Relations Russia-West have different axis
Traditional confrontation between East (Greek-Slave) Christianity and West Christianity
Competition between Russia and European States
Great Game Great Britain against Russian Empire
Relations Russia-West have different axis
China Institute, Fudan University 复旦大学 中国研究院
Multipolar approach (多极即) Theory of Multipolar World 多极世界理论
4th Political Theory 第四政治理论
Zhao Tingyang (赵汀阳) - Tianxia Tixi - 天下体系 - Middle Empire
Yan Xuetong (阎学通) – 王道外交
Zhang Weiwei (张维为) China model (中国模式)
Qin Yaqing (秦亚青) – I Ching (易经 ) in IR Theory 关系理论 -- relations
European New Right (Alain de Benoist)
Latin America school
Identity of China 中国的认同 China中国 is Civilization 文明(one of several, not unique) China中国 is Big Space 大空间 (one of several, not unique)
China中国 is Culture文化 (one of several, not unique)
China中国 is Power 权 (one of several, not unique)
China中国 is Pole 极 (one of several, not unique)
China中国 is Hegemony 霸权 (one of several, not unique)
China中国 is Empire 帝国 (one of several, not unique)
China中国 is Tianxia 天下 (one of several, not unique)
Identity of China
Relations are most important (constitutional)
Harmony should prevail
All oppositions are relative
Order is based on ethics
There is neither pure subjectivity nor pure objectivity
1. Noological analysis of present situation.
2. Globalization, anthropology of Post-Modernity, Artificial intelligence, artificial immortality, Post-humanism, feminism, EU.
4. Russia in noology.
5. Is the restoration of Logos of Apollo possible?
1. Serbs as southern slavs. Indo-European level of Serbian identity.
2. Serbian peasantry. Slavic matriarchy (Gasparini). Piatak. Vila. Mother Friday. Lepenski Vir, Vincha cultures.
3. The factor of Thracians, Illyrians.
4. White Serbia. Serbian came to Balkan. From where? Polabian slavs. Luzhitza. Sorbs. The style of Polabian slavs – sarmatians (Scythians) Pure Turanic. Differences with sclavins (bulgarians).
5. The relations with Byzance. Orthodoxy. Katekhonic concept.
6. Nemanici. Raska as new kingdom. Saint Sava holy Athos mountain tradition. Patriarchy of Pech.
7. The Empire. Byzantine - Bulgarian, Serb, Valachia, Russia.
8. Dushan the Strong. The control over Balkans.
1. The Modernity as paradigmatic phenomenon. The structure of Modernity is based on the denial of Tradition (Guenon, Evola, Schuon, Burkhardt, Valsan, Nasr). What Tradition destroys Modernity? The answer is clear: apollonian Logos in form of Christianity.
2. The origins of scientific world picture reveals the special philosophical tendency – atomism of Democritus and Epicurus. Later Roman Lucretius.. That was pre-socratic tendencies of Logos of Cybele in greek culture. Plato, Aristotle, Parmenides, Pythagoras and Stoia are based on Logos of Apollo and sometimes of Dionysus. Atomism and epicureanism are based on Logos of Cybele. So in Christianism Democritus and Epicurus were absent. They have reappeared with Galliley, Newton, Gassendi, Boyl, Descartes, Hobbes.
3. The Modernity is based on refutation of Platonism and Aristotle. It is basically titanic or in Christian terms Luciferian. The Modernity refuses verticality, hierarchy, warrior values (knights ethos of Middle Age), theology as ruling paradigm, sacralization of State (modern State as profane), democracy and individualism.
1. Noological analysis of Christianity is not dogmatic but based on typology.
2. The main structure of Christianity is heavenly patriarchy and verticality. God is Father and He is in Heaven. He is transcendent from creature so it is Logos of Apollo. Hence Platonism and Aristotelian logic in Joan Damascine and scholastics.
3. In Christology we see Dionysian features: two nature of Christ, death and resurrection, descent into the Hell, the Christ as future God and King. But it is apollonian type of dionysism – free from chtonic motives and figure, purified, patriarchal.
4. In the field of gender there is anelegyny and patriarchy: two branches of sedentary Indo-European society relation between sexes.
1. European civilization is based on the titanomachia. Its center is problem of Dionysus.
2. When we define Dionysus as Sun and male principle we interpret him in the perspective of Indo-European civilization. It is the apollonian Dionysus – Olympian one. He is the Son of God and belong to the Heaven. So Zeus promised to him his own throne. He is the King of future, of kingdom to come.
3. In its nature Dionysus can be different as in Chinese civilization. He can be neutral. But it can be as well cybelian, black double of Dionysus.
4. European cultures solve the problem of Dionysus – every culture in its own manner.
5. Greek solution: apollonian Dionysian synthesis.
6. But in Hellenism we encounter new dimension of the culture. The Hellenism is based on Platonism and iranism. Iranism is dualistic Patriarchy.
