Horror as a Fundamental Philosophical Category in Dostoevsky’s Work (Based on the Novel The Double)

JATS XML:

BibTEX:

Research Information Systems Citation Format:

Download:
PDF
Author: Ksenia N. Kholodnova
Information about the author:
PhD in Philosophy, Junior Researcher, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Lomonosovsky Ave., 27, r. 4, 119234 Moscow, Russia.

https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7336-0230

E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
For citation:
Kholodnova, K.N. “Horror as a Fundamental Philosophical Category in Dostoevsky’s Work (Based on the Novel The Double).” Dostoevsky and World Culture. Philological journal, no. 2 (30), 2025, pp. 29–45. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2025-2-29-45
Received: 11 June 2024
Approved after reviewing: 24 Jan. 2025
Published: 25 June 2025
Issue: 2025 no. 2 (30)
Department: HERMENEUTICS. SLOW READING
Pages: 29-45
DOI: Visit Website
EDN:
https://elibrary.ru/GGBKXK
UDK: 821.161.1.0+141.319.8+82.0
BBK: 83.3(2Рос=Рус)+87+87.5+87.52+83
Publication Type: Research Article
Keywords: horror, philosophical anthropology, “The Double,” Fyodor Dostoevsky, “the dual man,” Russian philosophy, man.
Abstract: When it comes to horror as a fundamental philosophical category, it is important to consider a number of aspects. Firstly, the difference between fear and horror is not quantitative, i.e. it is wrong to perceive horror as an accumulation of fear. Turning to such philosophers as Kierkegaard and Heidegger, who paid attention in their works to the distinction between fear and horror, we will see that the former always has a definite basis, i.e., it will be rational and motivated, while the latter will not have a specific source as a reason and, therefore, will be irrational in nature. Secondly, European philosophy conceptualizes horror as the result of the impact of the world on humanity. Accordingly, within the framework of Western philosophy, horror has an ontological dimension and is embedded in the general trend of deanthropologization of thought. The Russian intellectual tradition perceives horror as the result of the encounter with oneself, which means that it becomes legitimate to talk not only about the axiological dimension of horror, but also about its anthropologization. Analyzing the double in Dostoevsky, we conclude that the horror of a split person is caused by the fact that, as a result of turning to themselves, they are faced with their double, with their own non-existence and with the absence of their place in the world. Being terrified of themselves as something that is not built into the order of the present, a person gropes for the truly human in themselves, i.e., what allows us to declare their ontological otherness in relation to the world. In addition, this will entail a new understanding of the double as a phenomenon.

References

1. Berdiaev, N.A. O naznachenii cheloveka. Opyt paradoksal’noi etiki [About the Destiny of Man. An Experiment of Paradoxical Ethics]. Moscow, AST; Khranitel’ Publ., 2017. 444 p. (In Russ.)

2. Varava, V.V. Advokat filosofii [Advocate of Philosophy]. Moscow, Eterna Publ., 2014. 428 p. (In Russ.)

3. Girenok, F.I. “Krizis sub’’ekta” [“The Crisis of the Subject”]. Literaturnaia gazeta, no. 34 (6522), 2015, 2 Sept., pp. 1. (In Russ.)

4. Grishin, A.A. “Nravstvennoe naznachenie uzhasa” [“The Moral Purpose of Horror”]. Nauchnye vedomosti. Seriia: Filosofiia. Sotsiologiia. Pravo, no. 20 (217), issue 34, 2015, pp. 128132. (In Russ.)

5. Dekart, R. “Strasti dushi” [“The Passions of the Soul”]. Sochineniia v 2 tomakh [Works in 2 vols], vol. 1. Moscow, Mysl’ Publ., 1989. 654 p. (In Russ.)

6. Dilaktorskaia, O.G. Peterburgskaia povest’ Dostoevskogo [Dostoevsky’s St. Petersburg Story]. St. Petersburg, Dmitrii Bulanin Publ., 1998. 348 p. (In Russ.)

7. Dostoevskii, F.M. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii: v 30 tomakh [Complete Works: in 30 vols]. Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1972–1990. (In Russ.)

