The Anthropology of Tragedy: Oedipus the Knower

Aim. The article analyzes the concept of mystery as an ontological matrix of human nature and the phenomenon of existential experience, leading to a conflict between the cognitive intellect and incomprehensible foundation of personal existence. As a model of epistemological-existential conflict mechanism the authors investigate the mythological perception, reflected in the tragedy of Sophocles “Oedipus the King.”

Methodology. The analysis of the works of contemporary philosophers, dedicated to the anthropological problem of Oedipus myth, is supplemented by an appeal to the classics of Russian religious philosophy – A. F. Losev and P. A. Florenskiy. It is proved that the formative factor of the ancient tragedy is the conflict between “ousian” and “hypostatic” guilt as a clash of genus and individual. This also defines the situation of self-knowledge crisis in the closed immanent systems of scientific anthropologism, an alternative to which can be the phenomenology of religious mysticism and the principle of enigmatic anti-reductionism as a condition for the possibility of self-identity of a subject. The authors apply to the spiritual verses of Gregory the Theologian, dedicated to the mystery of human nature as an object of existential care and responsibility.

Results. The study concludes that even if total philosophical comprehension of the mystery of human existence is possible, it requires a readiness for a particular spiritual state, a readiness to see not only something ultimate but also something beyond-ultimate with all ontological completeness of noumenal.

Research implications. The possibility of further research of ancient tragedy and myth (with regard to the importance of Sophocles anthropology) and the phenomenon of mystery in the philosophical-anthropological context is envisaged. The epistemological conflict in philosophical anthropology regains relevance in the modern world.

1. Radtsig, S. I. (1962). Myth and Reality in Greek Tragedy. In: Philological Sciences. Scientific Essays of Higher Education, 2, 114–127 (in Russ.).

2. Pyatigorsky, A. M. (2004). The Myth about One Who Becomes God (Meeting with Oedipus). In: Pyatigorsky, A. M. The Incessant Conversation. St. Petersburg: Azbuka-classic publ., pp. 193–238 (in Russ.).

3. Shevtsov, S. V. Justification of Human Existence in Sophocles (2013). In: RSUH/RGGU Bulletin. Series Philosophy. Social Studies. Art Studies, 11 (112), 163–170 (in Russ.).

4. Plessner, H. (2004). Levels of Organic Life and the Human: An Introduction to Philosophical Anthropology. Moscow: ROSSPEN publ. (in Russ.)

5. Gagarin, A. S. (2014). Loneliness as an Existential in Ancient Philosophy (From Hesiod to Aristotle). In: Scientific Yearbook of the Institute of Philosophy and Law of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 14, 1, 43–58 (in Russ.).

6. Shchitsova, T. V. (2014). “The Birth Complex”: An Existential-Phenomenological Interpretation of the Oedipus Myth. In: Shchitsova, T. V. Anthropology. Ethics. Politics: A Collection of Philosophical Articles and Reports. Vilnius: ESU publ., pp. 90–121 (in Russ.).

7. Florensky, P. A. (2004). Collected Works. Philosophy of Cult (The Experience of Orthodox Anthropodicy). Moscow: Mysl publ. (in Russ.).

8. Florensky, P. A. (1996). Collected Works. Vol. 2. Moscow: Mysl publ. (in Russ.)

9. Aristotle (2000). Rhetoric. Poetics. Moscow: Labyrinth publ. (in Russ.).

10. Losev, A. F. (2013). Essays on Ancient Symbolism and Mythology. Moscow: Academichesky Proekt publ. (in Russ.).

11. Bakhtin, M. M. (2000). Author and Hero: Toward a Philosophical Foundation for the Humanities. St. Petersburg: Azbuka publ. (in Russ.).

12. Vernant, J.-P., duBois P. (1978). Ambiguity and Reversal: On the Enigmatic Structure of Oedipus Rex. In: New Literary History, 9 (3), 480–481.

13. Berdyaev, N. A. (2011). The Meaning of Creativity: The Human Justification Experience. Moscow: AST publ., Astrel publ. (in Russ.).

14. Alymova, E. V. (2014). The Daimon of Oedipus as a Paradigm (Sophocles’s Oedipus the King, 1192–1194). In: Verbum, 16, 16–30 (in Russ.).