1. The superposition of two existential horizons creates noological field of titanomachia. The Logos of Apollo confronts the Logos of Cybele in third function – in the culture of European peasantry.
2. That is the moment of Dionysus. The vine and the wheat. Short circuit. Bachofen explains Dionysus as the form of patriarchal conquest of the matriarchal agrarian society. The Heaven becomes immanent. There is in the story of Dionysus cult the call of Dionysus. It is the moment when the bacchantes hear the distant call and fall into madness. It is the madness of the male presence.
3. Dionysus is the god of agrarian cycle. It is the god of integration of Cybele into the Indo-European existential horizon.
4. The cult of Dionysus has no special features: all symbols and rites of Dionysus are taken from the cult of Great Mother. It is called pre-dionysian rites. K.Kerenyi and Vyach. Ivanov dedicated to this aspect important studies. Pre-dionysian is Cybelian. In the cult of Dionysus there is the patriarchal interpretation of the matriarchal cult.
1. The Indo-European warriors invaded the sedentary people the major part of them were matriarchy society. Mary Gymbutas. Bachofen.
2. The concept of paleo-european. The European population before the arrival of Turanian warriors.
3. The major centers of matriarchal civilization were in Anatoly and in Balkans. There was ancient civilization of Cybele. The Mother Goddess had different names but the same Logos. The birth and death. So absence of features in the face and head of Goddess was sign that was of no importance. There was a Power of manifestation.
4. The Goddes was immanent, chtonic, earthly. The male figures were absent. But there were the beasts – mostly two on both sides of Great Mother. After they were transformed in the half beast half human. They were possessions of Great Mother.
5. The figure of Attis. There was female Androgyne Agdytis that has given birth to beautiful youth. Cybele has fallen in love with that youth. But he wanted to marry earthly woman. Jealous Cybele has put the madness on him. He castrated himself and died. Cybele has resurrected him. He is the priest of Her. The fate of man in the Cybelian world.
6. Other type of male figure in Great Mother world is Titan. It is chthonic creatures with serpent features aggressing the Heaven. Dragon.
1. Existential space and its classes. Big and small existential spaces. The linguistic factor. Language as house of being.
2. Biggest existential space. Indo-European space. The Indo-European Dasein. The borders.
3. What is Turan? Iran and Turan in Firdowsi. Ancient name Avesta. Indo-European nomadic people and indo-european sedentary people.
4. The indo-european motherland. Craddle of Indo-europeans. Turan and Eurasia. Mary Gymbutas kurgan theory. Oswald Spengler three civilizations Atlantic, Kushitic and Turanian.
5. The structure of Indo-European Logos. Patriarchy. The theory of George Dumezil. Three functions.
• priests Apollo
• warriors Apollo/ Dionysus
• simple pastoralists Apollo/Dionysus – more material.
6. The Indo-European ideology is based on three functions. All the myths, tales, the historicals, political institutions, religions, rites are based on the tri-functional logic.
1. Geosophy is the field of application of Noology (the Noomahia principle) to the study of cultures, peoples and civilizations. Its is deepest level of ethnosociology.
2. The basic idea of geosophy is that there are different organization of the balance of three Logos that defines the identity of concrete human society. Apollonian culture, Cybelean culture and so on.
3. The society where the Logos dominates can change its form in space and time. The balance of Noomahia can change also. Here Apollo rules, there Cybele. Now here Dionysus dominates, then Apollo outbalances it. SO Noomahia is essentially dynamic, the process.
4. The borders of people or cultures in the moment of Noomahia in space are defined as existential horizon. It is multilevel structure close to Dasein concept. It is the basis of people, its roots. The Logos is build and founded over the existential horizon. It is living space. Da-sein, being t/here being in concrete world organized with the help of dominating Logos. So it is also ontho-logical space. There is no universal space. Space is existential and understood and studied through dominating Logos.
The philosophic basis of multipolarity. The self reflection of cultures and the territory of possible dialogue and polylogue. The noology is the essential basis of the Theory of Multipolar World and Fourth Political theory. The noology deals with the multilevel concepts that includes
• philosophy, • history of religions, • geopolitics, • world history, • sociology, • anthropology, • ethnosociology, • the theory of imagination, • the phenomenology, • the structuralism. It uses the existential analysis of Heidegger, the traditionalism (Guenon, Evola), the concepts of Bachofen, the structuralism of Dumezil and Levy-Strauss. The main concept is Nous greek word for Intellect, Intelligence, Mind, Thought, Consciousness. It is united in itself and represents the Human. The Nous is the Human. The thought is a Man. Everything that belongs to human being exclusively is the Thought. All the rest the man shares with others.
Russian stand-up comic once remarked that Russia is a country with an unpredictable past, pointing to its recurring efforts to redefine itself through the reinterpretation of history.
The figure of peasant as integral worker.
The lithurgy of the farmers works.
The mystery of the grain. The fate of seed.
The production as martyrdom and the consumption as ressurection.
Grain of wheat and Christ.
Christianity and Peasantry.