8. Evlampiev, I.I. Filosofiia cheloveka v tvorchestve F. Dostoevskogo (ot rannikh proizvedenii k “Brat’iam Karamazovym”) [The Philosophy of Man in Dostoevsky’s Works: From Early Works to the Brothers Karamazov]. St. Petersburg, Izdatel’stvo Russkoi khristianskoi gumanitarnoi akademii Publ., 2012. 585 p. (In Russ.)

9. Ivanov, G.V. “Strakh pered zhizn’iu. Konstantin Leont’ev i sovremennost’” [“Fear of Life. Konstantin Leontiev and Modernity”]. K.N. Leont’ev: Pro et contra: Antologiia: v 2 knigakh [Konstantin Leontiev: Pro et Contra: An Anthology. In two books], book 2: Lichnost’ i tvorchestvo K. Leont’eva v otsenke russkikh myslitelei i issledovatelei posle 1917 g. [Konstantin Leontiev’s Character and Work in the Works of Russian Thinkers and Researcher after 1917]. St. Petersburg, Izd-vo Rus. Khristianskogo gumanitarnogo in-ta Publ., 1995, pp. 187–196. (In Russ.)

10. Kierkegaard, Soren. Poniatie strakha [The Concept of Fear]. Trans. by N.V. Isaeva, S.A. Isaev. 2nd Edition. Moscow, Akademicheskii proekt Publ., 2014. 224 p. (In Russ.)

11. Kierkegaard, Soren. Strakh i trepet [Fear and Trembling]. Trans. by N.V. Isaeva, S.A. Isaev. 6th Edition. Moscow, Akademicheskii proekt Publ., 2022. 154 p. (In Russ.)

12. Mochul’skii, K.V. Gogol’. Solov’ev. Dostoevskii [Gogol. Solovyev. Dostoevsky]. Ed. by V.M. Tolmachev. Moscow, Respublika Publ., 1995. 607 p. (In Russ.)

13. Otto, Rudolf. Sviashchennoe. Ob irratsional’nom v idee bozhestvennogo i ego sootnoshenii s ratsional’nym [Sacred. About Irrational in Divine Idea and Its Correlation with the Rational]. St. Petersburg, ANO Izd-vo S.-Peterb. Un-ta Publ., 2008. 272 p. (In Russ.)

14. Podoroga, V.A. Rozhdenie dvoinika. Plan i vremia v literature F. Dostoevskogo [The Birth of the Double. Plan and Time in Dostoevsky’s Literature]. Moscow, RIPOL klassik; Pangloss Publ., 2019. 418 p. (In Russ.)

15. Rozanov, V.V. Perepiska K.N. Leont’eva i V.V. Rozanova (Pis’ma K.N. Leont’eva s primechaniiami V.V. Rozanova) [The Correspondence between Konstantin Leontiev and Vasily Rozanov. (Letters from K.N. Leontiev with Notes by V.V. Rozanov)]. Available at: http://az.lib.ru/r/rozanow_w_w/rozanov_leontyev_perepiska.shtml (Accessed 22 May 2024). (In Russ.)

16. Rostova, N.N. “‘Khorror’ v sovremennoi filosofii: mezhdu antropologizatsiei i deantropologizatsiei diskursa” [“Horror in Modern Philosophy: Between Anthropologization and Deanthropologization of Discourse”]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriia 7. Filosofiia, no. 1, 2020, pp. 44–60. (In Russ.)

17. Florovskii, G., prot. Puti russkogo bogosloviia [The Ways of Russian Theology]. Preface by N. Losskii. Moscow, Institut Russkoi tsivilizatsii Publ., 2009. 848 p. (In Russ.)

18. Heidegger, Martin. Bytie i vremia [Being and Time]. Trans. by V.V. Bibikhin. Kharkov, Folio Publ., 2003. 503, [9] p. (In Russ.)

19. Heidegger, Martin. Chto takoe metafizika [What is Metaphysics?]. Available at: http://www.bibikhin.ru/cto_takoe_metafizika (Accessed 30 May 2024). (In Russ.)

20. Khapaeva, D.G. Koshmar: literatura i zhizn’ [Nightmare: Literature and Life]. Available at: https://litmir.org/books/nauchnye-i-nauchno-populjarnye-knigi/kulturologiya/199037-dinaxapaeva-koshmar-literatura-i-zhizn.html (Accessed 30 May 2024). (In Russ.)