Nikolay Lossky | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Born | Nikolay Onufriyevich Lossky 6 December 1870 |
| Died | 24 January 1965 (aged 94) |
| Academic background | |
| Education | Imperial Saint Petersburg University |
| Influences | Origen,Plotinus,Hegel,Wilhelm Windelband,Wilhelm Wundt,Vladimir Solovyov,Pavel Florensky |
| Academic work | |
| Era | 20th-century philosophy |
| Region | Russian philosophy |
| School or tradition | Intuitionism |
| Institutions | |
| Main interests | Personalism,ethics,Neoplatonism |
| Notable ideas | Intuitivist-personalism,gnosiology |
| Influenced | Vladimir Lossky,Nicolai Hartmann |
Nikolay Onufriyevich Lossky[a] (/ˈlɒski/; 6 December [O.S. 24 November] 1870 – 24 January 1965), also known asN. O. Lossky, was a Russian philosopher, representative of Russianidealism,intuitionistepistemology,personalism,libertarianism,ethics andaxiology (value theory). He gave his philosophical system the nameintuitive-personalism. He spent his working life in St. Petersburg and, after his exile by theBolsheviks in 1922, in Prague and New York. He was the father of the influentialChristian theologianVladimir Lossky.[1]
Lossky was born in Kreslavka then in theRussian Empire. His father, Onufry Lossky, hadBelarusian roots (his grandfather was a Greek-Catholic Uniate priest[2]) and was anEastern Orthodox Christian; his mother Adelajda Przylenicka was Polish andRoman Catholic. He was expelled from school for propagatingatheism.
Lossky undertook postgraduate studies in Germany underWilhelm Windelband,Wilhelm Wundt andG. E. Müller, receiving a master's degree in 1903 and a doctorate in 1907.
Returning to Russia, he became a lecturer and subsequently assistant professor of philosophy in Saint Petersburg.
Lossky called for a Russian religious and spiritual reawakening while pointing out post-revolution excesses. At the same time, Lossky survived an elevator accident that nearly killed him, which caused him to turn back to theRussian Orthodox Church under the direction ofFr. Pavel Florensky. These criticisms and conversion cost Lossky his professorship of philosophy and led to his exile abroad, on the famedPhilosophers' ship (in 1922) from theSoviet Union as acounter-revolutionary.
Lossky was invited toPrague byTomáš Masaryk and became professor at theRussian University of Prague atBratislava, in Czechoslovakia. Being part of a group of ex-Marxists, includingNikolai Berdyaev,Sergei Bulgakov,Gershenzon,Peter Berngardovich Struve,Semyon Frank, Lossky, though aFabian socialist, contributed to the group's symposium namedVekhi orSignposts. He also helped the Harvard sociologistPitirim Sorokin with hisSocial and Cultural Dynamics
In 1947 N. O. Lossky took a position teaching theology atSaint Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary, an Orthodox Christian seminary inCrestwood, New York.
In 1961, after the death of his famous son, theologianVladimir Lossky, N. O. Lossky went to France. The last four years of his life were spent in illness there.
Lossky was one of the preeminent Russianneo-idealists of his day. Lossky's Гносеология orgnosiology is calledIntuitivist-Personalism and had in part adapted theHegelian dialectical approach of first addressing a problem in thought in terms of its expression as a duality ordichotomy. Once the problem is expressed as a dichotomy the two opposing ideas are fused in order to transcend the dichotomy. This transition is expressed in the concept ofsobornost,integrality or mystical communal union.[3] Lossky also followed and developed his ontological andgnosiological interpretation of objective reality from Christianneoplatonism based on the Patristic Fathers. This along withOrigen and the works of Russian mysticsKireevsky andKhomyakov and the later works ofV. Solovyov among many others. Understanding and comprehension coming from addressing an object, as though part of the external world, something that joins the consciousness of the perceiving subject directly (noesis,insight), then becoming memory,intuitionism as the foundation of allnoema or processes of consciousness. In that human consciousness comprehends the essence ornoumena of an object and the object's externalphenomenon which are then assembled into a complete organic whole called experience. Much of an object's defining and understanding in consciousness is not derived discursively but rather intuitively or instinctively as an object has no meaning outside of the whole of existence. Lossky summed up this concept in the term "all is immanent in all". As such much of reality as uncreated or uncaused is irrational, or random (see libertarianism below) and can not be validated rationally (i.e. freedom and love as energy are uncaused, uncreated). Therefore, consciousness in its interaction with reality operates not strictly as rational (only partially) much of consciousness operates intuitively. This isintuitively done by thenous. Thenous, consciousness or the focal point of thepsyche as the "organic connection" to the object and therefore the material world as a whole. The psyche here is the sensory input from the physical body to the inner being, mind or consciousness. This interaction causing different levels of maturing consciousness over time (reinterpretation). As a dynamic retention, experience constitutes the process of learning i.e. reflectivedifferentiation.
