The Ethnologist as a Writer: The Writer as an Ethnologist (2020) Book
Title: Етнологот како писател, писателот
како етнолог.
Editors: Ilina Jakimovska, Jasna Koteska
Link to the description at
kupikniga.mk
Link to the media coverage "The
Ethnologist as a Writer: The Writer as an Ethnologist" by Ivana Smilevska,
at the Radio MOF website.
Link to the student workshops and the
description of the project in February-June 2019.
Link to the Ethoff n.6, 6th
Edition of the International Student Ethnographic Film Festival and the
promotion of the book October 28 2020.
Зборникот текстови Етнологот
како писател: писателот како етнолог (2020) е настанат како
резултат на серија работилници одржани пролетта 2020, на која учествуваа
студенти од повеќе катедри на Филолошкиот факултет и од Институтот за
етнологија и антропологија на Природно-математичкиот факултет при УКИМ. Целта
беше да се укаже на можната врска помеѓу книжевноста и етнографијата, со тоа
што студентите имаа задача креативно да „препрочитаат“ оригинални архивски
материјали, интервјуа на различни теми, и врз основа на тоа да напишат свои
дела. Така се добија овие 25 раскази, песни, есеи и стрипови, лажни писма и
патеписи кои ги дополнуваат постоечките етнографски материјали, замислуваат
како е да се биде некој од соговорниците и како завршуваат нивните приказни.
Тие ја испитуваат тенката граница помеѓу документарното и фиктивното, прикажувајќи
ја вистината како калеидоскоп од наративи и перспективи.
 |
| Student Workshops, February-June 2019 |
The Technological Visions of the Human, Nordic Summer University, July 2020
27 July 2020 (Monday) 10:45-11:35 am
Nordic Summer University, Summer Session 2020.
Study Circle5 & Study Circle 8 Jasna Koteska,
Nordic Summer University, Summer Session 2020.
Study Circle5 & Study Circle 8 Jasna Koteska,
Tracing the Spirit, link to the abstract
The Technological Visions of the Human (From the Perspective of the Futures of Education)
Jasna Koteska, Skopje
“Of all the prostheses that mark the history of the body, the double is doubtless the oldest.”
Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation
Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation
The question of the “extended” human has been raised already in the beginning of the last century. The early anticipations of the forthcoming world in the 21 century concentrated on how the technological means might become the only condition for enduring the intensified ecological problems and ideological sadism in the world. The grandiosity of the human will be achieved by bringing the organic closer to the prosthetic. Some of many prognoses were that the environmental and societal degradation will become so impossible, so uncomfortable, that humans could bear to stand them only with technological means. And while the idea of the symbiosis of the human and the technology dates back to Aristotle’s concept of Automaton, the reality is that the mechanical culture of the 20 century that marked the beginnings of the New Deal capitalism, communism, and fascism, has been organized with the help of the prosthesis of aggression: machines, camps, industrialization… At the same time, curiously enough, the prognosis was that the same aggression could only be tolerated if the technological extensions, prosthetic additions, and implants of various kinds could be implemented. (Note for e.g. the famous quote from the Civilization and Its Discontents: “Human has, as it were, to become a kind of prosthetic God. Only when s/he puts on all his/her auxiliary organs, s/he is truly magnificent”.) The prosthetic additions were seen as a way in which humans ease aggression they themselves produced in nature and in culture, and vice versa are therefore subjected to it, and how could they bear the ecological, social, and political fate less painfully?
The paper will explore how to conceptualize the Technological vision of human at the present time? What it means for the current time of the ongoing pandemic, and the ecological, social, and economic crisis? Furthermore, what form/s will that Technological vision of Human achieve in the present times of uniformity, homogeneity, social media, advertising, consumerism, the instant publicity, the transformation of the public into a “monstrous nonentity”, of endless chattering, and most importantly, in the time of the current pandemic? Also, how to understand the possible merger/s between human and the technological other? And most importantly what implications it has and will have for the futures of education? How to conceptualize the technological vision of humans from the perspective of the education of the futures?
