FREE FULL TEXT (PDF)
DOI: http://doi.org/10.31617/visnik.knute.2019(123)08

UDC 141.5/.7
 
BARABASH Rostislav,
Post-graduate student
at the Department of Philosophy and Social Sciences
Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics
19, Kyoto str., Kyiv, 02156, Ukraine
 
E-mail: rostislav.barabash@gmail.com
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5091-3535

REBELLION AGAINST EVERYDAY LIFE AS A PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEM

Background. Formulation of the problem. Under the conditions of modern society and changes in the European worldview that occurred during the twentieth century, the problem of finding both the uniqueness of its individual representative and the sense of its existence are becoming more and more acute. Overcoming the spiritual decline of the philosophers of the twentieth century. were looking for a rebellion against everyday life. It is worth investigating the essence of this rebellion as a holistic phenomenon.
The analysis of recent researches and publications showed that despite the presence of partial research on the mentioned issues, the essence of rebellion against everyday life as a development at the junction of various philosophical directions has not been established.
The aim of the article is to reveal the content of the philosophical problem of rebellion against everyday life and to form a holistic view of it by comparing the main variants of its semantic content.
Materials and methods. In the process of research, methods of analysis, synthesis, abstraction, generalization, comparison were used.
Results. The rebellion against everyday life is analyzed as an ambiguous philosophical problem that determines the philosophy of existentialism and voluntaristic nihilism. The main reason for such rebellion is the absurdity of being as such or the discre­pancy of the forms of its presentation to the demands of the human spirit. Existential revolt has its main content not focus on the result, but the triumph of the very opportunity to rebel, that is, to say "no" absurdity and absurdity of everyday life and thus to establish their own freedom. Instead, the nihilistic trend of studying the problem of rebellion against everyday life appears in the name of the "better world". It is shown that rebellion against ordinary as a philosophical concept of the twentieth century. Designed to help a person survive the world’s catastrophes and cope with personal life crises by turning an individual into his inner world, realizing his own doom for freedom and responsibility for its implementation.
Conclusion. Unlike existing publications, for the first time formulated a coherent idea of rebellion against everyday life by comparing the basic variants of its semantic content. On the basis of the comparison of the main variants of the semantic filling of the concept of "rebellion against everyday life", the content of the latter as a philosophical problem in its integrity is revealed as the resistance of the human person to the external necessity and the establishment of her own freedom and the right to choose and self-creation. At the same time, the person relies on indifference to his own human situation in the world, the inertia and the mechanics of existence, depersonalization and anonymity, which correlate with the irresponsibility of a person for his own actions.

Keywords: rebellion, rebellion against the ordinary, everyday life, human existence, human, being.

