Time in the Works of F.M. Dostoevsky: Ontological and Anthropological Interpretations

Cover Page

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The article analyzes the problem of time in the following works by F.M. Dostoevsky: the novel “Demons” and the novella “Notes from the Underground”. The main method of the article is anthropological analysis, which will help achieve the purpose of this study and show the connection between man and time. The author suggests moving away from the already familiar interpretation of time in the works of F.M. Dostoevsky, namely, to stop considering time as an ontological category and talk about eschatological and apocalyptic time or even about overcoming it. The study analyzes the views of N.A. Berdyaev, M.M. Bakhtin and V.A. Podoroga on this problem in the works of F.M. Dostoevsky, their shortcomings are revealed and an alternative, anthropological interpretation of time is proposed. It is, in our opinion, that is the closest to the truth in the space of F.M. Dostoevsky’s philosophical anthropology. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the fact that the author for the first time in the scientific literature substantiates the idea that time in the selected works of F.M. Dostoevsky appears only with a person, becomes a property of his conscious life and is not an ontological, but an anthropological category. A person becomes someone who lives in time because he is “chained to himself, looking inside his self” (F.I. Girenok). But at the same time, a person does not live in space, because he does not turn to what is outside of it. The closeness of a person in himself makes him a temporary, not a spatial being, which, in our opinion, was demonstrated by F.M. Dostoevsky.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Ksenia N. Kholodnova

Lomonosov Moscow State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: kholodnovaksenia@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0008-7336-0230

Postgraduate Student, Faculty of Philosophy, Department of Philosophical Anthropology

Russian Federation, 27 Build. 4, Lomonosov avenue, Moscow 119192

References

  1. Бахтин М.М. Проблемы поэтики Достоевского. М.: Издательство «Э», 2017.
  2. Bakhtin M.M. Problemy pojetiki Dostoevskogo [Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo «Je» Publ., 2017.
  3. Бердяев Н.А. Самопознание (Опыт философской автобиографии). М.: Мир книги, Литература, 2006.
  4. Berdyaev N.A. Samopoznanie (Opyt filosofskoj avtobiografii) [Self-Knowledge (The Experience of Philosophical Autobiography)]. Moscow: Mir knigi, Literatura Publ., 2006.
  5. Гиренок Ф.И. Homo hallucinatas: идея двойной инверсии в исследовании человека // Философские науки. 2023. Т. 66. № 2. С. 7–25. doi: 10.30727/0235- 1188-2022-66-2-7-25
  6. Girenok F.I. Homo hallucinatas: ideja dvojnoj inversii v issledovanii cheloveka [Homo hallucinatas: the Idea of Double Inversion in Human Research]. Filosofskie nauki. 2023. Vol. 66. N 2. P. 7–25. doi: 10.30727/0235-1188- 2022-66-2-7-25
  7. Гиренок Ф.И. Что значит сегодня мыслить по-новому? // Философия хозяйства. 2017. № 3. С. 141–146.
  8. Girenok F.I. Chto znachit segodnja myslit’ po-novomu? [What Does It Mean to Think in a New Way Today?]. Filosofija hozjajstva. 2017. N 3. P. 141–146.
  9. Достоевский Ф.М. Бесы. Роман в трех частях. «Бесы»: Антология русской критики. М.: Согласие, 1996. C. 5–434.
  10. Dostoevsky F.M. Besy. Roman v treh chastjah. «Besy»: Antologija russkoj kritiki [Demons. A novel in Three Parts. Demons: Anthology of Russian Criticism]. Moscow: Soglasie Publ., 1996. P. 5–434.
  11. Достоевский Ф.М. Записки из подполья // Ф.М. Достоевский. Полное собрание повестей и рассказов в одном томе. М.: АЛЬФА-КНИГА, 2019. С. 596–674.
  12. Dostoevsky F.M. Zapiski iz podpol’ja [Notes from the Underground]. F.M. Dostoevsky. Polnoe sobranie povestej i rasskazov v odnom tome [The Complete Collection of Novels and Short Stories in One Volume]. Moscow: AL’FA-KNIGA Publ., 2019. P. 596–674.
  13. Кант И. Критика чистого разума / пер. с нем. Н. Лосского, сверен и отредактирован Ц.Г. Арзаканяном и М.И. Иткиным; прим. Ц.Г. Арзаканяна. М.: Эксмо, 2009.
  14. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [The Critique of Pure Reason], transl. from Germ. by N. Losskii verif. and edit. by C.G. Arzakanjan and M.I. Itkin; compil., notes by C.G. Arzakanjan. Moscow: Jeksmo Publ., 2009.
  15. Подорога В.А. Рождение двойника. План и время в литературе Ф. Достоевского. М.: РИПОЛ классик / Панглосс, 2019.
  16. Podoroga V.A. Rozhdenie dvojnika. Plan i vremja v literature F. Dostoevskogo [The Birth of a Double. Plan and Time in Dostoevsky’s Literature]. Moscow: RIPOL klassik, Pangloss Publ., 2019.

Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies