2022/3, стр. 207 - 218

DASEIN-PSYCHE RESEARCH: BETWEEN PLATO AND HEIDEGGER

Резюме:

Ключови думи:

Abstract. The article answers the question: “How does the agathos of Dasein-psyche and Dasein-Intelligent-Matter come into being?” or “How does the meaningful-presence of Dasein-psyche and Dasein-Intelligent-Matter come about?” The author turns to the philosophy of Plato and Heidegger and presents Dasein-psyche as an elementary structure or a Dasein-Intelligent-Matter actor. The Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence is significantly conditioned by the focus and limits of the arete potency, set by Dasein-Intelligent-Matter. The anthropologization of Dasein transforms the individual discourse and a way of life in accordance with the arete potency. The arete potency is the source of Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence. The anthropologization of Dasein sets free arete, providing the transforming of the arete existentials potency into the energy of Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence. The disclosedness of arete is an “ideal” state of the Dasein-psyche sustainable development and prosperity, the agathos of Dasein-psyche and Dasein-Intelligent-Matter.

Keywords: Dasein-psyche; anthropologization of Dasein; agathos; meaningfulpresence; arete; existential of arete

Introduction

The psyche as a subject of research is studied by neurophilosophy. The noun “psyche” (ψῡχή) is viewed in Platonic senses (Cratylus 399d – 400b; 415d-е). The author adheres to the distinction between “philosophy of neuroscience” and “neurophilosophy” and speaks about the latter (Bickle et al. 2019).

Neurophilosophy considers the psyche as natural disclosedness. Edmund Husserl used the term “aboutness” 1) (Bewußtsein-von-etwas) to describe such a state (Husserl, 2004). Martin Heidegger used the term “Dasein” in the meaning of the movement of Sein in Da (Sheehan 2014). We will use the term Dasein-psyche. In the term, we combine scientific and philosophical knowledge on Dasein-Intelligent-Matter (Bazaluk and Kharchenko 2018) along with the whole wealth of Heidegger’s Dasein meanings, the philosophy of cosmos (Vashkevich et al. 2021), and modern discoveries of neuroscience.

Exploring Dasein-psyche through the neurophilosophical approach (Bazaluk 2020) reveals Dasein-Intelligent-Matter and looks even deeper: first, into Dasein-Living-Matter, then into Dasein-Inert-Matter, and eventually into the highest account of the complexity of the movement of Sein in Da. In this context, the inclusion of Dasein-psyche into Dasein-the-One becomes obvious. Dasein-psyche is revealed as a part of the whole, or the image (εἰκών), created in the likeness of Dasein-the-One as a paradigm. 2) It is formed by the factors and causes of complication, as well as by the experience of being of the previous states of matter. Dasein-psyche is the new way of Dasein-theOne, or the cosmos power potential.

Neurophilosophy manifests agathos in neuroevolution. Plato investigated the etymology of the adjective “agathos” (ἀγαθός) in the dialogue “Cratylus” (Cratylus 412c; 422a). Diogenes Laertius, characterizing Plato’s philosophy, wrote: “He thinks that the gods take note of human life… He was the first to define the notion of agathos (ἀγαθός) as that which is bound up with whatever is praiseworthy and rational and useful and proper and becoming. And all these are bound up with that which is consistent and in accord with nature” (Diogenes Laertius 1972). The idea tou agathou (ή τοΰ άγαθού ίδέα) was considered by Plato as an image of the highest idea (Republic 6.505a – 6.509c; 6.510а – 6.511d; 7.518a – 7.518d; 7.532a – 7.532c; 7.534c; 10.621c-d; Timaeus 29а).

The idea tou agathou is immanently present in the complexity of the Dasein-psyche. “For a human being must understand a general conception formed by collecting into a unity by means of reason the many perceptions of the senses; and this is a recollection of those things which our psyche once beheld, when it journeyed with God and, lifting its vision above the things which we now say exist, rose up into real being” (Phaedrus 249b-c). The idea tou agathou presents Dasein-psyche in a sense Heidegger’s analysis of Dasein as a fundamental characteristic of human presence. Heidegger was the first to expand the conception of the neuroevolution to Aristotle’s scientific image of philosophy (Sheehan 2014).

