Klasikinių ir postmoderniųjų vertybių sąlyčio taškai

LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Antikos filosofija; Dialogas; Klasikinės vertybės; Postmoderniosios vertybės; Postmodernizmas; Vertybės; Šiuolaikinė filosofija; Ancient philosophy; Classical values; Dialogue; Modern philosophy; Postmodern values; Postmodernism; Values.

ENThe author of the article attempts to indicate the elements of common ground between classical and postmodern values. He argues that speaking in terms of values, especially non-relative values, and even the language of values as such, is characteristic of classical modes of thinking and classical worldview, whereas in the context of postmodern condition and postmodern philosophies the very meaning - and the very value - of the term “value” becomes problematic, because thinking and speaking in terms of values inevitably implies thinking and speaking in terms of hierarchy of one sort or another. The author claims that, instead of speaking of the death of values, even the death of value as such, in the postmodern world, we should rather speak of the radical transformation of the understanding of the nature of value. Firstly, the author distinguishes between the postmodern condition and postmodernism as various postmodern philosophies. Secondly, he makes a distinction between a kind of postmodernism (later in the article called the postmodernism of the first kind) which understands and posits itself as a reaction to modernity and a kind of postmodernism (later called the postmodernism of the second kind) which understands and posits itself as a continuation of modernity in even more radical ways. Thirdly, drawing a distinction between classical and postmodern values, the author emphasizes that what he means by the term “classical values” are not the values of modernity and various philosophies of modernity, but, rather, the values of classical Antiquity and the philosophies of classical Antiquity.The author of the article attempts to indicate the elements of common ground between classical and postmodern values. He argues that speaking in terms of values, especially non-relative values, and even the language of values as such, is characteristic of classical modes of thinking and classical worldview, whereas in the context of postmodern condition and postmodern philosophies the very meaning - and the very value - of the term “value” becomes problematic, because thinking and speaking in terms of values inevitably implies thinking and speaking in terms of hierarchy of one sort or another. The author claims that, instead of speaking of the death of values, even the death of value as such, in the postmodern world, we should rather speak of the radical transformation of the understanding of the nature of value. Firstly, the author distinguishes between the postmodern condition and postmodernism as various postmodern philosophies. Secondly, he makes a distinction between a kind of postmodernism (later in the article called the postmodernism of the first kind) which understands and posits itself as a reaction to modernity and a kind of postmodernism (later called the postmodernism of the second kind) which understands and posits itself as a continuation of modernity in even more radical ways. Thirdly, drawing a distinction between classical and postmodern values, the author emphasizes that what he means by the term “classical values” are not the values of modernity and various philosophies of modernity, but, rather, the values of classical Antiquity and the philosophies of classical Antiquity. [From the publication p. 574-575]