CARTESIAN PERSONAL METAPHYSICS

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i17.206811

Keywords:

metaphysics, Descartes, anthropology, reductionism, science, ethics, art

Abstract

Purpose. To consider the personal nature of Cartesian metaphysics. Its implementation involves: a) outlining methodological changes in the philosophy of the twentieth century; b) analysis of ways to interpret anthropological component of philosophizing in Descartes studies; c) appeal to Descartes’ texts to clarify the authentic form of his interpretation of metaphysics. Theoretical basis. I base my view of Descartes’ legacy on the conceptual positions of phenomenology, existentialism and hermeneutics. Originality. Based on Descartes’ own concept of teaching, the author substantiates the personal nature of Cartesian metaphysics. Important prerequisites for its comprehension are attention to the ethical motive as the driving force of philosophizing and recognition of the importance of the poetic worldview. The idea of the basic role of poetics finds its meaningful confirmation in the texts of the philosopher, who interprets the main areas of philosophy (science, morality and medicine) as the forms of art. Conclusions. Based on his own vision of anthropology and metaphysics as the forms of completion of the revolution initiated by Copernicus, the author defends the idea of the constitutive presence of personality in Descartes’ metaphysics. In the process of studying the research literature, methodological guidelines are outlined in the form of the importance of personal determination of the search for truth, the key role of ethical motive and art as components of philosophizing. The thesis about the poetic form of presentation of metaphysics by Descartes as a form of fixation of its personal dimension is substantiated.

Author Biography

A. M. Malivskyi, Dnipro National University of Railway Transport named after Academician V. Lazaryan

Dnipro National University of Railway Transport named after Academician V. Lazaryan (Dnipro, Ukraine), e-mail telepat-57@ukr.net

References

Antoine-Mahut, D., & Gaukroger, S. (Eds.). (2016). Descartes’ Treatise on Man and its Reception. In Studies in History and Philosophy of Science (Vol. 43). Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46989-8 (in English)

Ben-Yami, H. (2015). Descartes’ Philosophical Revolution: A Reassessment. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137512024 (in English)

Buzon, F. de. (2019). The Compendium Musicae and Descartes’s Aesthetics. In S. Nadler, T. M. Schmaltz & D. Antoine-Mahut (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism (pp. 254-268). Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198796909.013.15 (in English)

Cottingham, J. (1993). A Descartes dictionary. Wiley-Blackwell. (in English)

Cottingham, J. (2008). Cartesian Reflections: Essays on Descartes’ Philosophy. Oxford University Press. (in English)

Descartes, R. (1996). Oeuvres completes (Vol. 1-11). Paris: C. Adam et P. Tannery. (in French)

Dilthey, V. (2000). Vozzrenie na mir i issledovanie cheloveka so vremen Vozrozhdeniya i Reformatsii. Universitetskaya kniga. (in Russian)

Gadberry, A. (2017). The Cupid and the Cogito: Cartesian Poetics. Critical Inquiry, 43(3), 738-751. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/691018 (in English)

Heidegger, M. (2016). Nemetskiy idealizm (Fichte, Schelling, Hegel) i filosofskaya problematika sovremennosti. Vladimir Dal. (in Russian)

Jacobi, C. G. (1999). On the life of Descartes and his method of rightly conducting the reason and seeking truth in the sciences. Uspekhi Fizicheskih Nauk, 169(12), 1332-1338. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3367/UFNr.0169.199912g.1332 (in Russian)

Jaspers, K. (2012a). Filosofiya. Kniga pervaya. Filosofskoe orientirovanie v mire. A. K. Sudakov, Trans. Moscow: "Kanon+" ROOY "Reabylytatsyia". (in Russian)

Jaspers, K. (2012b). Filosofiya. Kniga tretya. Metafizika. A. K. Sudakov, Trans. Moscow: "Kanon+" ROOY "Reabylytatsyia". (in Russian)

Jonas, H. (2001). Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik fur die technologische Zivilisation. Kyiv: Libra. (in Ukrainian)

Khmil, V., & Malivskyi, A. (2018). The Problem of Forms of Completing the Copernicus Revolution in Modern Cartesian Science. Philosophy and Cosmology, 21, 131-139. DOІ: https://doi.org/10.29202/PHIL-COSM/21/14 (in English)

Khoma, O. (2012). Dekart i Paskal: Shliakh do filosofii na tli Grand Siècle. Filosofska dumka, 6, 19-38. (in Ukrainian)

Lee, K. (2013). Reading Descartes Otherwise: Blind, Mad, Dreamy, and Bad. Fortham University Press. (in English)

Malivskyi, A. (2019). Neznanyi Dekart: Antropolohichnyi vymir u filosofuvanni. Dnipro: Herda. (in Ukrainian)

Marion, J.-L. (2007). On the Ego and on God: Further Cartesian Questions (Perspectives in Continental Philosophy). C. M. Gschwandtner, Trans. Fordham University Press. (in English)

Marion, J.-L. (2018). On Descartes’ Passive Thought: The Myth of Cartesian Dualism. C. M. Gschwandtner, Trans. University of Chicago Press. (in English)

Moore, A. W. (2012). The Evolution of Modern Metaphysics: Making Sense of Things. Cambridge University Press. (in English)

Naaman-Zauderer, N. (2010). Descartes’ Deontological Turn: Reason, Will, and Virtue in the Later Writings. Cambridge University Press. (in English)

Nadler, S., Schmaltz, T. M., & Antoine-Mahut, D. (Eds.). (2019). The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198796909.001.0001 (in English)

Razumovsky, I. S. (2014). Cartesian Studies of Paul Valery. Voprosy filosofii, 9, 156-169. (in Russian)

Renault, L. (2019). Descartess Moral Philosophy. In S. Nadler, T. M. Schmaltz & D. Antoine-Mahut (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Descartes and Cartesianism (pp. 225-239). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198796909.013.13 (in English)

Sobol, O. (2000). Postmodern i maibutnie humanizmu. Humanizm: Suchasni interpretatsii ta perspektyvy (pp. 89-185). Kyiv. (in Ukrainian)

Welsch, W. (2004). Nash postmodernyi modern. A. L. Bohachov, M. D. Kultaieva, L. A. Sytnichenko, Trans. Kyiv: Alterpres. (in Ukrainian)

Downloads

Published

2020-06-30

How to Cite

Malivskyi, A. M. (2020). CARTESIAN PERSONAL METAPHYSICS. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (17), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i17.206811

Issue

Section

ANTHROPOLOGICAL PROBLEMS IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY