and internal experience is transformed into” Lines from A. S. Pushkin’s poem “The Poet.” Note Florensky: “We use the word Fichte, but not in the Fichtean meaning.” Intellectual set (lat.). The table is compiled mainly from the genealogical collections of the book. P. Dolgorukov, V.V. Rummel and V.V. Golubtsov, book. A. B. Lobanov-Rostovsky, P. N. Petrova and Russian ancestry. book ed. “Russian Antiquity”, as well as according to the notes of the book. N.V. Golitsyn to the Diary of E.I. Popova (St. Petersburg, 1911), – D. A. Khomyakov to the letters of A. S. Khomyakov (“Complete works of A. S. Khomyakov”, vol. 8, M. 1904), “Notes of D. N. Sverbeev” (M., 1899), “Chronicle of recent antiquity, book. Obolensky-Neledinsky-Meletsky" (St. Petersburg, 1876) and other genealogical and historical research. In the Archives of St. Pavel Florensky has preserved a piece of paper with the plan: “For Lectures on Genealogies. 1) Pedigree connections of the Decembrists - one nest (Malinovsky connections). 5) Russian poets - is it possible to establish connections? 6) Criminals - American studies (in general, Tredury...) 7) “Express your views demonstratively as a program” (preface). 9) New features of the addition of genealogies as a whole - according to the law. What would happen if culture..." The implementation of this plan includes several fragments found in the Archives of the Holy. Pavel Florensky: 1) “Semen and blood. 1918.VII.22 Kinship is a connection through blood (in time, succession of generations). The property is a connection through a seed, by seed (in space, coexistence of generations." 2) “You are a chosen generation” (1 Pet. 2:9). Wed. Is. 43:20 ; Ref. 19:6; 23:22 – LXX. Christianity as a race (or are Christians a race?) See details about the same subjects in Harnack in “The Essence of Christianity”, the teaching of Christianity, pp. 143 ff. : Harnack Adolf. The essence of Christianity // General history of European culture / Ed. prof. I. M. Grevs, F. F. Zelinsky, N. I. Kareev and M. I. Rostovtsev. T. V. Early Christianity. Department I. St. Petersburg, b/g. pp. 143 et seq. Aristide: “They trace their family back to I. X.” etc. ΝΒ These are spiritually defining lines (spiritual genealogy), eldership. 3) Anna “denominated from birth the pure Virgin Mother” ΝΒ (2nd canon for the Nativity of the Mother of God, canto 1, trope 1). 4) “πραξιεργίδαι, οί – praxiergids, att priestly family that performed the liturgical rites of Plinteria and Callinteria.” In the ancient times of Germany, when art was once grafted onto one branch of a family, it, together with it, usually made all its offspring noble, and the legacy of art seemed to gild the ties of blood kinship - as exemplified by many noble generations of artists who came from the ancient flourishing cities of Southern Germany. [Wackenroder] (On art and artists: Reflections of a hermit, a lover of the elegant, published by L. Tick. M., 1826; M., 1914, (p. 167)." Condition without which there is no (lat.). To know in order to foresee (French). Insert above the line: “boys (Berlin).” Note Florensky: “Wed. the teaching of K. P. Pobedonostsev about two forces that maintain society in balance - the forces of progress and the conservative forces, inertia and movement." Subject and action (Greek). Subject and law, action and interest (Greek). Everything flows (Greek) - an expression of Heraclitus. Note Florensky: “This is not about psychology and the doctrine of matter. Explained. Spirit is not mental activity, nature is not matter. Both matter is personal (explain), and mental processes are impersonal, automatic, therefore, the phenomenon is expressed as a different object.” In the margin there is a date: 1916.VIII.31. Serg Pos. Paramnesia is a memory disorder expressed in false memories. See: Beggars F. Thus spoke Zarathustra. Part 3 // Works: In 2 vols. T. 2. M., 1990. P. 160. A blank space of 1.5 lines is left in the text and the following is written in pencil: “(artistic creativity).” Note Florensky: “a note on dialectics.” Lines from A. S. Pushkin’s poem “The Poet and the Crowd.” Du Bois Raymond Emil Heinrich (1818–1896) - German physiologist. Date in the margin: 1916. IX. 1. Serg Pos. Perhaps this is William Frey (pseudonym of Vladimir Konstantinovich Gaines, 1839–1888). As a captain of the General Staff, he emigrated to America, where he founded a farm on communist principles. See: Reinhardt N.V. An extraordinary personality. Kazan, 1889; Gershenzon M. O. Russian Propylaea. T. 1. M., 1915. Florensky mentions him in his memoirs “To My Children...” (M., 1992). In the same book, William Frey is mentioned as a classmate of