Consequently, theexistence of objects can not be completely expressed with logic or words, nor validated with knowledge, due to objects having asupernatural essence or substance as their composition (supernatural in an ancient Greek philosophy or Orthodox Christian understanding of supernatural as uncreated or uncaused). Following an Orthodox Christiansubstance theory (seeGregory Palamas) energy andpotential do not have ontology without asentient agent (i.e.idealism), Lossky coined the term "substantive agent" to validate thatmatter as well asenergy are uncreated in substance, essence. This validation as part ofgnosiology or Christian mysticism (Orthodoxy) as opposed to the Russian Materialist and nihilist position that states that objects have no "thing in itself" or no essence, substance behind theirphenomenon (as inPositivism). Lossky based his intuitivism on gnosiology in that he taughtfirst principles as uncreated or uncaused. Lossky's Axiology was the teaching of first principlesdialectically. Russian philosophy based on Soloviev is expressedmetaphysically in that the essence of an object can be akin toNoumenon (opposed to its appearance orphenomenon), but it can haverandom characteristics to its being or essence, characteristicallysumbebekos. This is the basis of V Soloviev's arguments againstPositivism which are the cornerstone ofRussian philosophy contained in Soloviev's "Against the Positivists".The validation (immediate apprehension) of truth, value and existence all being intuitive as expressed by Aristotle'sNoesis.[4] Each event having value or existence because of substantive agents being engaged in the event, (viaNeo-idealism) giving the event value and existence.
One of the main points of Lossky's онтология orontology is, the world is an organic whole as understood by human consciousness.Intuition, insight (noesis in Greek) is the direct contemplation of objects, and furthermore the assembling of the entire set ofcognition from sensoryperception into a complete and undivided organic whole, i.e. experience. This expression of consciousness as without thought, raw and uninterpreted by the rational faculty in the mind. Thus the mind's dianoia (rational or logical faculty) in its deficiency, finiteness or inconclusiveness (due to logic's incompleteness) causes the perceived conflict between theobjectivism (materialism, external world) andidealism (spiritual, inner experience) forms of philosophy. Where intuitive or instinctual re-action is without rational processing of the rational faculty of the mind. It is outside of comprehension via the dianoia faculty of the mind, consciousness (Nous). Intuition being analogous withinstinctualconsciousness. Intuition functions without rational or logical thought in its absorption of experience (calledcontemplation). Rational or logical thought via the dianoia of thenous, then works in reflection ashindsight to organize experience into a comprehensible order i.e.ontology. The memory, knowledge derived from the rationalizing faculty of the mind is called epistemological knowledge. Intuitive knowledge orGnosis (preprocessed knowledge or uninterpreted) then being made by the logical facility in the mind into history or memory. Intuition rather than a rationalization (also seeHenri Bergson whom influenced Lossky)[5] determining factor it manifests as an integral factor of or during an actual conscious experience. Lossky's ontology being consistent withLeibniz'soptimism expressed as theBest of all possible worlds in contrast to thepessimism andnihilism of more pro-Western Russian philosophers. Lossky's work is also opposed to the pagan elements of the pagan philosophers that were an influence on his work. In that the logical faculty of the mind was only finite in a temporal sense and will eventually become infinite (bytheosis), as such it seeks the infinite rather than opposes it. Lossky believed that philosophy would transcend its rational limits and manifest a mystical understanding of experience. This would include an understanding that encompasses the intuitive, irrational, philosophically (as done instochastics) rather than the strictly pagan approach of a good deterministic force opposed to an evil irrational indeterminate force. This of course being the teaching of Christianfaith as a philosophical principle (calledfree will) andintrinsic component to conscious existence, one that manifestssobornost in the transcending of the pagan dichotomy of reason versus superstition or determinism versus in-determinism.
