Eng During last 365 days Approved articles: 1865,   Articles in work: 313 Declined articles: 771 
Library
Articles and journals | Tariffs | Payments | Your profile

Back to contents

Once again about the faith, mind and competence of science, or a F. M. Dostoyevskys philosophical essay about a bedbug
Mekhed Gleb Nikolaevich

PhD in Philosophy

Docent, the department of Philosophy, the faculty of Social and Humanitarian Sciences, Bauman Moscow State Technical University

105082, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Rubtsovskaya Nab., 2/18, of. 733

mekhed_gleb@mail.ru

 

 
Mekhed Nikolai Grigor'evich

PhD in Philosophy

Deputy Director-General, National Fuel Company LLC

107078, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Sadovaya-Chernogryazskaya, 8/1

nester-zinko@mai.ru

Abstract.

The subject of this article is a small chapter from the preparatory materials to Dostoevsky’s novel “Demons”, which in the authors’ opinion is a completed philosophical essay. This chapter, which lead character becomes a regular bedbug, represents value not only as a visual illustration that cracks a door into the creative laboratory of a prominent Russian writer and demonstrates the specific features of this artistic-philosophical method, but also as an imagery-symbolic insight or anticipation of the questions that engrosses the modern philosophy of mind. Particularly, reasoning on the limits and boundaries of the contemporary to Dostoevsky science, through his characters he questions: “what it is like to be a bedbug?” Those who at least merely familiar with the current situation within the philosophy of mind is bound to feel the close relation of similar wording with the famous article by T. Nagel “what it is like to be a bat?”, where this question and obvious failure of sensible answer from the third-person perspective, is used as a demonstration of non-reduction and fundamentality of the first-person perspective, and this the fundamental limitation of science.

Keywords: aesthetics, ethics, Demons, Dostoevsky, philosophy, religion, fiction, rationality, Nagel, misterianism

DOI:

10.25136/2409-8728.2018.6.26432

Article was received:

28-05-2018


Review date:

29-05-2018


Publish date:

30-05-2018


This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References
1.
Bakhtin M. M. Problemy tvorchestva Dostoevskogo. Kiev: Next, 1994. S. 9-179.
2.
Dostoevskii F.M. Besy. Podgotovitel'nye materialy. // F.M. Dostoevskii. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v 30 t. T. 11. L.: Izdatel'stvo Nauka, 1974. S. 64-308.
3.
Laut R. Filosofiya Dostoevskogo v sistematicheskom izlozhenii. M.: Respublika, 1996. 447 s.
4.
Lipskii B.I. Prakticheskaya priroda istiny. L.: Izdatel'stvo Leningradskogo universiteta, 1988. 152 s.
5.
Mekhed G.N. Khudozhestvennaya literatura kak metod filosofii // Filosofskaya mysl'. 2016.- 12.-S.23-35. DOI: 10.7256/2409-8728.2016.12.2148. URL: http://e-notabene.ru/fr/article_21483.html
6.
Nagel' T. Kakovo byt' letuchei mysh'yu? // Khofshtadter D., Dennet D. Glaz razuma. Samara: Izdatel'skii Dom Bakhrakh-M, 2003. S. 349-360.
7.
Flanagan O. Conciousness Reconsidered. Cambridge, London: The MIT Press, 1992. 241 p.
8.
Mekhed N.G. Artistic Creations as Objects of Ethical Research: The Works Of Dostoevsky // Soviet Studies In Philosophy. 1987.-4. P. 65-86.
9.
McGinn C. The Character of Mind. Oxford, New-York: Oxford University Press, 1996. 176 p.
10.
Nagel T. The View From Nowhere. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. 244 p.