Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

Comments on Nicholas Berdyaev's Book (1939) Spirit and Reality
Comments on Nicholas Berdyaev's Book (1939) Spirit and Reality
Comments on Nicholas Berdyaev's Book (1939) Spirit and Reality
Ebook76 pages39 minutes

Comments on Nicholas Berdyaev's Book (1939) Spirit and Reality

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars

()

Read preview

About this ebook

In Spirit and Reality (1939), Nicholas Berdyaev, an Orthodox exile from communist Russia, frequently writes the word "spirit", but rarely pens the word "reality". How should I appreciate this? Here is my guess.
In Philosophy of Nature (1935), Jacques Maritain presents an argument that allows this reader to construct diagrams of the Positivist's and the empirio-schematic judgments. The empirio-schematic judgment belongs to 'what ought to be' for the Positivist's judgment. So, a modernist poses two judgments at once, a judgment within a judgment. That is totally confounding.
In this close reading, features of Berdyaev's argument are diagrammed using models developed in the commentary on Jacques Maritain's Book (1935) Natural Philosophy.
Berdyaev places the Positivist's judgment into a new category-based nested form, polarizing the judgment until it takes the character of a dyad. Berdyaev emphasizes the character of the intellect-noumenal side. Ironically, the Vienna Circle (meeting between 1924 through 1936) celebrates the empirio-schematic judgment-phenomenal side.
What does this say about the historical moment?
Surely, between the two world wars, the nature of science is under scrutiny. Yet, inquirers lacked semiotic tools for inquiry. The tools are here. They transform Berdyaev’s argument into something both familiar and novel.

LanguageEnglish
PublisherRazie Mah
Release dateDec 30, 2018
ISBN9781942824589
Comments on Nicholas Berdyaev's Book (1939) Spirit and Reality
Author

Razie Mah

See website for bio.

Read more from Razie Mah

Related to Comments on Nicholas Berdyaev's Book (1939) Spirit and Reality

Related ebooks

Science & Mathematics For You

View More

Related articles

Reviews for Comments on Nicholas Berdyaev's Book (1939) Spirit and Reality

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars
0 ratings

0 ratings0 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

    Book preview

    Comments on Nicholas Berdyaev's Book (1939) Spirit and Reality - Razie Mah

    Comments on Nicholas Berdyaev's Book (1939) Spirit and Reality

    By Razie Mah

    Published for Smashwords.com

    2018

    Notes on Text

    This work comments on book by Russian Nicolas Berdyaev, Spirit and Reality.

    Single quotes and italics are used to group words together.

    Prerequisites include A Primer on the Category-Based Nested Form, A Primer on Sensible and Social Construction. Suggested readings include Comments on Jacques Maritain's Book (1935) Philosophy of Nature, abbreviated as CJMNP.

    Table of Contents

    The Beast Crouching at the Door

    Maritain’s Model of Positivist Judgment

    What is Real?

    Attributes of the Subjective Realm

    Models for the Subjugation of the Spirit

    Example of Sensible Construction

    Asceticism

    Subjective Evil and Suffering. Objective Sin.

    Purification

    Contemplation

    The New Spirituality

    The Beast Crouching at the Door

    0001 Nicolas Berdyaev publishes Spirit and Reality (1939) when he is 63 years old, a Russian exile in Paris. His residence in that city overlaps with another notable author. Jacques Maritain's book, Natural Philosophy (1935), examines positivist scientific attitudes through the lens of scholastic thought.

    Surely, Berdyaev and Maritain struggle with the same two-faced beast: positivist and empirio-schematic judgments. Talking to a modernist is like speaking to a ventriloquist and a puppet, both at same time. One has history on his side. The other has science.

    0002 A two-faced monster crouches at the door.

    There seems no way to stop it, because its desire is for our desire.

    Each of us wants to be on the right side of history. Who does not believe in science?

    0003 Maritain, trained as a chemist, tries to isolate the beast. But, he cannot separate the two faces. In order to neutralize the scientific facade, Maritain revives natural philosophy. He applies the scholastic approach of three degrees of abstraction to the creature. He configures an optical analogy in which the second degree is viewed through the first and third degrees. He claims that abstraction is visualization. Science is a lens to view the world.

    What a lens it is.

    Natural Philosophy shows that moderns view their world through two interconnected judgments. The relational structures of the positivist and empirio-schematic judgments are not nested. The empirio-schematic judgment occupies the position of what ought to be in the positivist judgment.

    0004 So how the beast devour?

    Noumena organize the positivist intellect, while that same intellect brings an empirio-schematic judgment into relation with a phenomenon.

    The beast devours because, unlike Aristotle’s judgment, the positivist judgment is full of its own righteousness.

    The empirio-schematic judgment - the scientific construction - is what ought to be.

    There is more.

    Models are more real than phenomena.

    History is destiny.

    Science is the truth that destiny reveals.

    0005 In this work of semiotic visualization, I start with Maritain’s model of positivist judgment and imagine that Berdyaev places this relational structure, as an actuality, into a new vessel. He places it into a new nested form.

    This polarizes the triad into a dyad, a dance between subjective and objective. He envisions this interplay as a dynamic expression of a new spirituality.

    0006 In this manner, the monster may be recognized and tamed.

    Or so, Berdyaev imagines.

    Maritain’s Model of Positivist Judgment

    0007 Judgment exhibits a triadic structure. It has three elements (P,Q,R). Judgment is a relation (P) between what is (Q) and what ought to be (R).

    In reflective judgment, categories are not assigned to each element.

    In actionable judgment, categories are assigned. A different category inheres to each element. The assignment permits the actionable

    Enjoying the preview?
    Page 1 of 1