Once knowledge is abstracted from conscious experience it becomesepistemological knowledge and is then stored in an ontological format in the mind (the format itselfa priori). The manipulation of memory and or reapplication of memory as knowledge as post-processed knowledge i.e.Epistemology. Lossky's Ontology as an agent's Сущность (the "essence") expressed asbeing and orbecoming is possible as both the person transcends time and space while being closely connected with the whole world, while in this world. Much of Lossky's working out of an ontological theory of knowledge was done in collaboration with his close friendSemen L. Frank.
Lossky as a metaphysical libertarian taught that all people have uncreatedenergy (Aristotle) orpotential (Plotinus). This being very much inline with thevitalism of his day. Though Lossky did not strictly adhere to vitalism but rather to its predecessorMonadology and its living forces (dynamis) theory. This is to contrastLeibniz's theory of Monadology againstCartesianmind-body dualism. This as a rejection of vitalism in its dualism of mind and body being of different substances. For Lossky'sSubstantive Agents have potential (dynamis) and they can act (beings haveenergy) upon, from this potential. All power or potential comes from the individual. That spontaneous or organic reality structures or orders itself to reconcile opposing forces (sobornost), doing so while maintaining order and freewill. Each pole of existence (the created and uncreated of gnosiology) or opposing ideologies, reaching compromise through value and existence and manifesting in a complete organic whole (sobornost).[6]
Second Section: That selection is the agent's free act. Consequently, the temporal order of events is not uniform even in the inorganic nature. It is quite possible that although some two electrons have millions of time repulsed each other, they will not do so the next time. But functional connections between ideal forms conditioning the existence of the world as asystem – e.g. mathematical principles and the laws of the hierarchy of values and their significance for conduct conditioning the presence of meaning in the world – are independent of the agents' will. Violation of these laws is unthinkable, but they do not destroy the agent's freedom: they merely create the possibility of activity as such and of its value. Those laws condition the cosmic structure within the frame work of which there is freedom for an infinite variety of activities. The system of spatiotemporal and numerical forms provides room for activities that are opposed to one another in direction, value, and significance for the world. The absence of rigidly uniform connection between events does not make science impossible. It is sufficient for science that there should be more or less regular connection between events in time. The lower the agent's stage of development, the more uniform are their manifestations. In those cases there may be statistical laws. Many misunderstandings of the doctrine of free will are disposed of by distinguishing betweenformal andmaterial freedom. Formal freedom means that in each given case an agent may refrain from some particular manifestation and replace it by another. That freedom is absolute and cannot be lost under any circumstance. Material freedom means the degree of creative power possessed by an agent, and finds expression in what he is capable of creating. It is unlimited in the Kingdom of God, the members of which unanimously combine their forces for communal creativeness and even derive help from God's omnipotence. But agents outside the Kingdom of God are in a state of spiritual deterioration and have very little material freedom, though their formal freedom is unimpaired. Life outside the Kingdom of God is the result of the wrong use of free will.