REFERENCES

1. Buryj, A. (2014). Kinematografichni metafory istorii’ jak dzerkalo jevropejs’koi’ identychnosti [CinematicmetaphorsofhistoryasamirrorofEuropeanidentity]. Naukovi zapysky Nacional’nogo universytetu "Ostroz’ka akademija" – ScientificnotesoftheNationalUniversityofOstrohAcademy, 15, 2, 122-142. (Serija "Kul’turologija") [inUkrainian].
2. Matvijenko, I. S. (2015). Ekzystencijne osmyslennja ljudyny: bunt i ljuds’ka pryroda u filosofii’ A. Kamju [The existential interpretation of human: rebellion and human nature in the philosophy of A. Camus]. Naukovyj visnyk NUBiP Ukrai’ny –Scientific Bulletin of NUBaNR of Ukraine,13-18. (Serija: Gumanitarni studii’) [inUkrainian].
3. Gejko, S., & Danyl’kiv, O. (2015). Problematyka ironii’ v nigilistychnyh pogljadah F. Nicshe [TheproblemofironyinnihilisticviewsofF. Nietzsche]. Naukovyj visnyk NUBiP Ukrai’ny –Scientific Bulletin of NUBaNR of Ukraine. С. 7-13. (Serija: Gumanitarni studii’) [inUkrainian].
4. Salij, A. V. (2018). Samotnist’ ta vidchuzhennja u filosofs’kij kartyni svitu Fedora Dostojevs’kogo [LonelinessandalienationinthephilosophicalworldviewofFyodor Dostoevsky]. Gileja, 127, 182-187 [inUkrainian].
5. Brytvin, D. V. (2017). Osoblyvosti verbalizacii’ marginal’nosti u francuz’kyh romanah XXstolittja [FeaturesofVerbalizationofMarginalisminFrenchnovelsofthetwen­tiethcentury]. Visnyk KNLU – HeraldofKNLU. (Vol. 20),1. 25-31.(Serija Filologija) [inUkrainian].
6. Novaja filosofskaja jenciklopedija (2010). [New Philosophical Encyclopedia]. (Vol. III). Moscow: Mysl’[in Russian].
7. Shynkaruk, V. I. et al. (2002). Filosofs’kyj encyklopedychnyj slovnyk Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. Kyi’v: Abrys [inUkrainian].
8. Pigulevskij, V. O. (2002). Ironija i vymysel: ot romantizma k postmodernіzmu [Ironyandfiction: fromromanticismtopostmodernism]. R/ na-Donu: Foliant [inRussian].
9. Tabachkovs’kyj, V. G., Bulatov, M. O. et al. (2005). Ljudyna v cyvilizacii’ XXI stolittja:problema svobody [Man in the civilization of the XXI century: the problem of freedom]. Kyi’v: Naukova dumka [in Ukrainian].
10. Jaspers, K. (1986). Sovremennaja tehnika [Moderntechnology]. Novaja tehnokrati­cheskaja vojna na Zapade– New technocratic war in the West.(pp. 119-146). Moscow: Progress [in Russian].
11. Gajdenko, P. P. (1991). Chelovek i istorija v jekzistencial’noj filosofii Karla Jaspersa [ManandhistoryintheexistentialphilosophyofKarlJaspers]. [Trans]. Moscow: Politizdat [inRussian].
12. Ljutyj, T. V. (2002). Nigilizm: anatomija Nishho [Nihilism: AnatomyNothing]. Kyi’v: PARAPAN [inUkrainian].
13. Hajdegger, M. (1997). Bytie i vremja [Being and time]; [Trans.V. V. Bibihina]. Moscow: Ad Marginem [in Russian].
14. Istorija filosofii: Zapad – Rossija – Vostok (2000)[History of Philosophy: West - Russia - East]. (2nded.). Moscow: Greko-latinskij kabinet Ju. A. Shichalina [inRussian].
15. Sartr, Zh.-P. (2009). Bytie i nichto. Opyt fenomenologicheskoj ontologii [Beingandnothing. Experience of phenomenological ontology]. Moscow: AST[in Russian].
16. Kissel’, M. A. (1976). Filosofskaja jevoljucija Zh.-P. Sartra [PhilosophicalevolutionofJ.-P. Sartre].L.: Lenizdat [inRussian].
17. Kamju, A. (1990). Buntujushhij chelovek. Filosofija. Politika. Iskusstvo [Rebellious man. Philosophy. Politics. Art]; [Trans.].(Mysliteli XX veka).Moscow: Politizdat [in Russian].
18. Tavrizjan, G. M. (1997). Gabrijel’ Marsel’. Bytie i intersub’ektivnost’ [GabrielMarcel. Being and intersubjectivity]. Istorija filosofii – History of philosophy,1. 33-47 [in Russian].
19. Rassel, B. (1995). Istorija zahidnoi’ filosofii’ [HistoryofWesternphilosophy]; [Trans. Ju. Lisnjaka, P. Tarashhuka]. Kyi’v: Osnovy [inUkrainian].
20. Ignatenko, N., & Binaryzm F. (2009). Nicshe v konteksti postmodernists’kogo dyskursu [Nietzsche in the context of postmodern discourse]. Kul’tura i suchasnist’ – Culture and modernity, 2. 20-25 [inUkrainian].