'Median culture': The dialogue of binary and trinitarian system of thought

Y.G. Nigmatullina

Kazan Federal University, Kazan, 420008 Russia

E-mail: nigmatullina.yulduz@mail.ru

Received December 19, 2016

Full text PDF

Abstract

This paper considers one of the possible methodological approaches to the analysis of “median culture” – the search for its structural invariant.

The search is performed in the context of contemporary philosophical studies of culture development patterns in the aspect of interaction between binary and trinitarian system of thought. The increased interest in this aspect during the late 20th – early 21st century is explained by a number of facts: it is the response of culture to the fundamental changes that occurred in Russia during the collapse of the Soviet Union, moreover, in broader meaning, the realization of the catastrophic consequences of the confrontation of nations and states during the age of globalization; it is the tendencies toward philosophical understanding of contemporary science, the desire to combine different conceptions of world view through “the unified theory of interaction” (Yu.S. Vladimirov).

Certain ideas of the works considered by us become a starting point for our concept as well:

1. The binary system of thought (which is based on the opposition of paired elements) and trinitarian one (which conceives the interrelation of three quantities, one of which can play the role of an integrating factor) should not be strongly opposed to each other. The notion of productivity of the trinitarian system of thought does not imply the negation of binary systems in sci-tech, social, and cultural fields. It is necessary to consider different options for their interaction.

2. During the analysis of the topic it is necessary to combine the “substantial” and “procedural” approaches. The “substantial” approach (system-component analysis) involves the determination of initial components of the system and their properties; when the “procedural” approach is used, the subject of analysis is transformations of the dialogue of binary and trinitarian systems in the process of historical development of science and intellectual culture of society.

Our point of view on the issue under consideration is the following one. The history of literature and art development produces an infinite variety of interrelation forms between binary and trinitarian systems and their relative separation and confrontation in certain periods. “Median culture” functions in the social and cultural process as a reconciling integrative spiritual factor which contributes to the achievement of social cohesion and stability of civilized development. It is important for the researches of “median culture” to determine its structural invariant in the aspect of interaction between binary and trinitarian system of thought, i.e., the type of dialogue which corresponds to the key tendencies of its development. For the functioning of “median culture”, the interpenetration dialogue seems the most productive one, i.e., the incorporation of both systems within a single phenomenon (even within a single work). Thus, one of them, either binary or trinitarian, plays a dominant role while the other one remains in a potential state but is capable of becoming actual in a different historical and literary context. In other words, the structural invariant of “median culture” is based on the functional connection of binary and trinitarian systems in the process of their interaction: the alteration of the type of binary opposition and its specific content corresponds to the search for a new way of “overcoming” the contradictions by means of the trinitarian structure.

In order to make the variants of the binary and trinitarian systems dialogue well-defined, the examples of classifications of binary oppositions and triad are given in this paper. They are presented from more “rigid”, classical variants to the “transitional”, indefinite ones:

– binary oppositions: by the principle of dichotomy (either – or), it is transitional, chaotic cohesions, binary oppositions by the principle of diplastia (and – and, this and this);

– trinitarian systems (triads): linear, transitional (by the Hegelian concept of Sublation), system triads (the synthesis of three equal elements, one of which performs an integrative role, “sets the measure of compatibility” (R.G. Barantsev)).

Considering the scope of the paper, we have given only four examples (four variants) of interaction between the binary and trinitarian principles within the literary work: in the ode “Music or Seven Tones” (1792) by the poet of the XVIII century N.A. L'vov, in the poem “Day and Night” (1839) by the poet of Romanticism F.I. Tyutchev, in the realistic novel “Fathers and Sons” (1862) by I.S. Turgenev and in the picture of contemporary Tatar avant-garde artist L. Akhmetov “Udmurt Forest” (2011).

The determination of structural invariant may become the basis for the solution of many aspects of “median culture”. For example, it may help to identify the signs of “median culture” in various phenomena of literature and art; conventionally designate the field of “median culture” in the culture system as a whole, trace the continuity of artistic traditions at different stages of “median culture” development.