TST Virtual Forum Series, Trinity College & Emmanuel College: Rootedness and Community (July 16, 2020)
Co-hosts:
Trinity College, Toronto, Faculty of Divinity
Emmanuel College of Victoria University in the University of Toronto
Toronto School of Theology TST Virtual Forum Series
Topic: Rootedness and Community: Challenges and Threats to our Collective Life
Date and Time: Thursday, July 16, 2020, at 11:30 am (Toronto time) Zoom
Platform Presenters:
Nestor Medina (Emmanuel),
Esther Acolatse (Knox),
Darren Dias (St. Michael's)
Michel Andraos (St. Paul, Ottawa),
Bojan Zalec (Ljubljana, Slovenia),
Jasna Koteska (Skopje, Macedonia)
Conversation to follow for 60 minutes (90-minute forum). Zoom use is for two hours.
Co-hosts:
Abrahim H. Khan (Trinity College)
Tom Reynolds (Emmanuel College) Abrahim H. Khan (Trinity College)
Freud on the First World War, Part 2 (2020)
Freud on the First World War (Part 2)
Jasna Koteska, Full Professor in Humanities, Faculty of Philology "Blaze Koneski", University Ss. Cyril and Methodius of Skopje, Macedonia
Full text here.
How to cite: Koteska, Jasna (2020). Freud on the First World War (Part 2). Researcher. European Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences. 1 (3), 45-60.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.32777/r.2020.3.1.3
For the first part of this article go here and here.
Abstract:
The
article “Freud on the First World War (Part 2)” analyzes Sigmund Freud’s
controversial attitude towards the First World War. It exposes Freud’s attitude
towards the medical procedure known as the faradization, and his double role
regarding the Great War. His public persona was that of a pacifist scholar,
while his personal correspondence reveals a nationalist who lived from one
German victory to the next. This article demonstrates there are two Freuds
regarding the Great War. The ‘first Freud’ was his public medical persona, who
lamented the partisan attitudes of scientists carried away by their emotions.
The ‘second Freud’ is Freud in communication with his closest friends and
colleagues, where he admits his nationalism, and he identified himself with the
Austro-German side and displays a war enthusiasm. In the only study dedicated
to the Great World, the study titled “Thoughts for the Times on War and Death”,
Freud offered a rich and valid insight into human nature, human’s capacity for
destruction, and also human’s attitude towards its own immortality. Freud draw
a clear distinction between war and death, and while in the first essay he
dealt with discontent and disillusionment, in the second he says that human’s
unconsciousness believes in its own immortality. The article also exposes
Freud’s legendary meetings with artists during the Great War, and most notably
with Lou Andreas-Salomé and with Rainer Maria Rilke.
Key
words: Sigmund Freud, psychoanalysis. First World War,
faradization, nationalism, two Freuds, Thoughts for the Times on War and Death,
the question of War, the question of Death, Lou Andreas-Salomé, Rainer Maria
Rilke.
I.
The
Curious Role of Freud in the Case against Doctor Julius Wagner Jauregg
(War
Neurotic or Malingerer?)
During the war, soldiers
were tortured not only by the enemies, but also by their military commanders.
The general attitude of the Austrian military doctors was to proclaim that
patients were lying about their war traumas. The ‘medical procedure’ often consisted
in prescribing so-called faradization (the term originated from the name of
Michael Faraday, the physicist who studied electromagnetism in therapy). The
traumatized soldiers were exposed to the application of faradic currents to
stimulate muscles and nerves. The electrical shocks were often as painful as
the actual traumas, and by critics they were regarded as concealed military
torture! But, despite being painful, were the electric currents actually useful
in healing neurotic symptoms? According to Freud, they were not.
Courage is a Virtue between being a Coward and a Crazy Temper (Interview, January 16, 2020)
Interview, January 16, 2020.