Florensky at the 2nd Tiflis gymnasium. The Kryshtanovichs are distant relatives of the Florenskys who moved to America. The Florenskys visited their Batumi estate near Chakva. Ivan Nikolaevich Elchaninov – employee of the Archive of the Heraldry Department; helped Florensky compile the genealogy of Archimandrite. Serapion (Mashkin). See: Priest. Pavel Florensky. Present ed. T. 1. M., 1994. Pp. 236–249. Date in the margin: 1916. IX. 14. Serg Pos. Lines from the monologue of monk Pimen from A. S. Pushkin’s drama “Boris Godunov”. Flammarion Camille (1842–1925) – French astronomer. Herschel William (1738–1822) – the founder of stellar astronomy, built the first model of the Galaxy, discovered the planet Uranus. Glagolev Sergei Sergeevich (10/9/1865–10/10/1937) graduated from the MDA in 1889; from 1892 he taught there at the department of basic theology, member of the Board of the Moscow Academy of Arts, member of the Holy Council of the Russian Orthodox Church 1917–1918. He was involved in the Sergiev Posad case of 1928, sentenced to deportation to Penza, released early in 1929, lived in Vologda, arrested in 1937 and soon executed. A blank space is left before the closing parenthesis. Note in the margin. Florensky: “So it is in the text, but this is an obvious mistake, since the father continues to raise his son.” Note Florensky: “The famous translator “Resener was born in St. Petersburg (in 1825), raised in the Gatchina Orphan Institute and then spent his whole life in Russia, mainly in St. Petersburg. He didn’t know who his parents were; he lost them very early and considered his only relative to be some old woman, an aunt or grandmother, a German woman, whose photograph always hung above his work desk...” E. F. Librovich, - At the book post (Essay “Half-forgotten writer-teacher.” P. and M., 1916, p. 155). I believe that this is negligence on Resener's part. Couldn’t he really find out from the documents, ask the same old woman about his parents, he just didn’t want to, wasn’t interested, considered it unnecessary. This is an example of extreme nihilism." See: List of persons of the Korsakov family, Rimsky-Korsakov family and Prince. Dondukov-Korsakov. St. Petersburg, 1890. On the back is Florensky's note in pencil relating to this section: 2) Childbirth is simple. Holiness. Witold Vladislavovich Rummel (1855–1902) – genealogist. Together with V.V. Golubtsov, he published the “Genealogical collection of Russian noble families” (in 2 volumes, St. Petersburg, 1886–1887). He wrote a lot for the Brockhaus-Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary. Book Alexey Borisovich Lobanov-Rostovsky (1824–1896) – statesman, lover of Russian antiquity, genealogist, author of the “Russian Genealogical Book” (2 volumes, 2nd ed., revised and expanded. St. Petersburg, 1895). Book Pyotr Vladimirovich Dolgoruky (1816–1868) – genealogist, author of the books “Russian Genealogical Collection” (St. Petersburg, 1840–1841) and “Russian Genealogical Book” (St. Petersburg, 1854–1857), etc. Pyotr Nikolaevich Petrov (1827–1891) - writer, genealogist, author of the books “The History of the Russian Nobility” (St. Petersburg, 1886) and “For the Few: A Collection of Notes on Genealogy, Heraldry, etc.” (SPb., 1875). Date in the margin: 1916. IX. 15. Night. August Weismann (1834–1914) – German zoologist and geneticist. On the back of the page is Florensky’s note in pencil relating to this section: “Genealogy is a connection of realities. But reality can be (11 nrzb.), etc. Hence the types of genealogy.” Lukomsky V.K. and Baron Tipolt N.A. Russian heraldry: A guide to the compilation and description of coats of arms. Pg., 1915. P. 38. “There is a type of pedigree tables, the so-called. ascending-mixed genealogy, which usually consists of coat of arms, arranged in a certain order, namely: at the bottom is the coat of arms of the person from whom the genealogy is being traced, slightly higher, to the left (from the viewer) is the coat of arms of his father and to the right - the family of his mother, even higher is a series of coats of arms, starting from the left, the first is the coat of arms of the grandfather, the second is the coat of arms of the grandmother's family, i.e. the mother of his father, the third is the coat of arms of his father mother and the fourth coat of arms of his mother's family; above is a new row of ascending relatives, the shields of the family coat of arms are located to the left - on the father's side and to the right - on the mother's side. The arrangement of eight or 16 armorial shields in the top row is considered sufficient, but, of course, it can have 32, 