philosophy Auto-translated

A scientific worldview is an objective approach to the realities of the world. As soon as objectivity begins to be replaced by stereotypes, science dies. And the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries were a time of flourishing stereotypes. For example: "Progress is linear and limitless," "Everything in the world is knowable; nature is a workshop." I'm not even talking about ethnic and racial stereotypes. The peak of this undoubtedly occurred in the 20th century, when two trends emerged: "Capitalism is evil," "Socialism is the spawn of hell." In general, the scientific worldview died with antiquity. And only some scientists tried to revive it.

An interesting take on the scientific worldview. It's usually just called "non-stereotypical thinking." And there were plenty of stereotypes in antiquity too. By scientific worldview, I mean something like this: - A belief that everything in the world has a cause, and that cause lies WITHIN this world; - A belief that the world is governed by the laws of logic (i.e., that two contradictory events cannot coexist - gravity cannot have two contradictory formulas for calculation, yielding contradictory results; in the context of psychology, I mean not denying emotions, but acknowledging that emotions have causes, logically derived from past experiences - this, by the way, is the dominant position now). These seem to be the main points... If I remember anything else, I'll add it.

As for Bulgakov – maybe. He came up with "The Master and Margarita," but how can you take him seriously! – Then let's throw Gogol in the trash as well – he wrote "Viy"!

Gogol was buried alive. Those who buried him didn't know that he was simply in a state of lethargic sleep. An unusual person had an unusual death. :)

I sincerely sympathize with Gogol. You fall asleep... and wake up in a coffin... a terrible death...

Yeah, that’s too bad! But I liked the movie – the first Russian horror film, “The Witch,” based on Gogol’s “Viy.” It’s a fitting theme! I especially liked the ending!!! :eek: :) :D

I haven't seen it...
By the way, you're wrong to criticize Bulgakov, saying that "The Master and Margarita" is not a serious work! The fact that there are many jokes in it doesn't make it unserious! There are many smart and profound ideas, and the origins of all the characters and situations are very interesting...
For example, Perumov writes without jokes, but his works (even if they are interesting) are not serious. So humor and seriousness are not related.

"The Master and Margarita" is a very serious philosophical and even theological work (after all, Bulgakov knew what he was writing, as he was the son of a priest), but it has been overused and popularized to such an extent that it is difficult to see the forest for the trees. Although, of course, those who want to will see it.

Guys, read Gogol again first, so you can talk like that – “Evenings on a Farm Near Dikanka” is still our cultural heritage, no matter how silly it may sound… and regarding Bulgakov – besides “The Master and Margarita,” he has other works that show the change in his worldview… he wrote his novel about the time when “sturgeon was second freshness,” as a commentary on current events, so we simply miss most of his metaphors… it’s a very profound work – he who has ears, let him hear.

:) I'm glad you agreed with me about Bulgakov :) By the way, he wrote "The Master and Margarita" shortly before his death, and he wrote it with great intensity...
And Gogol also wrote his "Evenings..." with great intensity! And, if I'm not mistaken, he later said that the atmosphere he created helped him to cope with his state of mind at the time. By the way, Pushkin praised them precisely because of the unrestrained atmosphere of celebration, a carnival, and a folk festival.

About a scientific worldview: All of this is correct, but the point is that in the Middle Ages, the first point did not apply, because the cause of everything was attributed to God, and God was outside the world. And in later times, the second point did not apply – almost all thinkers of the modern and contemporary eras completely lacked logic – stereotypes prevailed. This is why Marx was not liked – he used logic to completely dismantle all stereotypes.

Regarding the fact that "Master..." and "Evenings..." are good – I completely agree!

That's why people didn't like Marx – he completely shattered all stereotypes with his logic.

Marx was just like me! I can annoy anyone with my logic!:D

I'm continuing to read about Marxism. Yes, it's a powerful concept, truly powerful. You just need to sort through all these complexities. And besides, no one has provided a better explanation of European development than Marx. And there's no need to reduce all of Marx's ideas to class struggle and similar specifics. You need to think more globally, more broadly.

I remembered an anecdote: Brezhnev ends up in Hell. Well, the devils grab him and put him in a cauldron. Brezhnev sits there and sees Hitler calmly sitting on a deckchair, reading a book. "What's going on?!" Brezhnev was indignant. "Did he sin less than me?" "You don't understand," the demons calmed him down. "He's translating the works of Karl Marx into Hebrew." I personally haven't read Marx, but I've heard that it's a very powerful work. One of my friends even converted to Orthodox Christianity after reading it. Before that, he was a pagan.