Messianic Anthropology

The article explores the manifesto of the Moscow Anthropological School, emphasizing the primacy of hallucinations in anthropogenesis. The current predicament of modern humanity urges the anticipation of something genuine and substantial. However, the essence of philosophy does not always align with the prevailing “spirit of the times.” Its mission is to pursue autopoiesis, scrutinizing society for its inherent flaws that impede progress. From this viewpoint, F.I. Girenok’s hallucinatory theory is entirely pertinent and justified. The narrative of civilization is typically portrayed as a chronicle of discoveries and triumphs of rationality over irrationality. The history of fears and misconceptions, which not only persist from the past but also resurface, is less well-documented. Therefore, the program of the Moscow Anthropological School is far from being peripheral; on the contrary, it holds significant relevance.  It  furthers  the  tradition  of  inversion  anthropology, initially established by N.Ya. Danilevsky, the first Russian critic of Darwinism. This anthropological tradition was particularly advanced by the concept of B.F. Porshnev and the research of contemporary authors like Yu.M. Boroday and V.A. Podoroga. Each, in their unique way, contributed to the critique of evolutionism and reductionism. F.I. Girenok’s concept evokes schizoanalysis, albeit devoid of Marxist influence, unlike G. Deleuze. All these aspects warrant a comprehensive philosophical discourse on the manifesto. Meanwhile, reports and discussions concerning F.I. Girenok’s theory revealed that not all participants are readily prepared to tread the path suggested by the founder of this theory, confining themselves to theological explorations instead. This, as per the author of the article, inherently signifies that hallucinatory and messianic anthropologies are complementary to each other.

1. Girenok F.I. (2010) Autography of Language and Consciousness. Moscow: MSIU (in Russian).

2. Habermas J. (2002) The Future of Human Nature. Moscow: Ves’ Mir (Russian translation).

3. Kohn E. (2018) How Forests Think: Toward an Anthropology Beyond the Human. Moscow: Ad Marginem Press (Russian translation).

4. Lavazza A. & Reichlin M. (2019) Introduction: Moral Enhancement. Topoi. Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 1–5.

5. Nietzsche F. (1989) The Anti-Christian. In: Nietzsche F. Twilight of the Gods: Collected Works (pp. 17–93). Moscow: Politizdat (Russian translation).

6. Nietzsche F. (1996) The Antichrist. In: Nietzsche F. Collected Works (Vol. 2, pp. 472–524). Moscow: Mysl’ (in Russian).

7. Nietzsche F. (2005) The Will to Power: An Attempted Transvaluation of All Values. Moscow: Kulturnaya Revolyutsiya (Russian translation).

8. Propp V.Ya. (2021) The Morphology of the Folktale. Saint Petersburg: Piter (in Russian).

9. Rostova N.N. (2020) Aggiornamento of Anthropology: Over-coming the Boundary between Nature and Culture. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies. Vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 731–750 (in Russian).

10. Said E. (2016) Orientalism: Western Concepts of the Orient. Saint Petersburg: Russkiy mir (Russian translation).

11. Sarrazin T. (2012) Germany Abolishes Itself. Moscow: Rid Grupp (Russian translation).

12. Sloterdijk P. & Heinrichs H.-J. (2015) Sun and Death: A Dialogical Study. Saint Petersburg: Ivan Limbach Publishing House (Russian translation).

13. Trubetskoy E.N. (1995) Old and New National Messianism: Selected Works. Moscow: Kanon (in Russian).

14. Yudin B.G. (2018) Human: Beyond the Limits. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya (in Russian).