64, etc. sequentially.” In Florensky’s draft materials, A. Larionov’s typescript “On the symbolism of family coats of arms” (April 27, 1922: 3 m. p.) was preserved. Reasoning that paralyzes the will (lat.). The phrase is not completed, followed by crossed out text, “(if the angle of divergence of the branches is α, then the increase in the line occupied by the next generation is a linear function of α, a is the place of the end (text break in the manuscript)).” Nearby is a drawing related to the crossed out text... Manage and drive ships (Greek). In the draft materials for the lectures, the diagram “Family tree of monasteries” was also preserved, drawn by an unknown person at the request of Florensky according to the book: Muravyov A. N. Russian Thebaid in the North. St. Petersburg, 1894. The name of the scheme probably belongs to Florensky. Next, there is a gap of about a third of the page - clearly leaving room for the continuation of the thought. Compare: “Along with this divergence of relatives in space, either horizontally or vertically, the branching of the genus occurs in time. At the same time, the last process especially attracts attention, because, in contrast to a tree, the previous generation quickly dies out and in each three-dimensional section of the genus there are rarely more than three generations at a time. Thus, if the oak retains all previous generations of branches, and they continue to live, forming, to a certain extent, the image of the entire history of the tree, then in the genus the past does not leave its traces, and the spatial picture of the genus is incomparably poorer than its four-dimensional image. In life and socially, this circumstance teaches the absolute need for a person to know, represent and synthesize in his knowledge the past of his kind, to consolidate it in possible ways, while the branches of a tree, if we imagine it as conscious, are much less in need of such consolidation, because there the past itself remains fixed, and as long as the organism of the tree is alive, the memory of its entire past is alive. The genus is a single organism and has a single holistic image. It begins in time and ends. It has its peaks and its declines. Each time of his life is valuable in its own way; however, the race strives for some definite, especially complete expression of its idea; it is faced with a historical task assigned to it, which it is called upon to solve. This task must be finally completed by special organs of the clan, one might say, the entelechy of the clan, and to give birth to them is the immediate goal of the life of the entire clan. These are fragrant flowers or tasty fruits of this genus. They end some cycle of ancestral life, they are the last or some penultimate manifestations of the genus. Whether there will be offspring from them or not is no longer a significant question, at least in the life of a given family, for in the person of these flowers it has already fulfilled its task. If there are offspring here, then this can only be the development of the clan by inertia, and in the near future, that is, after three, four, etc. generations (and what do three or four generations mean in the history of the clan!), the vital energy of the clan is destined to dry up. In other cases, it is possible, with the influx of proper blood, to give birth to stable offspring. But this most often comes from one of the younger branches of the clan, junior in carrying the generic idea. This is, as it were, the vegetative emergence of a new offspring, if you will, a new genus, with a new generic idea and a new historical task. But the more fully and perfectly the historical meaning of the clan is expressed in a well-known representative, the less reason there is to expect further growth of the clan branch to which he belongs. There is no doubt that the life of the race is determined by its law of growth and passes through certain ages. But there is also no doubt about the freedom that belongs to the clan - a freedom that, in the power of its creativity, is just as superior to the freedom of an individual representative of the clan on average, as the fullness of life of the clan as a whole is superior to that of individual relatives on average. In addition, at some time and in the person of some individual representatives of the clan, this self-determination receives extraordinary opportunities. The family then stands at the door of its own destiny. If, in general, in other times and in the person of his other members, he is given some carelessness and clear decisions and insight into the life and task of the whole are not required