The main distinctive feature of Heidegger’s analysis of Dasein was that Heidegger “has been wrested from hiddenness” 3) the fundamental essence of the experience of Dasein’s being seeking the source of the meaningful presence of psyche. Just as Columbus discovered America in the search for India, Heidegger revealed an account of Dasein-the-One’s complexity, exploring the existentials of a human being.

We will specify Heidegger’s analysis of Dasein and demarcate Daseinpsyche. In the movement of Sein in Da we explore the certain account of complexity that originates from the source of meaningful presence of Daseinpsyche. We will answer the question, “How does agathos of Dasein-psyche come into being?” or “How does the Dasein-psyche meaningful-presence-as come about?”

How does the Dasein-psyche meaningful-presence-as come about?

In the philosophical school, the account of the complexity of the Daseinpsyche is explored from the perspective of the method, which Plato called “know thyself,” “γνῶθι σεαυτόν” (Phaedrus 229e) and Heidegger – “the clearing” (der Lichtung) (Sheehan 2014). Both terms reveal the path of selfknowledge that liberates the source of Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence from its hiddenness. Plato wrote: “…the psyche of the philosopher greatly despises the body and avoids it and strives to be alone by itself” (Phaedo 65d) 4) basically because the body is an obstacle “to share in the search for phronesis” (τῆς φρονήσεως κτῆσιν) (Phaedo 65а). Plato created philosophy as a special way of transforming the potency of the coming into being into the meaningful presence of what is occurring. Philosophy, as a certain discourse and a way of life, disclosed transcendence as reality. The history of the philosophical school is an improvement of the way on which, as Plato suggested, the psyche was to conceive and bring forth to phronesis and arete as a whole.5) The liberated arete testified the achievement of the complete disclosedness by the psyche or, equivalently, the source of meaningful presence.

Modern research in neurophilosophy enriches and concretizes Plato’s ideas. Self-knowledge remains the main way of the intelligibility of the account of the complexity of Dasein-psyche. The psychoanalytic approach 6) and cognitive behavioral therapy, 7) which have proven their effectiveness in psychiatry, were developed on their basis. However, their main achievement is proof that the intelligibility of the account of the complexity of Daseinpsyche liberates the source of the meaningful presence and ensures sustainable development of the personality.

We denoted the highest account of the complexity, or the source of the meaningful presence of Dasein-psyche, by the Greek term “arete” (ἀρετή) (Meno 73c). In modern literature, the term arete is commonly translated as a “virtue.” In fact, in ancient Greece, this term had a different and deeper meaning, namely “being the best you can be,” or “reaching your highest human potential.” Arete was explored by Plato as the essence of psyche (Symposium 209a), “the flow of the agathes psych‘s” (ῥοὴν τῆς ἀγαθῆς ψυχῆς) (Cratylus 415d).

We understand arete as a particular set of basic structures and functions that determine the individual being of Dasein-psyche. It is a specific potency of the coming into being, where the experience of Dasein’s being sets the focus and limits of self-realization. It is “freedom as letting beings be,” which, according to Heidegger, “is intrinsically the resolutely open bearing that does not close up in itself. All comportment is grounded in this bearing and receives from it directedness toward beings and disclosure of them” (Heidegger 1961). Arete manifests it an innate craving for agathos (Hadot 1999, 50), actually demonstrating its affiliation with it. However, arete, as the potency of the coming into being, needs to prove its correspondence to the agathos of what is occurring. Only in this case, the arete potency transforms into the energy of the Dasein-psyche meaningful presence.

