Kultūros ir jos sintezės refleksija XIX a. pab. – XX a. pr. Lietuvių inteligentų pasaulėžiūroje
Mykolo Romerio universitetas |
Globalizacija iškelia ribų – tarp kultūros sričių, tarp specialiųjų mokslų – klausimą. Šiame procese ieškoma vietos humanitariniams mokslams. Panašios problemos imtos svarstyti Lietuvoje ir praeito šimtmečio pradžioje. Pozityvistai ir socialistai bet kokius dvasios mokslus atmetė kaip neteikiančius jokios praktinės naudos, todėl ir nereikalingus. Dvasininkai, priešingai, laikydamiesi atnaujinto tomizmo pažiūrų, teigė, kad galima skirtingų kultūros sričių sintezė, pateikianti visuminį pasaulio vaizdą. Materialistai, neigdami tokią galimybę, mokslams taip pat kėlė universalų tikslą suvienyti žmoniją, tačiau socialiniu pagrindu. Tokia pažiūra buvo visai nepriimtina romantikams, kultūroje svarbiausią vaidmenį numačiusiems dvasios mokslams, galintiems atkleisti žmogaus ir tautos ypatingumą.
The clergy denied such a single sided view of culture. For them not only a material and, thus, scientific interpretation of the world was not acceptable, but also was a single sided idealistic reasoning of culture held by supporters of the romantic views. While holding neo-Thomistic views and often combining them with the ideas of V. Solovyov, the clergy had no doubt about the possibility of holistic understanding of the world which could unfold the versatility of the being. However, such comprehensiveness is not an end in itself, it is indispensable for creation of a balanced, moral human. The final goals of positivists, Marxists and neo-Thomists became paradoxically similar: culture, according to neo-Thomists and science, according to positivists, must lead to the ideal state of humanity. In fact, the clergy speaks of a balanced individual and positivists and Marxists speak of anonymous, unified humanity united by common scientific or social ideals. Consequently, the question emerges whether by reducing the limits between regions, cultures and thus by merging entirely different areas we could maintain the diversity. In this case the Romanticists, who emphasize the originality and uniqueness referring to language as the main source of culture, are exceptional. Also the neo-Thomists, who sought for synthesis of all fields of culture, noticed the distinctions of these fields which could not be eliminated.