Keywords: “median culture”, binary and trinitarian systems, dichotomy, diplastia, systemic triad

References

1. Barantsev R.G. Establishment of Trinitarian Thinking. Moscow, Regul. Khaotich. Din., 2005. 123 p. (In Russian)
2. Nigmatullina Yu.G. Between Disharmony and Harmony: Problems of “Median Culture”. Kul'tura kak primiritel' [Culture as a Reconciler]. Kazan, Fen, 2013, pp. 5–35. (In Russian)
3. Raushenbakh B.V. On the logic of the trinity. Voprosy Filosofii, 1990, no. 11, pp. 166–169. (In Russian)
4. Lotman Yu.M. Culture and Outburst. Moscow, Progress, Gnosis, 1992. 271 p. (In Russian)
5. Lotman Yu.M., Uspenskii B.A. Materials on Russian and Slavic of Philology. Vol. 28: Literature Studies. On the 50th Anniversary of B.F. Egorov. Rol' dual'nykh modelei v dinamike russkoi kul'tury (do kontsa XVIII veka) [The Role of Dual Models in the Dynamics of Russian Culture (Until the End of the 18 Century)]. Tartu, 1977. pp. 3–36. (In Russian)
6. Berdyaev N.A. Sense of Creativity. Kharkiv, Folio, 2002. 679 p. (In Russian)
7. Erasov B.S. Civilizations. Universals and Authenticity. Moscow, Nauka, 2002. 524 p. (In Russian)
8. Davydov A.P. Development of the “median” culture” in Russia (based on the material of the Russian literature of the first half of the 19th century). Doct. Cult. Sci. Diss. Moscow, 2002. 561 p. (In Russian)
9. Kuznetsov B.G. Modern Science and Philosophy: Ways of Fundamental Studies and Prospects of Philosophy. Moscow, Politizdat, 1981. 184 p. (In Russian)
10. Vladimirov Yu.S. Metaphysics. Moscow, Binom, Lab. Znanii, 2002. 534 p. (In Russian)
11. Mes'kov V.S. Methodology of the trinity. Voprosy Filosofii, 2013, no. 11, pp. 66–76. (In Russian)
12. Postmodernism. Encyclopedia. Gritsanov A.A., Mozheiko M.A. (Eds.). Minsk, Interpresservis, 2001. 1038 p. (In Russian)
13. Yastrebova N.A. Urgent Problems of Methodology in Modern Art Studies. Diplastiya i esteticheskoe soznanie [Diplasty and Aesthetic Consciousness]. Moscow, Nauka, 1983, pp. 316–333. (In Russian)
14. Losev A.F. Problem of Symbol and Realistic Art. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1995. 320 p. (In Russian)
15. Nigmatullina Yu.G., Pashkurov A.N., Buranok O.M. Searching for transformation invariants in the Russian literature of the 18th century: Pre-Classicism and Pre-Romanticism. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie, 2016, no. 3, pp. 262–272. (In Russian)
16. Fedortseva V.N., Chelnokova A.A. Symbolism of numbers in works of the German Romanticism. Predromantizm i romantizm v mirovoi kul'ture: Materialy nauch. konf., posvyashch. 60-letiyu prof. I.V. Vershinina: v 2 t. [Pre-Romanticism and Romanticism in the World's Culture: Proc. Sci. Conf. on the 60th Birth Anniversary of I.V. Vershinin: 2 vols.]. Vol. 1. Samara, Izd. Samar. Gos. Pedagog. Univ., 2008, pp. 50–56. (In Russian)
17. Russian Literature of the Last Third of the 19th Century (Some Aspects of System-Complex Analysis of Literary Process). Nigmatullina Yu.G. (Ed.). Kazan, Izd. Kazan. Univ., 1980. 192 p. (In Russian)
18. Udmurt Republic: Encyclopedic Handbook. Izhevsk, Udmurtiya, 2011. 152 p. (In Russian)
19. The Creative Group of Emnoyumna. Izhevsk, Inkar, 2013. 43 p. (In Russian)
20. Nigmatullina Yu.G. “Delayed Modernism” in the Tatar Literature and Fine Arts. Kazan, Fen, 2002. 175 p. (In Russian)

For citation: Nigmatullina Y.G. “Median culture”: The dialogue of binary and trinitarian system of thought. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki, 2017, vol. 159, no. 1, pp. 26–42. (In Russian)

The content is available under the license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.