Plato compared philosophy with maieutics (μαιευτική), thus emphasizing its main goal (Theaetetus 210b). Philosophy brought agathos into the world (ἐκτετόκαμεν). Plato associated the adjective agathos (ἀγαθός) with the adjective sophos (σοφός, soph–s), and agathos always came first (ἀγαθὸς καὶ σοφὸς) (Meno 93e; Hippias Minor 367e). The noun “philosopher” (φιλό + σοφος) conveys the integral and all-consuming love of sophos. 8)

Philosophy helped the arete potency to overcome the concealedness of what is occurring and to fulfill itself in the energy of the meaningful presence. Philosophy created certain discourse and a way of life that helped to master phronesis or the agathos moulding power. The intelligibility of the account of the complexity of the movement of Sein in Da was the most effective way to transform arete potency into the energy of the meaningful presence of Dasein-psyche.

The intelligibility of the account of the complexity, which leads to the liberation of the arete, we called the anthropologization of Dasein (Bazaluk 2020). To anthropologize Dasein means to initially limit Heidegger’s analysis of Dasein by disclosing the source of the meaningful presence of Daseinpsyche. The term “anthropologization” is made up of two Greek words: anthropos (ἄνθρωπος) + logos (λόγος). Anthropos (man) “indicates that the other animals do not examine, or consider, or look up at (ἀναθρεῖ) any of the things that they see, but man has no sooner seen – that is, ὄπωπε – than he looks up at and considers that which he has seen” (Cratylus 399c). 9) In the current meaning, logos is a certain account of the intelligibility complexity of the connection between the coming into being and what is occurring. This connection reveals the peculiarities of the arete potency transformation into the energy of the meaningful presence of Dasein-psyche. To anthropologize Dasein is to consistently reveal the account of the complexity of Daseinpsyche up to the highest account – arete liberation.

The intelligibility of each new account of the complexity is accompanied by eudaimonia. According to Plato, eudaimonia was accompanied by moving towards agathos (Phaedo 115d). On the one hand, the eudaimonia improves the self-realization capacity of Dasein-psyche as the Dasein-the-One potential and intensifies the energy of the meaningful presence. On the other hand, it is the external manifestation of the agathos moulding power. It reports the correspondence of the anthropologization of Dasein to the idea tou agathou. The absence of the eudaimonia warns of the discrepancy of the chosen method of the arete potency self-realization.

The intelligibility of the highest account of the complexity of Daseinpsyche shows the boundary that separates Dasein-psyche from Dasein of any other state of matter. It is from this point that noogenesis originates (Safer 1992; Kastrup 2018). The key result of the intelligibility of the source of Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence is the discovery of the elementary particles, which we called arete existentials.

The existential of arete

The existential of arete is an indivisible whole of one of the three fundamental determining qualities of the three-level block organization of the psyche. Science is not yet able to comprehend them. Philosophy, however, has been focusing on these qualities for several millennia. For instance, Plato’s “ideas,” Kant’s “categories,” Leibniz’s “monads,” Husserl’s “phenomena,” and Heidegger’s “existentials of Dasein.” Neurophilosophy allows us to rethink the basic qualities of the three-level block organization of the psyche in the field of history of philosophy.

In philosophy, the existentials of arete reveal themselves as the first principle of anthropology and the defining characteristics of Dasein-Intelligent-Matter. Every quality of the three-level block organization of the psyche is determined by the experience of Dasein-Intelligent-Matter’s being and Dasein’s previous states of matter. The existentials of arete are the elementary particles of Daseinpsyche, in which the experience of being Dasein-the-One is concentrated. They are similar to quarks in Dasein-Inert-Matter, or genes in Dasein-Living-Matter. The existentials of arete contain the defining combinations of the possibilities of the Dasein psyche and the different degrees of freedom of letting beings be. Like other elementary particles, they obey the principle of identity, i.e., in Dasein-the-One, all existentials of arete of the same kind fully correspond to each other in their properties.

