MY
A.
BERDYAEV
PHILOSOPHIC
(BERDIAEV)
WORLD-OUTLOOK
(1952/1937 - #476)
At the centre of my philosophic creativity is situated the problem
of man. And therefore my philosophy is to an utmost extent anthropologic. To posit the problem of man -- this means at the same
time to posit the problem of freedom, of creativity, person, spirit and
history. Therefore I have chiefly concerned myself with the philosophy of religion, the philosophy of history, social philosophy and ethics.
My philosophy is of the existential type, if contemporary terminology be used. But it can be likewise regarded as a philosophy of
spirit. In its basic tendency this philosophy is dualistic, although the
term is about dualism of a particular sort and to some measure is not
ultimate. This is a dualism of spirit and nature, of freedom and determinism, of the person and the in-general, of the kingdom of God
and the kingdom of Caesar. And in this I sense myself closer to Kant,
than to the monistic German idealism of the beginning XX Century.
The initial point of my weltanschaung-outlook is the primacy of freedom over being. This provides philosophy a dynamic character and
explains a basis for evil, as also the possibility of creativity in the
world of something new. Freedom cannot be a determinisation by being, freedom is not delimited even by God. It is rooted in non-being.
In this, as regards thinkers of the past, especially close to me were
Heraclitus, Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa amongst the fathers of
the Church, Jakob Boehme -- who had tremendous significance for
my spiritual developement, and to a certain degree also Kant. As regards philosophers of our times those having points contingent with
me were Bergson, Gentile, Max Scheler. Amongst the representatives
of existential philosophy the closest to me is Jaspers. Dostoevsky, L.
Tolstoy, Nietzsche, one after the other they played a large role in the
working out of my weltanschaung-outlook, just as did Marx, Carlyle,
Ibsen and Leon Bloy -- in the forming of my social views.
of humanism presents itself as a movement towards principles suprahuman, either towards Christ, or towards the Anti-Christ. The force
of technology is one of the moments of the crisis of humanism. The
incursion of the masses modifies culture from above downwards,
lowers its quality and leads to a crisis of spirituality. Technical civilisation rends the integral wholeness of the human being and transforms him into a function. Only a spiritual renaissance would allow
man to subordinate the machine to himself.
Social Philosophy. The fundamental problem is the problem of the
relationship between the person and society. Society presents itself as
the objectivisation of human relationships. In society the I can remain solitary and not meet up in encounter with the thou. For sociology the person is an insignificant part, subordinate to society. For
existential philosophy, on the contrary, society assumes the appearance of being part of the person, its social side. In the person there is
inherent a spiritual principle, a depth, which is not defined by society.
Men belongs to two spheres: the kingdom of God and the kingdom of
Caesar. Upon this is grounded the right and the freedom of man. And
thus also, there exist limits to the domination of the state and society
over man. Society is not an organism. The reality of human society
defines itself by the reality of the human community. An objectivised
society, suppressing the person, arises from the disassociation of people, from their sinful egocentrism. In such a society there exists communication between people, but not community. The highest type of
society appears to be the society, in which there are united the principle of the person and the principle of community. Such a type of society might be termed a personalist socialism. In such a society, for
each human person there would be acknowledged an absolute value
and utmost worth as a being, called to eternal life, and therein the social organisation would guarantee for each the possibility of attainment of the fulness of life. It is necessary to strive towards a synthesis
of an aristocratic, a qualitative principle of person, and a democratic,
socialist principle of justice and the brotherly collaboration of people.
In the epoch of the active incursion of the masses into history
and the giddying developement of technology society becomes technically ordered. Mankind forsakes the organic rhythm of life and subordinates itself to a mechanical and technical organisation. For man as
an integrally whole being, this process is sickening and tormentive.
The tellurgic period of the life of mankind approaches its end. The
might of the machine signifies the beginning of a new period -- cosmogonic, since it subordinates man to a new cosmos. Man already no
longer lives amidst bodies inorganic and organic, but amidst organised bodies. In such an epoch especially there is need for a strengthening of spirit and spiritual movement for the preservation of the image
of man. Without a spiritual renewal it is impossible to attain social restructuring.
Ethics. Personalism is a basis for ethics. Moral judgements and acts
are always personal and individual, they cannot be defined by the
concepts or choice of a collective or society. The distinction between
good and evil is a consequence of the fall into sin. The paradisical existence was situated above good and evil. There exist three views of
ethics: the ethics of law, the ethics of redemption and the ethics of
creativity. The ethics of law is the most widespread amongst sinful
mankind. The ethics of law is the ethics of a social everydayness, it is
based upon the subordination of man to norms, and for it there does
not exist the human individuality. For it man exists for the Sabbath.
The good however, which observe the law, shew themselves often
to be evil. In this ethics it is the idea of an abstract good that governs. The ethics of law found its most extreme expression in Phariseeism. This is a normative ethics. The ethics of redemption issues forth
from a lived human existence, and not from an abstract idea of the
good. The ethics of creativity is based on the creative gifts of mankind. The creative act has a moral significance, and a moral act is a
creative act. The true moral act is unique, it cannot be repeated. The
moral act is not a fulfilling of the law, of norms, but is rather a creative newness in the world. Every creative act has moral significance,
though this be a creativity of cognitive or aesthetic values. Ethics is
bound up with the eschatological problem, the problem of death and
immortality, of heaven and hell. Hell is situated in the subjective, and
not in the objective, and it remains within time, within unending
time, and does not pass over into eternity. The ontology of an eternal
hell is impossible. Hell is created by the good for the evil, and
therein they render themselves evil. The kingdom of God is on the
other side of our here and now good and evil, and the thought
about it can only be apophatic.
________________________
Basic works for the understanding of my philosophic worldview are: The Meaning of Creativity (published in English title
The Meaning of the Creative Act), The Meaning of History,
Philosophy of the Free Spirit (published in English under title
2000
(1952/1937
by
translator
-
Fr.
476
S.
Janos
-en)
- -.
Return to Berdyaev Online Library.