Nova Makedonija Newspaper,
Read it online in Macedonian here
Title: "Courage is a virtue between being a coward and being a crazy temper"
Interviewer: Biljana Stojanovska, writer and journalist, check here
Македонската верзија е подолу.
Social reputation is... Social reputation is an illusion, nobody has it. A belief in one’s own reputation is like a dentist who if s/he fixes his/her own teeth, has a fool for a patient.
People who do not
know how to make jokes at their own expense ... are often people who in the
solitude of their rooms create hilarious jokes about the human existence. I
don't have a high opinion of the everyday humor. Humor hides the excess sadistic
enjoyment embedded in the order. Those who joke on their own account are the
same as those who make jokes of others, plus with the appearance of modesty.
The humor of the masses is in order for a person to better align his/her place
in the system, to approve it more, to better fit in it, to legitimize the cruelty
through sarcasm. Chaplin, for example, is a terrifying humor, one of the first
to exploit the mass forms of today's machined laughter. Free laughter only
occurs when one dismentles the
system. Kafka is an authentic humorist. Beckett is a genius comedian. Buddha is
happy, he is a bearer of a freed laughter.
I run away from
... I'm trying to run away from vices. Also from the “too much” and “too little”,
in the sense that generosity is the golden mean between being stingy and being
wasteful.
Courage is a virtue between being a coward and being a crazy temper.
Self-confidence is a golden mean between vanity and asceticism. But above all I
am trying to run away from the effects of power. They are the worst form of
grief.
16. International Meeting of Publishers and Writers on Søren Kierkegaard, Slovenia&Croatia, December 2019
 |
| Opening, 16 International Meeting 26.11.2019, Ljubljana |
16. International Meeting of Publishers and Writers, "Revija v reviji", 2019 November 26 - December 1, 2019 Ljubljana (Slovenia) and Zagreb (Croatia)
Full program of the events in Slovenia and Croatia here
Some pictures from the literary events and scientific symposium:
- Ljubljana book fair, Slovenia (November 26- December 1, 2019)
- Zagreb International Symposium Modern Film and Theory (November 27-29, 2019), Croatia.
I won Bronze Medal at the Philosophical Quiz at the Ljubljana book fair November 30, 2019 :)
 |
| Philosophical Quiz November 2019 with Zarko Paic, Primoz Repar |
 |
| My Bronze in Philosophy :) |
Freud on the First World War, Part 1 (2019)
 |
| Communication Trench, Battle of Somme, 1916 Photo: Royal Engineers, No 1 Printing Company |
Freud on the First World War (Part 1)
Jasna Koteska, Full Professor in Humanities, Faculty of Philology "Blaze Koneski", Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia.
The full text here.
How to cite: Koteska, Jasna (2019). "Freud on the First World War (Part 1)". Researcher. European Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences. 4 (2), 53-68.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.32777/r.2019.2.4.4
FREUD ON THE FIRST WORLD WAR
(Part 1)
Jasna Koteska
Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje
Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje
I.
The Birth of Psychoanalysis as an Austro-Hungarian Legacy
Despite its many shortcomings, from the
regressive political system of governance to the refusal to recognize the basic
human freedoms and political participation, the Austro-Hungarian Empire
(1867–1918) left several important international
legacies behind: the nineteenth century idea of cosmopolitanism, the
mixture of ethnicities and cultures, innovations in the arts and sciences, the
promotion of new ideas, the entrepreneurial spirit, the encouragement of
equality for Jews at a time of rising anti-Semitism across Europe, etc. And
among them, one important legacy of the Austro-Hungarian Empire is the birth of psychoanalysis.
Born between 1895 and 1900, psychoanalysis
provided a radical insight into human nature, explaining that humans are torn
between two paradoxical calls: a) The will for total (self-) annihilation, and
for the brutal destruction of everything which exists (the Thanatos principle);
b) At the same time, this destructive impulse is never fully realizable,
because it constantly gets blocked by the human urge to stick to what
psychoanalysis calls ‘a partial, lost object’, which could translate to desire for objects (the Eros principle).