from him, then, on the contrary, in such times and in the person of such of his members, he acquires the opportunity to pull himself up, to strain himself spiritually, and at these turns to make a choice, to say either yes or no to the highest decision about him. This happens in the life of an individual; but these nodal points in the life of an entire race are immeasurably more responsible. And here, the race is free to say no to its own idea and snatch the source of life from itself. Then, after this fatal “no” to itself, the race no longer needs to exist, and it dies, one way or another. The life task of everyone is to know the structure and form of his species, its task, the law of its growth, critical points, the relationship of individual branches and their particular tasks, and against the background of all this - to know one’s own place in the family and one’s own task, not one’s individual task set for oneself, but one’s own - as a member of the family, as an organ of a higher whole. Only with this ancestral self-knowledge is it possible to have a conscious attitude towards the life of one’s people and to the history of mankind, but usually they do not understand this, and ancestral self-knowledge is neglected, considering it - at worst - as an object of empty vanity, and at best - as a legitimate, historically earned reason for pride. However, neither one nor the other captures the main thing: the qualitative superiority and qualitative completeness of the clan over relatives. But the current, quantitative understanding of it as a simple sum of changeable generations, as an eternal eadem sed aliter, as the boring performance by each generation of all the successive duties of age - this understanding is fundamentally false, and it leads to the desire for a generation to isolate itself within itself, not to see anything behind and not to take into account the future. " The phrase is written in pencil on a quarter-page blank space left. Next, there is a gap of about a quarter of the sheet. In the margin there is a date: 1916.IX.29. Thursday. Morning. Note Florensky on the back of the page in pencil: “God is the God of Abraham, Isa, Jacob - not the God of philosophers and scientists” (Pascal’s Amulet). Note Florensky on the back of the page in pencil: “Frazer. Grand. Allan and others - about the emergence of culture from religion and, namely, from cult ideas (domestication of animals and plants). Fustel de Coulanges. La cité antique.” Note P. A. Florensky: “Schmidt. Synonym, d. gr. Sprache, I, S. 282. ff. No. 13." Note on the back of the previous page. Florensky with a missing connection to the text: “What, in fact, does the verb יךע mean (see Gesenii Thes. linguae hebr., II, p. 570–573): a) videre, to see, to notice with the eyes. Gesenius compares this theme with Indo-European languages, in which the original meaning of see, videndi was to know: Sanskrit veid - to know, Zendsk - weedeni, Greek - Ιδείν, Latin - video, Gothic - witan - to see, to know, etc. Cf. see, widoe (Polish). At the same time, ν in some languages is replaced by j - just as in Hebrew י through ן c) vidisse, see, аnimadvertere, cognoscere, novisse, scire, experiri (cf. Greek οίδα = vidi, hence novi). I saw, I noticed, therefore I know. 1. animadvertit, wahmehmen gewahrwerden, both with the eyes and the touch, especially with the mind, hence – intellexit, einsehen, merken. Often - belongs to intention and will: animum, advertit ad aliquid, auf etwas merken. Hence – curavit. 2. rescivit, both by seeing and by hearing. Hence – expetus est. 3. cognovit aliquem – (kennen lernen). a) about a man (in gender terms). b) about a woman (in a sexual sense). 4. novit aliquem (aliquid), kennen. 5. scivit (wissen) aliquid. 6. scire, sapere in the absolute sense. Note Florensky: “I am inclined to think that knowledge by kinship is Aryan, and knowledge by property is Semitic, i.e., that the first formed the basis of Aryan thinking, and the second – Semitic. Hence in Aryan Theosophy there is a trinity of birth, and in Semits there is a trinity of marriage. Husband - Wife - Child (family). Talk about Kabbalah. Circumcision – ecstasy – mystical union – mystical marriage and wife. Note P. A. Florensky: “Although it is difficult to isolate and exclude the influence of the language of the Bible.” Note P. A. Florensky: J. Espann,–Erzeugen u. Erkennen (Theologische Quartelschrift, 1912, 4 Heft.). A. M. Tuberovsky. To the doctrine of Logos (retelling of Espanna's note) (B V), 1912, T. III, pp. 857–862). From this word to the end - written in pencil on the back of the penultimate page. You might be interested in: