Eternity and its Preimages (book review of L.S. Chernyak, “Eternity and Time”)

Abstract

This article is a book review on L.S. Chernyak, "Eternity and time" (Moscow; St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya Publ., 2012. 576 pp.). A considerable size of the book and informative saturation of the text cause determine in this case the necessity of distancing from the usual schemes, more or less complete presentation of the content, concentration on the most significant, "nodal" moments of it. Such group is defined primarily as "sacrificial status of a person" in conditionality by "scheme of eternity", transcendental schematism of "contemplation", through the prism of which "out-thought" becomes available thoughts; the last puts at the forefront of attempts of author's interpretation of time (eternity).

The origins of such intentions are seen by the reviewer in the main trends of philosophy of the twentieth century. It is emphasized that the accentuation of time and space is closely connected with the approval of the common scientific methodology of a number of universals that are independent of the content of what is happening, and because of interest, associated also with the end of metaphysics. It is noted in this connection that the requirements of general validity on samples positive knowledge had a very significant impact on the theory of knowledge, appealing to "panhuman" in it. Space and time in connection with mathematical axioms were a prototype of this kind of hypothetical-universal methods.

However, the attempts of their application to the composition of the Humanities revealed a distinct failure of the separated form, causing, in turn, adding to the time, space and subject additional (sacred) dimensions (or horizon). In this regard, the notion of being and the concept of time are supplemented by the relationship between God and man (attitude, put in direct connection to eternity/time and being).

In this context, an author's vision arises of the sacred as the horizon of eternity, which asserts sacrificial status. The author (reasonably and justifiably) claims (carefully analyzing the texts of Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, Hegel, Husserl and Heidegger), that such a classic interpretation (of temporality) lacks such measurements (of eternity/infinity).

Follow-up and explication of the key points of the argument of the author has led to the structure and content of the reviews.

In critical part, the reviewer concludes that "thinkable" and "non-thinkable" are (necessary) abstractions ("the central denoting"), which remain markers of non-cleared content in the course of the study. But the "pure forms" of thought are inconceivable without the concrete historical forms of expression (language, logic), otherwise, are in no way free from the general validity (verification). In this "manifestation" and "conditionality" (of out-thought) pure thought already is not pure (instrumental). This "impurity" of pure forms (of thought) is not acting as a result of the irregularity of a logical progress within the construction of the author's conception, but reflects the impossibility of the separation of form (of thought) from its content (the form is informative, the content is arranged).

Similarly, the status of a sacred victim (taken as a base) in terms of logic is also not "pure", implying the total pressure of "out-thought" in the absence of the other (thought), which throws the "beginning of history" in the darkness and horror of all mystic powers (again driven out with hypothetical desire of hypothetical (at the dawn of history) thought to knowledge of out-thought). The last (out-thought) isn't enough to take in its logical abstraction (negativity), but it must be filled with its real properties in the "dawn of history" of mankind (what the reviewer is trying, albeit extremely brief, to do).

However, these comments, of course, not in the least reduce the value held by L.S. Chernyak extremely conscientious and professional studies that deserve highest praise.