The search for the ‘lost object’ is not performed out of a belief that there
exists such a ‘lost object’, nor that it will satisfy the actual needs of people. Instead, the ‘lost
object’ serves as a reminder that there exists a ‘primordial lack’ in humans.
Humans are not capable of bypassing the radical antagonism between the finite
and the infinite. Due to the radical chasm, people endlessly repeat their
obsession with their ‘lost objects’, creating what psychoanalysis recognized as
the ‘surplus excess of life’, and humans are beings explained by their excessive nature. Psychoanalysis
explains that humans are torn between two contradictory principles: the
pleasure principle and the reality principle, between Eros and Thanatos. For
Freud, Thanatos is the primary drive,
and it is more fundamental than the Eros.
Freud’s explanation of Thanatos as the more fundamental drive strangely overlapped with the devastating outcomes of the First World War. The last European experience of war dated back to 1870 and most parties expected the Great War of 1914 to be a brief conflict, but the war lasted for four years, and it took the lives of 20 million and wounded many more. It was the first war fought with the industrial means of modern warfare, and it set new standards for destructiveness and for the ‘passionate surplus of life’. Although Freud’s discipline was originally intended to treat individuals, it soon became useful in explaining the attitudes of collective entities, and offered multiple insights into human capacities for destruction, aggression and brutality. Freud wrote that contrary to common knowledge, humans are not more reflexive than animals. What ‘humanizes’ people is never just what moral norms preach. People appear more ‘human’ than animals mainly because they are inherently caught up into the closed loop of repetition of the same gestures and rituals, much of them connected to destruction or self-destruction. Two years after the end of World War I, in his study Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1920) Freud writes:
If we are to take it as truth that knows no exception that everything
living dies for internal reasons – becomes inorganic once again – then we shall
be compelled to say that ‘the aim of all life is death’ and, looking backwards,
that ‘inanimate things existed before living ones.
Michal Viewegh, Bringing Up Girls in Bohemia, BookStar (October, 2019)
 |
| Bringing Up Girls in Bohemia Skopje Promotion 7 October 2019 |
Јасна Котеска
„Пост-транзицијата во романот 'Воспитувањето девојки во Чешка'“,
Зборник на трудови од VII македонско-чешка научна конференција, Филолошки
факултет Блаже Конески, Скопје 2018, 171-185.
(Извадок)
[...]
Мислејќи на Беата, нараторот вели: „Јас не го кревам ѓубрето од земја само затоа што е валкано“. Што секако не е вистина. Крал не е загрижен заради забавите на неговата ќерка и го убедува брачниот херој да го сфати курсот по креативно пишување како пофлексибилна задача: „Горе-долу може да правиш што сакаш“, му вели „единствена цел е да ја развеселиш малку, да престане да биде така несреќна, тоа е сè.“ Оваа реплика на „кралот“ има функција на пасош за љубовен продолжеток, бидејќи по индиректното одобрување, безимениот наратор влетува во љубовна врска со Беата.
 |
| Viewegh seemed really afraid of me, 2019 |
Сопругата ја нема во нарацијата, таа
е статус, не се знае нејзиното
име, професијата, приватните дилеми, што прави со
својот ден. Како што пишува Померој за т.н. брачна секлузија во старогрчкото
општество, кога реферира на отфрлањето на Ксантипа од смртната постела на
Сократ
и неговата желба да умре со своите машки компањони - така
и жената на нараторот кај Вивег е алиенирана од бракот.
Бранот: човечката психологија и авторитарноста (2019)
 |
| Die Welle (2008) Dennis Gansel Theatrical Release Poster |
Јасна Котеска „Бранот: човечката психологија и авторитарноста“, Филозофска трибина, 42, бр. 26, стр. 57-76, есен 2019.
