Leibniz-Zentrum für Literatur- und Kulturforschung, Berlin
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (28) (remove)
Language
- English (28) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (28)
Keywords
- Benjamin, Walter (12)
- Begriff (7)
- Sowjetunion (4)
- Geschichte (3)
- Anthropozän (2)
- Begriffsgeschichte <Fach> (2)
- Berliner Kindheit um neunzehnhundert (2)
- Energie (2)
- Entropie (2)
- Koselleck, Reinhart (2)
The essay will focus on three of the "many faces of irreversibility", sketching a history of irreversibility in 20th-century Russian thought: The abstract irreversibility of time in physics, the 'embodied' irreversibility of biological evolution and, finally, the irreversibility of cultural processes. The first part will trace the history of irreversibility in 19th-century physics and biology. The second part will discuss Vladimir Vernadsky's theory of biological time as an attempt to synthesize physical and biological irreversible processes ('neobratimye protsessy') as phenomena of asymmetry in space-time. The third part will look at the migration of scientific ideas of irreversibility into the theory of culture, i.e., Juri Lotman's semiotic theory of irreversibility as unpredictable and unrepeatable processes of culture. In this three-step sketch, the history of irreversibility will be outlined as one of spatialization (from an abstract law to the image of 'time's arrow') and of specialization (from the law of entropy to the case of the generation of meaning).
This article follows the conceptual history of regulation in the Russian and Soviet context from the late 19th to mid-20th century and emphasizes its ecological dimension. Considering that regulation is a fundamentally interdisciplinary concept applied in biology, economics, law, or political science, such a history cannot strictly limit itself to the conceptual use of regulation in ecological theory. Here, ecology is rather generally understood as a scientific knowledge of nature that is being formed in various sciences throughout the 19th and 20th century by reintegrating knowledge generated in such different disciplines as natural history, biology, medicine, physics, or physiology. This paper exemplarily traces the constitutional process of ecology as a science with regard to the concept of regulation by acknowledging the transdisciplinary and sometimes metaphorical use of the concept and its oscillation between the organic and the social, the natural and the artificial, the mechanic and the dynamic, the intrinsic and the extrinsic.
Metabolism has long served as a broad organizing concept in Russian and Soviet culture for the exchange of material and energy between organisms and their environment. The Russian term 'obmen veshchestv', literally meaning "exchange of substances", semantically ranges beyond the Latinate 'metabolizm' (metabolism) and provides a framework for reflecting on bodies and material objects as open systems engaged in a constant process of transformation. 'Obmen veshchestv' appears in public discourse in mid-19th century Russia as a calque from the German term 'Stoffwechsel' (or 'Wechsel der Materie'). Its usage in Russia reflects the enduring influence of German science. In this entry, I will explore the development and expansion of this concept of material and energy exchange between organisms and their environment in Russia and the Soviet Union. In the course of a century, metabolism migrated from discussions of plant nutrition into physiology, thermodynamics, and ultimately into the Soviet practice of state economic planning. This entry will therefore pay particular attention to the early Soviet period when existing debates on metabolism took on new urgency as tools for praxis on every scale, from the body of the individual worker to humanity's future collective management of planetary material and energy flows.
In search for an ecological concept defining a "whole complex of organisms inhabiting a given region" with more methodological value than 'complex organism' or 'biome' and 'biotic community', the British phytocenologist Arthur Tansley introduced the term 'ecosystem' in 1935. [...] Independently of each other, other scientists from different countries also recognized the interconnectedness of all phenomena on the Earth's surface, resulting in the parallel coining of various notions. The Russian Botanist Vladmir Sukachev (1880–1967) introduced the term 'biogeotsenoz' ('biogeocoenosis' or 'biogeocoenose'), which was broadly used in the Soviet Union and throughout Eastern Europe. It was introduced into Russian in two stages: Following the forestologist Georgii Morozov (1867–1920), who systematically implemented Karl Möbius's term 'biocoenosis', Sukachev first suggested the term 'geotsenoz' ('geocoenosis') in 1942. It was meant to link the earth's surface with its inhabitants and abiotic environmental factors in a dynamic unit. However, in 1944, he changed geocoenosis into biogeocoenosis (BGC), implementing an integral connection with Vladimir Vernadsky's (1863–1945) concepts of the biosphere and the biogeochemical cycles. According to Sukachev, BGC came close to Tansley's notion of the ecosystem which also brings together a biocoenosis with its habitat (the ecotope). However, both terms were not used synonymously: as a more general term, ecosystem was not precise enough to classify the unit of nature itself, whereas the BGC, in accordance with Vernadsky's concept of 'living matter', did not include all abiogenic abiotic factors of the ecosystem. Also, the notions of 'facies' and 'landshaft', which were used by physical geographers, were discussed as similar conceptualization.
Vladimir Vernadsky's concept of living matter is central to his biogeochemistry, the science he founded. For several reasons, his original understanding of living matter is one of the most complex notions in the history of the life sciences. First, biogeochemistry is by definition an interdisciplinary enterprise that embraces biology, including evolutionary theory, geology, and chemistry, and combines them into a unique research program. Second, if understood in the original sense as used by Vernadsky, living matter is a concept built into idiosyncratic metaphysics constructed around the so-called principle of life's eternity. Third, the concept of living matter reflects the specificity of Vernadsky's sophisticated philosophy of science as he insisted that 'scientific thought' is a planetary phenomenon as well as a geological force. In our contribution, we will introduce Vernadsky's concept of living matter in its historical context. Accordingly, we will also give some chronology of Vernadsky's work related to the growth of his biosphere concept highlighting the 'Ukrainian' period as it is in this period that he intensively elaborated on the notion of living matter. This will be followed by his theory of living matter as it was formulated in his major works of the later period. We are going to locate the notion of living matter within Vernadsky's theoretical system and demonstrate that he regarded his theory of the living as an evolutionary theory complementary to that of Charles Darwin from the very beginning. Additionally, we will briefly present Vladimir Beklemishev's concept of 'geomerida' which he developed at approximately the same time as Vernadsky was elaborating on his 'living matter' to highlight the specificity of the latter's methodology.
