Raštai

LTŠis knyga yra vieno pirmųjų XX a. profesionalaus lietuvių filosofo, meno kritiko, visuomenės ir kultūros veikėjo Romano Bytauto (1886-1915) darbų rinkinys, apimantis visus išlikusius jo tekstus: iš rusų kalbos išverstų Maskvos universitete apgintą diplominį darbą „Wundto mokymo apie sielos substancijos sąvoką kritika“ (1912), taip pat straipsnius ir studijas gyvenamojo meto (1908-1913 m.) kultūrinėje spaudoje: „Šis tas iš lietuvių kalbos filosofijos“, „Lietuvių raštkalbės reikalai“, „Aplink mūsų dailės parodą“, „Argi?“ „Lavinimosi reikalui“, „Kaip tarti ir rašyti svetimžodžius“, „Tauta ir tautiška sąmonė“, „Enciklopedijos reikalais“. Šie darbai skirti tiek filologiniams, tiek filosofiniams kalbos klausimams, išskirtinei M. K. Čiurlionio kūrinių vertei aptarti, tautos esmės ir egzistencijos, nacijos formavimosi, dvasinės kūrybos, tautinės kultūros ir sąmonės, asmenybės, individualizmo problemoms nagrinėti. Kaip Lietuvos filosofinės, visuomeninės, kultūrinės minties istorijos šaltinis, R. Bytauto darbų rinktinė gali būti naudojama Lietuvos kultūros, kalbos, psichologijos, edukologijos istorijų, tautinės tapatybės ir pan. studijose ir moksliniuose tyrimuose. [Anotacija knygoje]

ENThis book continues series of researches entitled “The History ofLithuanian Philosophy. Monuments and Researches” and performed by the Department of the History of Lithuanian Philosophy at the Lithuanian Culture Research Institute since 1990. It publishes the entire remaining written legacy of the Lithuanian philosopher Romanas Bytautas (1886-1915). It is not abundant: it is a large scale thesis work defended at Moscow University - “Critique of Wundt’s teaching on the concept of soul substance” (1912, translated from Russian) and several articles and studies on issues of language, philosophy, nationality, cultural issues, published in the Catholic “Draugija”, “Lietuvos žinios” and the liberal schooling magazine “Aušrinė”. R. Bytautas, with his philosophical program, was basically preparing to follow the path that Vydūnas had already followed and to which S. Šalkauskis, A. Maceina and other famous representatives of Lithuanian cultural philosophy later came. In the articles “A thing or two from the philosophy of the Lithuanian language”, “The affairs of the Lithuanian written language” (both 1908), “How to pronounce and write foreign words?” (1912) common problems of language formation are studied, it is proposed to apply spelling of the Lithuanian language, phonetics, to add Lithuanian endings to foreign words. R. Bytautas invited to study more deeply the formation of Lithuanian words, the composition of sentences, to study the issues of the Lithuanian language. He was not satisfied with the external study of the Lithuanian language - grammar, but insisted on studying the language from the inside - philosophically, taking into account the meaning of words and sentences.He was especially concerned about the semantic side of the Lithuanian language, since its study helps to clarify the meanings of words, the content of their concepts, and without knowing the exact meaning of words, there can be no accurate scientific thinking. Based on the thesis that thinking is in extricably linked with language, R. Bytautas demanded the purity, regularity and accuracy of language. In the article “Around our art exhibition” (1908), based on some paintings by M. K. Čiurlionis, R. Bytautas discusses the aesthetic effectiveness of symbolic art. The most important features of symbolic art are considered to be metaphoricality and associativeness: the artistic idea is revealed in details, comparisons. In the beauty of those comparisons, one must look for the aesthetic value of symbolic works. The details here have not a direct, but a figurative meaning and the more impressive the associations they cause, the more effective they are. The author considers the most valuable of those paintings of M. K. Čiurlionis, in which this principle is most consistently realized. In the article “Really?” (1911), R. Bytautas tried to combine idealism and materialism, complementing them with each other. He saw manifestations of such a reconciliation in dualistic and pantheistic philosophical concepts, on which he himself relied in many cases. The philosophical positions of R. Bytautas are close to psychophysical parallelism: the primary elements of the world are both material and spiritual. Each object in the world, even the most primitive, has not only its own physical structure, but also its own sphere of consciousness. Arguing about the immanent spirituality of the original elements of the universe and the world as a whole (which can also be treated as intelligence), R. Bytautas tries to move from dualism based on psychophysical parallelism to pantheism, in which, in his opinion, idealism can fully reconcile with materialism.The Lithuanian thinker is not entirely original here - he only agrees with the German neokantianist F. Paulsen, who seemed to think that pantheism should have logically emerged from the postulated principles of materialism itself. In the opinion of R. Bytautas, it is necessary to supplement the regularity recognized by materialism with Aristotelian teleologism - each phenomenon is conditioned not only by causality, but also by the expediency inherent in the development of the world. The very formation of the world and its further development is not an accidental, but a purposeful event in which the potency of the cosmic intelligence of being is actualized. In his largest and most important work - his thesis - R. Bytautas argues that psychology studies the empirical facts of internal life. R. Bytautas criticized W. Wundt’s theory of relevance, which denies the existence of a substancial soul, and with it the changing, but remaining in itself, the human consciousness. Rejecting the substanciality of the soul, W. Wundt looked for principles that could clarify the laws of human mental activity. Declaring that consciousness is a continuous process in which others follow some processes, W. Wundt pointed out three principles by which the dynamics of mental phenomena can be interpreted: the heterogony of goals, creative synthesis and contrast. R. Bytautas especially criticized the principle of creative synthesis, in which, in his belief, there was a materialistic understanding of the phenomena of consciousness. According to W. Wundt, externalstimuli cause only simple, elementary mental processes (sensations), from which more complex mental formations are formed. The latter differ qualitatively from the elements that make up them. [...]. [From the publication]