УДК: 159.923: 17.033.1
791.31:|373.5.091.33-027.22(73):329.18(430)
Die Welle (2008)- movie
The Third Wave Experiment (1967)
БРАНОТ:
ЧОВЕЧКАТА ПСИХОЛОГИЈА И АВТОРИТАРНОСТА
Јасна Котеска
ABSTRACT
The
article analyzes the implications of the social experiment known as the The Third Wave
from 1967, as well as its film adaptation in the German movie “The Wave” (2008)
by Dennis Gansel. The article addresses several issues related to the
experiment, such as: the questions of human responsibility, how the
authoritarian ideology is being implemented, what is the relationship between a
human being and his/her social role, what is the difference between
authoritarianism and fashism, ethics vs free will, and finally how to
conceptualize the thinking related to human actions.
KEY WORDS
The
Wave, social experiments, authoritarianism, social role, human psyche, ethics
vs free will, the concept of thinking
Четири типа одговорност на Јасперс
Текстот кој
следи се занимава со неколку прашања од етичка природа: како се создава
авторитарната идеологија, дали луѓето се податливи за авторитаризам и следат наредби
дури и кога се спротивни на нивните убедувања, како е возможно радикализирање
на милиони луѓе кои чинат зло? Каква е врската помеѓу моралот и слободната
волја? И конечно, дали постои слободна волја?
Oвие
прашања се адресирани во филмската адаптација на социјалниот експеримент
екранизиран во германскиот филм Бранот (The Wave, 2008) на режисерот Денис Гансел (Dennis Gansel). Повод за текстот е социјалниот експеримент кој се
случува помеѓу 6 и 10 во април 1967 во училиште во американскиот град Пало Алто,
кој во стручната литература од областа на социјалната психологија денес се води
под името Експериментот на Третиот бран. Заедно
со Милграм експериментот од 1963 и Затворски експеримент на Стенфорд од 1971,
овие три експерименти во 20 век донесоа неочекувани увиди во човечката наклонетост
кон авторитарноста и морално (не)расудување. Но, најнапред неколку контекстуални
рамки за разбирање на проблематиката на Третиот
бран.
 |
| The Third Wave Experiment 1967 by Unknown Licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0. |
Кога во 1996
година се појави книгата на Даниел
Голдхаген „Доброволните џелати на Хитлер“ таа предизвика многу контроверзи
затоа што во неа се тврдеше дека: бројот на убиените Евреи им бил познат на
повеќето Германци; и дека одбивањето да се учествува во геноцидот над Евреите
не бил казнуван со смрт, ниту со каква било неправда. Отворањето на
Штази-архивите во Германија го потврди истото - дека оние што одбиле да
соработуваат со тајните служби на комунизмот не претрпеле никаква лична штета.
Моралните избори биле возможни, но луѓето се наклонети да ги поддржуваат професионалните
и етичките кодови на апстрактната државна машинерија. Овие увиди фрлија
непријатно светло врз параметрите под
кои се случуваат масовните злосторства. Масовните злосторства се возможни само
со премолчена соработка на сите со сите, а се обезбедени преку идеолошкиот штит
на авторитарните идеологии.
Студиите за
затворската тортура го потврдуваат истото. Тортурата во најопшта смисла не
функционира, од оној што го измачуваш не можеш да добиеш релевантен податок, а тортурата
се одржува како мит со причина. Во книгата „Тортура и демократија“ (2007) Дариус Реали вели: „(Т)ортурата не е
корисна за собирање информации. Луѓето мислат дека тортурата била ефикасна за
Гестапо, на пример. Не била. Тоа што го правело Гестапо така застрашувачки
ефикасно била неговата зависност од соработката на народот. Шпионите се
главната причина за долгогодишното уништување на отпорот во Европа, и сите го
знаеле тоа, но позгодно било да се каже дека Гестапо го извлекол тоа од нас –
тепајќи не’.“[1]
The Jewel on a Frozen Lake: Kierkegaard on the Meaning of Action (May 2019) CERI-SK Conference, Slovenia and Croatia
Jasna Koteska: The Jewel on a Frozen Lake, Kierkegaard on the Meaning of Action
Ljubljana, 16 May 2019, 13:00-13:30
Cankarjev Dom, Ljubljana, Slovenia
The Jewel on a
Frozen Lake: Kierkegaard on the Meaning of Action
Jasna Koteska
1.