The Soviet Union is remembered as a lab for socioeconomic changes on larges scales and environmental catastrophes: the Chernobyl disaster, the Aral Sea tragedy, and ecocide. However, little is known about the groundbreaking concepts and theories of Russian and early Soviet science which laid the foundation for systemic ecological thinking, environmental consciousness for nature conservation, and corresponding initiatives of the revolutionary years after 1917. The isolation of Eastern Europe that came as a result of Stalinism and the Cold War led to Soviet science developing its own scientific approaches and terminology during the 20th century. This does not only include ideological constructions and practices such as the pseudo-scientific Lysenkoism which outlawed genetics and led to disastrous effects on agriculture, the people, and the scientific community. Soviet science has also managed to continue and unfold the new concepts and interdisciplinary dynamics of the ecological turn on the threshold of the 20th century, a development which, at that time, was only sporadically noted in the West. In the context of its thematic focus on Eastern European ecological terminology, this issue discusses a selection of these concepts.
This article develops a novel reading of the threefold division of modes of historicization in Nietzsche's "Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life". It argues that Nietzsche's stance is closely matched, and indirectly responds, to specific features of the argument for progress in human history that Kant presents in "Conflict of the Faculties". Kant had hit upon interest, boredom, publicity, and forgetting as systematic problems for the philosophy of history, and Nietzsche's thought on history takes up these concerns. I argue that Nietzsche's reaction to these Kantian problems prompted him to subtly dissociate historicization and historicity. This manoeuver allowed him to counter the conceptual challenges Kant had established and to align his notions on history with those on ethical normativity in lived life, embracing what he elsewhere rejected as a “"moral ontology."
Anna Simon-Sickley zeigt in ihrem Beitrag die historischen Verflechtungen des Begriffs des 'Anthropozäns' mit den Diskursen von Energie und Entropie. Die Gefahren einer semantischen Rückprojektion reflektierend, kann sie deutlich machen, wie die heute 'totalisierende Metapher' des Anthropozäns bis in die Diskurse der Energie und Entropie zurückreicht. Energie erscheint dabei begrifflich als Einheitswährung, mittels deren Natur einzig als auszubeutende Ressource (fossile Brennstoffe) thematisiert wird. Mit der Thermodynamik legt die Umweltforschung den Schwerpunkt auf Effizienz, Produktion und Abfall. Das wachsende Bewusstsein, dass Energie Geschichte strukturiert, erweist sich als eine Perspektive, die für die Geschichtsschreibung des Anthropozäns von entscheidender Bedeutung geworden ist. Mit ihm soll sich das wissenschaftliche Thema des Menschen vom Kontext der Geisteswissenschaften zum Kontext der Wissenschaften verschoben haben. Menschliche Systeme und Kulturen werden im Anthropozändiskurs als geologische Kräfte verstanden und erscheinen als geochronologische Epochen naturwissenschaftlich exakt berechenbar.
Energy
(2020)
Der Beitrag zur Begriffsgeschichte von 'Energie' von Ernst Müller stellt neben der Ausstrahlung des Begriffs in verschiedene Wissenschaften vor allem heraus, wie sich dieses zentrale Konzept für die Physik eng verbunden mit dem - meist getrennt von ihm untersuchten - Begriff der (kapitalistischen) Arbeit herausbildet. Um 1900 erscheinen alle Bereiche des menschlichen und kulturellen Lebens auf ihre energetischen Grundlagen hin untersuchbar. Daran knüpfen fortschrittsorientierte Weltanschauungen ebenso an wie Ängste des 'fin de siècle' vor einer sterbenden Sonne und vor der Erschöpfung der menschlichen Arbeit.
Entropy
(2020)
Im Zentrum steht der Begriff der Entropie, den Christian Hoekema in seinem Beitrag untersucht. Seine Stichproben zur Freilegung der semantischen Schichten des Begriffs gehen von der Kontextualisierung der Thermodynamik in der britischen und deutschen industriellen Revolution aus. Wurde die Rezeption des Entropiebegriffs in Literatur und Philosophie bislang vor allem im viktorianischen Großbritannien untersucht, so richtet Hoekema seinen Blick auf den deutschsprachigen Kontext und damit auf drei der wirkungsvollsten Theoretiker der Moderne, auf Marx, Nietzsche und Freud. Ein weiteres Feld der Entropie-Aneignungen bilden die Informationstheorie und Kybernetik, die ebenso wie der Strukturalismus und die Systemtheorie den Prozess der Formalisierung der Sprache beschleunigt haben. Hoekema zeigt, wie tief stochastische Konzeptionen der Welt in unsere wissenschaftlichen und kulturwissenschaftlichen Praktiken und Theorien eingebettet sind. Seine letzte 'Autopsie' schließlich thematisiert die in den 1970er Jahren entstehende Forderung nach einem "vierten" Hauptsatz der Thermodynamik. Er beleuchtet damit einen Ansatz, der die Biosphäre und das Leben in Kategorien der Entropie beschreibt und der bis in heute virulente Debatten um das Anthropozän reicht.