The anthropologization of Dasein reveals three arete existentials. We have denoted them with authentic Greek terms “Nous,” “Episteme,” and “Phronesis.” The arete existentials are in two states: the coming into being and what is occurring. In the first state, they are revealed as the main qualities of the arete potency, in which the Dasein’s being experience concentrated a certain focus and limits of self-realization. In the second state, they are revealed as the main qualities of Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence. They are manifested as the energy transforming the kalos cosmos.

The arete existentials require care. They need particular living conditions, nutrition, training, and compliance with the daily routine. The more actively the arete existentials are involved in the intelligibility of the account of the complexity of the movement of Sein in Da, the more extensively their ability to turn what is occurring from closedness into disclosedness. Let us consider the key meanings of the arete existentials.

1. Nous (νοῦς) or intelligence. Plato used the term “nous” to describe what distinguished rational from emotional thinking and made it possible “to search out the pure, absolute essence of things” (Phaedo 66a). Nous conceived eidos (εἶδος) (Timaeus 51d) or the main essence of a thing. It made things intelligible. Nous was an important part of а Living Creature (ζῷον) (Timaeus 30b), so Plato regarded it as a cosmic phenomenon, which Gods, daimons, and humans possessed to a varying degree.10) In the “Philebus,” Plato made clear that nous ruled the cosmos from the very beginning.11)

From our perspective, nous is a neural brain structure with a certain structure and function. At this stage of the complication, nous is represented by the neural ensemble of consciousness, which provides a certain quality of the intelligibility of the movement of Sein in Da. In Dasein-Intelligent-Matter, neural ensembles can be at different stages of the complication. Therefore, the term “nous” abstracts the neural structure. Nous emphasizes its key function “to experience the world as a process” or to comprehend the account of the complexity of Dasein-the-One.

Nous is a possibility to contemplate something, which produces itself from itself. It provides the situation “once the sun itself could be truly seen” or “once the highest idea could be caught sight of” (Heidegger 1986, 269). Nous is formed in such a way that its ability to cognize transcendence is improved by practice. The basic structure of consciousness is not enough to ensure the quality of the intelligibility of the movement of Sein in Da. Nous should learn to transform the hiddenness of Dasein-the-One into disclosedness, or, effectively, to master the agathos moulding power. Heidegger called this state, “existence’s alert awareness for itself” (Safranski 2005, 179). He wrote that Dasein should ambush itself where “it avoids itself” (Safranski 2005, 179).

This important peculiarity of the neural ensemble turns the nous not into an obvious fact of neuroevolution but into the arete potency. Every person is intelligent, however, there are differences in the abilities of every individual intelligence. This feature makes society heterogeneous and competitive.

The complication of the nous as the arete existential is a special way of life, aimed at the continuous and non-linear complication of the structure and functions of the neural ensemble of consciousness. It implies a painstaking and long-term work aimed at self-development and self-actualization, namely forcing oneself to do what contrasts to basic needs, coercion to selfprogramming, tightening of self-discipline; maximal concentration of will power; focusing on the cognition of the experience of Dasein’s being, an extension of the memory, speech, imagination and attention capabilities by training. More than two thousand years ago, Aristotle gave the answer to the question, “How can students make progress?” He said, “By pressing hard on those in front and not waiting for those behinds.” 12)

2. Episteme (ἐπιστήμη) or knowledge. Plato contrasted episteme with “doxa,” common belief or opinion. Plato explored the nature of episteme in his three later dialogues “Theaetetus,” “Sophist,” and “Statesman.” The episteme was one of the main characteristics distinguishing philosophers from sophists. The latter possessed conjectural knowledge (δοξαστικὴν ἐπιστήμη), rather than brought to light aletheia.13)

Exploring the episteme, Plato used the verb ἐκτετόκαμεν (“to bring into the world”). On the one hand, this allowed Plato to emphasize the complexity and painfulness of the episteme mastering process (Theaetetus 210b). On the other hand, Plato highlighted the correspondence of the episteme to the agathos.

The transformation of closedness into disclosedness or the intelligibility of each new account of Dasein-the-One’s complexity is accompanied by labor pains. It is the episteme, or rather, the agathos of what is occurring is born.