The Parable
On
30 March 1846 Kierkegaard published a book Two
Ages, A Literary Review, his first book under second authorship (1846-1855),
a period marked by rich literary production. The question about the meaning of
action was not his prime interest during these years, but it was closely
related to his main concern regarding the religious salvation. Two Ages tried to address the present
situation, the responsibility regarding the “divine message”, the question of suffering,
the pseudo-Christianity and above all what does the concept of selfhood mean. The
question of selfhood was of the highest importance to Kierkegaard, and it was
further developed in his book Sickness
unto Death (1849), in which, he offered a highly abstract definition of
selfhood, writing that self is “a relation that relates itself to itself or is
the relations’ relation relating itself to itself in the relation”. Although
abstract, for Kierkegaard the definition meant few basic things: a self is a task, a self is not given, a self includes
responsibility, and the only medicine
against despair of the selfhood is faith. The Two Ages was written as a prelude, as the explanation why the
present age obstructs the self from achieving these goals.
The
Jewel on Thin Ice parable reads as follows:
If the jewel
which everyone desires to possess lay far out on a frozen lake where the ice
was very thin, watched over by the danger of death, while, closer in, the ice
was perfectly safe, then in a passionate age the crowds would applaud the
courage of the man who ventured out, they would tremble for him and with him in
the danger of his decisive action, they would grieve over him if he were
drowned, they would make a god of him if he secured the prize. But in an age
without passion, in a reflective age, it would be otherwise. People would think
each other cleaver in agreeing that it was unreasonable and not even worthwhile
to venture so far out. And in this way they would transform daring and
enthusiasm into a feat of skill, so as to do something, for after all
‘something must be done’. The crowds would go out to watch from a safe place,
and with the eyes of connoisseurs appraise the accomplished skater who skate
almost to the very edge (i.e. as far as the thin ice was still safe and the
danger had not yet begun) and then turn back. The most accomplished skater
would manage to go out to the furthermost point and then perform a still more
dangerous-looking run, so as to make the spectators hold their breath and say:
‘Ye Gods! How mad; he is risking his life.’[1]
The
main idea with this parable for Kierkegaard was to explain the difference
between an engaged, passionate age, and the objective spectatorship of
modernity. His explanation was simple, if the age is revolutionary, the
community celebrates the courage of a person who sacrifices his life for the
common goal. And vice versa, if the age is reflective, people consider the
hero’s action as unreasonable and meaningless, they ridicule his courage and
strength, and they reduce the hero’s sacrifice to a simple display of skills. The
passion mobilizes the spirit; enflaming the passion will bring hopes in the
possibility of a new form of spiritualized political collective. But for
Kierkegaard, the passion is inevitably obstructed by the features of modernity.
The Jewel on a Frozen Lake (2019) Symposium & School of Philosophy, Slovenia & Croatia
7th International Philosophical Symposium, Cankarjev dom & municipality of Cernomelj, Slovenia.
Søren Kierkegaard, 13- 17 May, 2019.
The Symposium will be attended by 40 Kierkegaard scholars from 20 countries, including Norway, Denmark, Canada, Germany, China, India, Mexico, Iceland, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia and Macedonia.
School of Philosophy at Island Unije, Croatia.
Kierkegaard in Dialogue, 19-24 May, 2019.
Kierkegaard in Dialogue, 19-24 May, 2019.
Link to the program at the CERI-SK website.
