Архетип: ейдос чи ідея. Від платонівської ідеї до ентелехії Аристотеля
The Archetype: an Eidos or an Idea. From Plato’s Idea to Aristotle’s Entelechy

Summary/Abstract: The relevance of the research is the returning to the idea of culture universals as archetypes, which provides the opportunity to see the main path of not only the consciousness of humanity, but also existentiality of its subsistence. This approach is provides the opportunity to find the meaning of time-spatial coordinates in the artistic creation (eg, composed), to understand what exactly archetypal prototypes are actual today. The purpose of the article is the phenomenon of "archetype" in terms of his being as an existential eidos, ideas, entelechy at the time of Plato and Aristotle. As is well known, in the scientific field of modern thesaurus the term "archetype" was involved by the Swiss thinker and psychologist Karl Jung, who laid the concept of "archetype" the Platonic idea of eidos, because, according to Jung, ""archetype" is an explanatory description of Plato εῒδος". Thus, reflecting on the historical and cultural origins of the "archetype" phenomenon, we notice that an unconditional beginning of all archetypal Platonic doctrine can be called a theory based on eidetic beginning of all existence. It is connected with the general convictions of ancient Greeks that eidoses are in the heart of all universe, or, as the Greeks called them the prototypes. The Plato’s concept of "eidos" is understood not as an external and internal form, but as the way of being, in other words, there are immanent things. In addition, an eidos of Plato is independent ontological status, which organizes the transcendent world of ideas (that is actually the world of eidos) as a combination of absolute and perfect samples of possible things. Plato, and later his follower Plotinus, are considering the hierarchy of eidos. According to Plato, transcendental eidos inherit an intangible imitate divine and they are perfect cosmos ideal for protoforms its elements. But art does not reproduce pure eidos. Plato argues that art can imitate only an imperfect copy of eidos, that the shell material and formal events, at the same time not expressing its depth, original essence. It should be noted that in ancient Greek philosophy language and culture as a whole concept eidos was virtually equivalent to the concept of the idea (Greek ἰδέα appearance, appearance). Finding thing eidos is conceived by the ancient Greeks as "objectification" of eidos, eidos abstraction transformation in non-abstract thing. It defines the concept of a semantic connectedness eidos with the concept of form. Considering eidos and idea as the archetypal prototypes, it is necessary to note the correct observation R.Tarnas, noting that Plato used the Greek word "idea" and "eidos" alternately: "idea" got into Latin and English, while the term "eidos" translated into Latin had turned into "forma", while into the English had entered as a "form". Excellent research of Plato`s terminology were held by famous thinkers A. Losev and P. Bromer. If you follow these researchers, the idea will be imagined as a figure, but rather the prototype that we wear in the soul, and eidos is a logical structure of the idea. The idea and eidos seek to comprehend a real form in the process of connecting. It is about a conjugation of eidos and ideas with the sphere of meaning at the semantic level. Based on the research of A. Losev, which follows the logic of Plato’s thought, it follows that every entity thing carries a meaning or semantic context represents the information that brings idea filled by him. Plato discovered that at the beginnings of all sensible things there are similar joint patterns, shapes, designs and ideas. Thus, for the ancient Greek philosopher all forms have their ideal prototypes, which we call archetypes "original grounds of universality" (by V. Sukhantseva). Consequently, the archetype is an essential constituent of all phenomena, and at this level there is the most profound sense, whereas every artistic creation, including music, is also potentially possessing vigor, as ideas the archetypes pass through several stages: from his "pre-" exist to implement his plan composer of musical text. The next important step in understanding the culture archetypes is, according to E.Panofsky, an Aristotelian reconciliation of "the world of ideas and the world of phenomena in the field of philosophy and art by the synthetic interaction between form and matter". In Aristotelian conception there are many similarities with Plato’s theory of ideas, which is traditionally considered tap root archetype of the future theory. However, the Aristotelian concept of the ultimate beginning of "reasonable prime mover" as the beginning of all things is possibly estimated as one that also leads us back to "archetype". In the context of our research we should pay attention to important Aristotle generalizations related to the concept of entelechy. Thanks to entelechy the Greek philosopher explains the idea of the soul. According to Aristotle, the soul is the cause and effects of this entelechy. In the interpretation of Aristotle’s soul the entelechy is a place of existence, but entelechy could not realize itself if there was not soul. Then it turns out that the human soul is the focus of all things, this is an ontological entity. Mechanism entelechy transforms to the main chaos surrounding the man in order. In the musical art entelechy is implemented through the construction of forms, harmonization and catharsis. Adhering the logic of Aristotle, entelechy is also a process, and the result simultaneously, entelechy as the process is carried out both on the spiritual and on the physical level by acquiring appearance and shape because this encourages to energy which is present in being. From our point of view, in understanding of an archetype as eidos, ideas are leading to entelechy the cornerstone of all modern understanding of the culture. If to interpret "eidos" and "idea" as the prototype of all artistic, it is possible to return to the initial, ("pre-rational, yet dissected the opposition to "yes" and "no", "past" and "future" of consciousness the distant origins. So, we have an opportunity to "plunge into" in the composer’s creativity inherent in archetypes like element pre-, extra- and supra-conscious, to assume in artistic creation "over-categorical", "over of meaning" unity (by A. Losev) when any act of art (artistic work) is an act of self expression of the artist, his archetypical outside conscious activities.

• Details
• Contents