Labor pains are the energy of eudaimonia that transforms the closedness of the account of the complexity of Dasein-the-One into disclosedness. The episteme “brings into the world” a fragment of disclosedness of the movement of Sein in Da. It releases a specific energy potential of the meaningful presence of what is occurring. Hence follows the definition of episteme. Episteme is an intelligible fragment of openness of Dasein-the-One.

The birth of the episteme is always agathos (Meno 82b – 85c). The effectiveness of maieutics as a philosophical method can be explained by the sequence of questions, facilitating the birth of the episteme, moulds the agathos of what is occurring. Factually, maieutics is the address of the agathos of what is occurring towards the agathos of the coming into being. The main purpose of the address is to achieve full disclosedness of a certain account of complexity. The disclosedness is an “ideal” state of the Dasein-psyche sustainable development and prosperity.

The coherent intelligibility of the account of the complexity of Daseinpsyche, leading to the episteme birth, corresponds to the serial transformation of the arete potency into the energy of the meaningful presence. Hadot compared the final result of this transformation with the state of the universal perspective or “the look from above” (Hadot 2005, 211) when Dasein-psyche rises to the level of mystical experience or to “a state of absolute unity and simplicity” (Hadot 2005, 137). In this state, Dasein-psyche identifies itself with Dasein-the-One, which is the agathos.

We distinguish the episteme from the knowledge. The knowledge is explored as the intellectual enquiry and answering the questions “What is ...?” and “What is not ...?” The episteme manifests as the disclosedness of Daseinthe-One “brought into the world.” It liberates the energy of Dasein-the-One’s meaningful presence, thus providing the opportunity to use the resources of what is occurring to enhance the significance of the coming into being potency. The episteme is summed and forms the holistic intelligibility of the disclosedness, which provides the mastering of the agathos moulding power.

The episteme sets “the law within us,” which Immanuel Kant called conscience. “…The reproaches of conscience would be without effect, if we did not regard it as the representative of God, who, while He has raised up a tribunal over us, has also established a judgment-seat within us” (Kant 1900).

3. Phronesis (φρόνησις). Plato clarified the main meanings of the term “phronesis” in the dialogue “Symposium” (Symposium 202a; 209a). They are much richer than the meanings of the term “prudence,” which is used in modern translations. First, phronesis, along with sophia, was the opposite of ignorance (ἀμαθίας).14) Second, to possess phronesis meant to be gifted with ingenuity and genius (εὑρετικοὶ) (Symposium 209a).

Following Plato, we will consider phronesis as a specific skill wherein the agathos moulding power is manifested. The noun “phronesis” is derived from the verb “phroneo” (φρονέω) and was used by Plato to mean “to act on the scale of immortals and Gods.”15) Phronesis differs from techne (τέχνη) in that it cannot be mastered through learning. Phronesis is immanent to Dasein-psyche and presents the uniqueness of the arete potency. It is manifested as the action based on the disclosedness of the movement of Sein in Da, holistically intelligible. Phronesis transforms the agathos of what is occurring. It induces eudaimonia and enforces the energy of Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence in Dasein-the-One.

Phronesis is uncountable. It is always the only and holistic quality that consistently confirms Dasein-psyche as a certain discourse and a way of life, or a Dasein-the-One potential. “Dasein est ubi phronesis” or “Dasein is where phronesis is.”16)

Phronesis is strictly rational. It is a specific sequence of actions that transforms the arete potency into the energy of meaningful presence. Phronesis advances Dasein-psyche in the continuous and non-linear complication of the Dasein-theOne; this advancement is a care. It is phronesis that transforms Dasein-IntelligentMatter of the Earth into the high-tech cosmic civilization, as it can be present in the Dasein-the-One only in this quality. Phronesis products are modern information and communication technologies, including nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, cognitive science, simulated reality, artificial intelligence, superintelligence, cryonics, etc. In the last decade alone, phronesis has promoted Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence in simulated reality technologies, artificial intelligence, superintelligence, 3D bioprinting, mind uploading, chemical brain preservation, etc. (The Transhumanist Reader 2013).