— From History of Russian Philosophy section on N. Lossky in chapter on Intuitivists p. 260.[6]
Lossky's argument that determinism can not account for the cause of energy in the Universe. Energy being a substance that can not be created or destroyed (see the law ofconservation of energy). Each agent accounting for their existence as their own dynamistic manifestation. Dynamistic manifestation as being that of act orenergy derived from aNeoplatonic interpretation.[6]
First section: Determinists deny freedom of the will on the ground that every event has a cause. They mean by causality the order of temporal sequence of one event after other events and the uniformity of that sequence.Causation,generation, creation and all other dynamic aspects ofcausality are ruled out. Lossky proves that the will is free, taking as his starting point the law of causality but defending adynamistic interpretation of it. Every event arises not out of itself, but is created by someone: it cannot be created by other events: having atemporal formevents fall away every instant into the realm of the past and have no creative power to generate the future. Only supertemporal substantival agents – i.e., actual and potential personalities – are bearers of creative power: they create events as their own vital manifestations. According to the dynamistic interpretation of causality it is necessary to distinguish among the conditions under which an event takes place thecause from theoccasion of its happening. The cause is always the substantival agent himself as the bearer of creative power, and the other circumstances are merelyoccasions for its manifestations, which are neither forced nor predetermined by them. The agents' creative power issuperqualitative and does not therefore predetermine which particular values an agent will select as his final end. FromHistory of Russian Philosophy section on N. Lossky in chapter on Intuitivists p. 260.[6]
Much of the theology that Lossky covers (as his own) in the bookHistory ofRussian Philosophy is inline with the idealism ofOrigen.[7] Lossky'sidealism is based on Origen's. In that the relationship between the mystic, religious understanding of God and a philosophical one there have been various stages of development in the history of the Roman East. The nous as mind (rational and intuitive understanding) in Greek Christian philosophy is given the central role of understanding only when it is placed or reconciled with the heart or soul of the person. Earlier versions of Christian and Greek philosophicalsyncretism are in modern times referred to as Neoplatonic. An example of this can be seen in the works ofOrigen and his teaching on the nous as to Origen, all souls pre-existed with their Creator in a perfect, spiritual (non-material) state as "nous," that these minds then fell away so to pursue an individual and independent existence apart from God. Because all beings were created with absolute freedom and free will, God, not being a tyrant, would not force his creations to return to Him. According to Origen, God's infinite love and respect for His creatures allowed for this. Instead, God created the material world, universe or cosmos. God then initiated theaeons or history. God did this for the purpose of, through love and compassion, guiding his creations back tocontemplation of His infinite, limitless mind. This was according to Origen, the perfect state.[8] Though the specifics of this are not necessarily what Lossky taught in his theology courses, since dogma in a general sense, is what is taught as theology. N. O. Lossky also was inline with the common distinctions of Orthodox Christian theology. Like theEssence-Energies distinction for example. Though Lossky did pursue a position of reconciliation based on mutual cooperation between East and West. Lossky taught this co-operation as organic and orspontaneous order, integrality, and unity calledsobornost. Sobornost can also be translated to mean catholic.
In biographical reminiscences recorded in the early 1960s,philosophical novelist andObjectivism founderAyn Rand recalled only Lossky among her teachers at theUniversity of Petrograd orUniversity of St. Petersburg, reporting that she studiedclassical philosophy with him prior to his removal from his teaching post by the Soviet regime.[1][9]
N.O. Lossky also influenced the theologian-philosopher, Professor Joseph Papin, whose work Doctrina De Bono Perfecto, Eiusque Systemate N.O. Losskij Personalistico Applicatio (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1946) was listed among the 100 leading scholarly works of the 20th Century. Papin's volume is the most profound study of Lossky's work in relation to Christian teachings in Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. After teaching at the University of Notre Dame, Papin founded the Theology Institute at Villanova University. He edited publications from the first six symposia (1968–1974). The idea of Sobornost was prominent in the VI volume: The Church and Human Society at the Threshold of the Third Millenium (Villanova University Press, 1974). His own in depth scholarly contribution was entitled: "From Collegiality and Sobornost to Church Unity." The Dean of Harvard Divinity School, Krister Stendahl, gave his highest praise to Papin for his efforts in overcoming the divisions separating Christians: "It gladdens me that you will be honored at the time of having completed a quarter century of teaching us all. Your vision of and your dogged insistence on a truly catholic i.e. ecumenical future of the church and theology has been one of the forces that have broken through the man-made walls of partition. . ." [Transcendence and Immanence, Reconstruction in the Light of Process Thinking, ed. Joseph Armenti, St. Meinrad: The Abbey Press, 1972, p. 5). At the time of his death, United States President Ronald Reagan along with theologians, philosophers, poets, and dignitaries from around the world wrote to Dr. Joseph Armenti praising the life and work of Reverend Joseph Papin. See: “President Reagan Leads International Homage to Fr. Papin in Memorial,” JEDNOTA, 1983, p. 8).
From the introduction ofValue and Existence:[10]
Due to the tradition of the Church, Russia had an implicit philosophy, a philosophy that was born of theNeoplatonism of the Church Fathers. This implicit Neo-platonism is the true heritage of Russian thinking.[10]
All is immanent in all.[10]
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help){{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)