The
Jewel on a Frozen Lake: Kierkegaard on the Meaning of Action
Jasna
Koteska
ABSTRACT
The
paper analyses the paradox in Søren Kierkegaard’s interpretation of the meaning
of action in his famous 1846 tract “Two Ages: A Literary Review”. As is well-known,
to describe the two ages Kierkegaard used a parable of a precious jewel on a frozen
lake covered with thin ice. If the age is revolutionary, Kierkegaard writes, the
whole community celebrates the courage of a person who will sacrifice his life for
the common goal. And vice versa, if the age is reflective, people consider the
hero’s action as unreasonable and meaningless, they ridicule his courage and strength,
and reduce the hero’s sacrifice to a simple display of skills. The paradox occurs
when Kierkegaard describes the revolutionary vigor. Otherwise known for his masterful
literary style, Kierkegaard enigmatically avoided the playful, urgent and swift
descriptions, which would correspond to the momentum needed for revolutionary action
and instead chose repetitive and dull sentences. E.g.: “The age of revolution
is essentially passionate and therefore essentially has culture”; “The tension
and resilience of the inner being are the measure of essential culture”; “The age
of revolution is essentially passionate” and so on.
The
obvious question is why Kierkegaard, who was aware that repetition brings reduction
of jouissance, chose to interpret the revolutionary age through repetition, and
with the same melancholy and mourning with which he described the present age? Was
it because he considered every revolution as essentially a repetitive event? Or,
because he believed that each self-sacrifice (the hero on thin ice) is always
already a senseless gesture, which cannot get an approval of the community? Or,
more radically, what if there is no age which can be called a revolutionary
age? What if there is nothing exclusive in history, and each epoch is just a set
of practical decisions about what kind of life one wants to commit oneself to? The
paper argues that Kierkegaard developed a notion that both pleasure of the
aesthetical and the ethical existence - “the life of a poet” and “the life of a
judge” are incomplete, the only resolution of human’s destiny must come about
in the form of a religious choice. Due to the radical antagonism of human
situation, humans are incapable of bypassing the abyss between the finite and
the infinite, therefore the action is always conducted without a full meaning,
without a rational knowledge of the consequences of that action and with a leap
of faith; therefore the true action can come only in the form of a conduct of
the single individual directed towards the highest
good as it is understood in Kierkegaard.
DOCUMENTARY Still the Spy of God, Søren Kierkegaard in the 21st Century (in development for 2021)
DOCUMENTARY
Still the Spy
of God: Søren Kierkegaard in the 21st Century /
New Perspectives
Director: Thomas Josef Roth, Germany.
Documentary Film Production: Dok Haus Berlin.
Thomas Josef Roth is author of "The Voice of Nothingness: Zen Buddhism and the Kyoto School Philosophy" link, "Nietzsche in Sils Maria" link.
Documentary Film Production: Dok Haus Berlin.
Thomas Josef Roth is author of "The Voice of Nothingness: Zen Buddhism and the Kyoto School Philosophy" link, "Nietzsche in Sils Maria" link.
The Ethnologist as Writer: The Writer as Ethnologist (2019)
 |
| The Ethnologist as Writer March 21, 2019 |
 |
| The Writer as Ethnologist March 21, 2019 |
The Ethnologist as a Writer: The Writer as Ethnologist
Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics
Faculty of Philology "Blaze Koneski"
University Ss. Cyril and Methodius, Skopje, Macedonia
The interdisciplinary project, with students from the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology (IEA) at the Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics and from the departments of literature and linguistics at the Faculty of Philology, explores the links between literature and ethnography, examines the boundaries between facts and fiction, and the documentary value of ethnological field materials versus the literary imagination.
Project leaders:
Prof. Ilina Jakimovska, IEA, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics.
Prof. Jasna Koteska, Department of Macedonian and South Slavic Literatures, Faculty of Philology.
Duration: February - June 2019.
  |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