In general, the intelligence, episteme, and phronesis, as the arete existentials, reveal the focus and limits of Dasein-psyche within Daseinthe-One. The arete existentials do not depend on the location of a natural or artificial space object in the Universe or on sex and biological capabilities of an organism or material values. These are the elementary particles of the kalos cosmos of Dasein-Intelligent-Matter.

Conclusions

The article answers the question: “How does the agathos of Dasein-psyche and Dasein-Intelligent-Matter come into being?” or “How does the meaningfulpresence of Dasein-psyche and Dasein-Intelligent-Matter come about?” Dasein points to the natural disclosedness of psyche and society, which come into being in the relatively closed Dasein of the previous states of matter. The quality of the intelligibility of the connection between the coming into being and what is occurring discloses the closeness to the source of the Dasein-the-One meaningful presence and mastering of the agathos moulding power. The author presents Dasein-psyche as an elementary structure or a Dasein-Intelligent-Matter actor. The Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence is significantly conditioned by the focus and limits of the arete potency, set by Dasein-Intelligent-Matter. The anthropologization of Dasein transforms the individual discourse and a way of life in accordance with the arete potency. The arete potency is the source of Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence. The anthropologization of Dasein sets free arete, providing the transforming of the arete existentials potency into the energy of Dasein-psyche’s meaningful presence. The disclosedness of arete is an “ideal” state of the Dasein-psyche sustainable development and prosperity, the agathos of Dasein-psyche and Dasein-Intelligent-Matter.

NOTES

1. Alternatively “consciousness of something.”

2. See (Timaeus 29a-b).

3. Heidegger wrote, “Truth originally means that which has been wrested from hiddenness.” Heidegger, M. Plato’s Doctrine of Truth. Historical and Philosophical Yearbook. Moscow: Nauka, 1986: p. 265.

4. Translated by Harold North Fowler (1966).

5. ἃ ψυχῇ προσήκει καὶ κυῆσαι καὶ τεκεῖν: τί οὖν προσήκει; φρόνησίν τε καὶ τὴν ἄλλην ἀρετήν (Symposium 209a).

6. Freud, S. Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. New York: Boni and Liveright, 1922; Jung, C.G. The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. Princeton University Press; 2nd edition, 1981.

7. For example, a National Health Service (England) initiative “Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT).” See https://www.nice.org.uk/about/whatwe-do/our-programmes/nice-advice/iapt

8. For example, οὐκοῦν καὶ τὸν φιλόσοφον σοφίας φήσομεν ἐπιθυμητὴν εἶναι, οὐ τῆς μέν, τῆς δ᾽ οὔ, ἀλλὰ πάσης (Republic 5.475b).

9. Translated by Harold N. Fowler.

10. For example, Plato used the expression “θεοῦ νόησις,” “intelligence of God” (Cratylus 407b).

11. “νοῦς ἄρχει σύμμαχος ἐκείνοις” (Philebus 30d).

12. Diogenes Laertius. Lives of Eminent Philosophers. Edited by Robert Hicks. 1972: 5.1.20.

13. “δοξαστικὴν ἄρα τινὰ περὶ πάντων ἐπιστήμην ὁ σοφιστὴς ἡμῖν ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἀλήθειαν ἔχων ἀναπέφανται” (Sophist 233c).

14. “σοφίας καὶ ἀμαθίας” and “φρονήσεως καὶ ἀμαθίας” (Symposium 202a).

15. φρονεῖν μὲν ἀθάνατα καὶ θεῖα (Timaeus 90c).

