LTPasiremiant Vytauto Kavolio veikaluose aptarta skirtimi tarp sąmoningumo istorijos ir civilizacijų analizės, straipsnyje mėginama klausti, ar ir kokia prasme sąmoningas gali būti ne tik paskiras asmuo, bet ir visa visuomenė, kaip individų visuma. Atkreipiamas dėmesys į skirtingas lietuviško žodžio „sąmoningumas“ reikšmes, parodoma, kad pats Kavolis asmeninį sąmoningumą siejo ne tik su grynuoju mąstymu, bet ir su individo gebėjimu empatiškai atjausti kitą asmenį, kitaip tariant, asmeninį sąmoningumą, kaip kritinės refleksijos galia pasižyminčią etinę savižiną, visų pirma siejo būtent su sąžine ir asmenine atsakomybe už kitą asmenį: sąsaja tarp savižinos ir sąžinės ypač ryški angliškame žodyje consciousness; ši sąsaja, deja, gerokai sunkiau įžvelgiama lietuviškajame atitikmenyje „sąmoningumas“. Siekiama argumentuoti, kad tam tikra perkeltine prasme sąmoningumas (kaip tradicijoje kristalizuota išmintis) yra būdingas ir visai visuomenei, bet jis negali būti veiksmingas be sąlyčio su individualia sąmone ir asmeniniu sąmoningumu. Visuomeninį sąmoningumą galima sieti su moraliniais visuomenės rezervais, tačiau etiškumą (ypač suvokiamą ne tiek sociologijoje, kiek šiuolaikinėje kontinentinėje filosofijoje vartojama prasme), kuris savo prigimtimi yra esmingai individualus, pagrįsta sieti tik su individualia sąmone bei asmeniniu sąmoningumu. Akcentuojant tradicijos svarbą, parodoma, kad, siekiant filosofiškai apmąstyti santykį tarp asmeninio ir visuomeninio sąmoningumo, teorinės Kavolio prieigos, jei tik jos nėra nekritiškai suabsoliutinamos, gali išlikti labai aktualios ir dvidešimt pirmajame šimtmetyje. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Asmuo; Civilizacijų analizė; Civilizacijų istorija; Egzistencinis mąstymas; Laisvė; Sąmoningumas; Sąmoningumo istorija; Tradicija; Visuomenė; Vytautas Kavolis; Analysis of civilizations; Consciousness; Existential philosophy; Freedom; History of consciousness; History of consciousness, analyses civilizacion; Person; Society; Tradition; Vytautas Kavolis.
ENThe author of the article, employing the distinction between the history of consciousness and the analysis of civilizations, as two different theoretical approaches in the field of sociology elaborated upon in the works of Vytautas Kavolis, posits a question whether and, if yes, in what sense some sort of consciousness (understood, of course, in some figurative, not literal, sense) might be predicated of the society in general, as personal consciousness is predicated of an individual person. It is shown that the English word consciousness and the corresponding Lithuanian word sąmoningumas (which has essentially the same meaning as its English counterpart), nevertheless have slightly different connotations: the English word has both the meaning of mental alert and that of self-critical ethical attitude (in the sense of Latin conscientia), while the Lithuanian word has a significant bias towards strictly cognitive (or strictly intellectual) attitude, meaning both the mental alert and moral responsibility, but not simply conscientia, or consciousness as an ethical attitude. Instead, the Lithuanian word sąžinė, not sąmoningumas, is used when speaking of consciousness as conscientia. It is argued that the understanding of personal consciousness characteristic of Vytautas Kavolis is much closer to the range of meanings inherent in the English word consciousness than to that of its Lithuanian counterpart, sąmoningumas: this circumstance ought to be always kept in mind while discussing the Kavolian concept of personal consciousness, especially when the starting point of our discussions is the corpus of Vytautas Kavolis' works in Lithuanian translation, not in English original.Elucidating the Kavolian understanding of personal consciousness, the author of the article draws to the fore the semantical and etymological affinity between two Lithuanian words, sąžinė (meaning, as already mentioned, consciousness as conscientia) and savižina (meaning the self-critical knowledge of oneself, which is also meant by the Latin word conscientia in its primary etymological sense). While the author of the article underscores the significant role and suprapersonal wisdom of tradition as a repository of moral values, nevertheless he is of the opinion that the ethical attitude sensu stricto, which is strictly individual and personal in nature (especially as the nature of ethical attitude or what constitutes the domain of the ethical in general is understood in Continental philosophy), is what distinguishes the individual person, as the locus of personal consciousness, from human society in general, which also has the quality of consciousness, yet not in strictly literal, but only in some sort of figurative sense. The author comes to a conclusion that the works of Vytautas Kavolis wherein he presents an analysis of the difference between the history of consciousness and the analysis of civilizations, as two different methodological approaches in the field of theoretical sociology, might appear to become quite relevant in the 21st century. [From the publication]