16. We paraphrased Koyr “Dasein est ubi curat” (“Dasein is where care is”) (Koyr, 1999).

REFERENCES

BAZALUK, O., KHARCHENKO, L. 2018. The Philosophy of the Cosmos as the New Universal Philosophical Teaching about Being. Philosophy and Cosmology, 21, 6 – 13. Available from: https://doi. org/10.29202/phil-cosm/21/1

BAZALUK, O. 2020. The Anthropologization of Dasein-Psyche’s Being by Methods of Neurophilosophy. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, 18, 7 – 19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i18.221297

BICKLE, J., MANDIK, P., LANDRETH, A. 2019. The Philosophy of Neuroscience. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/ neuroscience/

BURNET, J. (ed.) 1901. Oxford Classical Texts: Platonis Opera. Vol. 2: Tetralogia III – IV. Oxford University Press; Oxford Classical Texts.

BURNET, J. (ed.) 1903. Oxford Classical Texts: Platonis Opera. Vol. 3: Tetralogia V – VII. Oxford University Press; Oxford Classical Texts.

BURNET, J. (ed.) 1978. Oxford Classical Texts: Platonis Opera. Vol. 4: Tetralogia VIII. Oxford University Press; Oxford Classical Texts.

DIOGENES LAERTIUS 1972. Lives of Eminent Philosophers. Edited by Robert Hicks. Available from: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/ hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0258%3Abook%3 D3%3Achapter%3D1

DUKE, E.A., HICKEN, W.F., NICOLL, W.S.M., ROBINSON, D.B. and STRACHAN, J.C.G. (eds) 1995. Oxford Classical Texts: Platonis Opera, Vol. 1: Tetralogiae I – II. Oxford University Press; Oxford Classical Texts.

FREUD, S. 1922. Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. New York: Boni and Liveright.

JUNG, C.G. 1981. The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. Princeton University Press; 2 nd edition.

HADOT, P. 1999. What Is Ancient Philosophy? Moscow: Publishing House of Humanities.

HADOT, P. 2005. Philosophy as a Way of Life: Conversations with Jeannie Carlier and Arnold I. Davidson. Trans. V. A. Vorobyov. Moscow, St.-Petersburg: Stepnoy veter; Kolo Publ.

HEIDEGGER, M. 1986. Plato’s Doctrine of Truth. Historical and Philosophical Yearbook. Moscow: Nauka, 255 – 275.

HEIDEGGER, M. 1961. On the Essence of Truth. Translated by John Sallis. Available from: https://aphelis.net/wp-content/ uploads/2011/02/Martin-Heidegger-On-the-Essence-of-Truth.pdf

HUSSERL, E. 2004. The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology: An Introduction to Phenomenological Philosophy. St. Petersburg: Vladimir Dal.

Kant, I. 1900. Kant on Education (Ueber Paedagogik). Boston: D.C. Heath and Co. Available from: http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/kantkant-on-education-uber-padagogik

KASTRUP, B. 2018. The Next Paradigm. Future Human Image, 9, 41 – 51. Available from: http://doi.org/10.29202/fhi/9/4

KOYR‚, A. 1999. Martin Heidegger’s Philosophical Evolution. Logos. 10, 113 – 136. Available from: http://www.ruthenia.ru/logos/ number/1999_10/06.htm#_ftn1

SAFER, I. 1992. Noogenesis: Weaving Ourselves on Incarnation’s Loom. Zygon, 27(3), 361 – 370. Available from: https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1467-9744.1992.tb01071.x

SAFRANSKI, R. 2005. Heidegger: A Master from Germany and His Time. Moscow: Molodaya Gvardiya.

SHEEHAN, T. 2014. Making Sense of Heidegger: A Paradigm Shift. Rowman & Littlefield International.

The Transhumanist Reader: Classical and Contemporary Essays on the Science, Technology, and Philosophy of the Human Future 2013. Edited by MAX MORE and NATASHAVITA-MORE. WileyBlackwell.

VASHKEVICH, V., TIMASHOVA, V. 2021. From Philosophy of Cosmos to Space Policy: Contemporary Issues and Trends.

Philosophy and Cosmology, 26, 35 – 45. Available from: https:// doi.org/10.29202/phil-cosm/26/3