general godfather godfather in the zone is called the operational commissioner for escapes, and in the script there was even general sholokov, but clearly one should not even count on this name getting through, the minister of internal affairs nikolai anisimovich shcholokov was known in the country quite well, a wonderful phrase came out of the script: you sit down in the spring, you go out in the spring, you always have to.

if they had waited a little longer for his birth, severe collectivization would have already begun with the confiscation of all funds, they probably wouldn’t have given birth, and after four years there would have been no one, but if they had rushed a little, he would have been 17 years old in 1945, he would have been subject to the last military conscription, well, where else but in the infantry, in general, we all know well what the life of a villager in the war in this infantry in each . the village stands by an obelisk, where there are more surnames than households, it just so happened that he fell exactly into the gap, he survived, fortunately for us, because after all, this is a big national profit, when somewhere in the village of srostk, in the altai mountains, 5 hours drive to mongolia, a national genius is born, able to put words in a sentence in a special way and explain people to people. this is

a podcast of burning with fire and i am its host denis gorelov with a story about the ninety-fifth anniversary of the great man of our land shukshan vasily makarovich. every writer had his own basic theme. babel wrote about the jews, tolstoy wrote about the nobility, because he knew the common people poorly and in every possible way attributed to them some unfamiliar fictitious spiritual beauty. shukshin, on the contrary, is just for the common people. knew in every possible way disputed its apparent simplicity, and as for the complex ones, he all he wrote was that accountants are snub-nosed and governors are cunning, everyone already knows this without him, in fact, he really opened the door to village life, about which outsiders only knew that all the people there were singing and mowing all the time, and what prevents people from speaking out is the universal four-class...

is there any income in the neighboring village with meat or noodles, how much does it cost to take a taxi from the city and back, and what is in old money according to old money. with a price - this is already a month of work, so the phrase “overseas a heifer is half a half and a ruble transportation" was not invented with smiling communism, frankly speaking, they talk a lot about money in these parts, poor areas, because what else is there to talk about, secondly, they talk a lot about faith with a clear register of all the injustices to the church, this is in the films one constantly notices the half-submerged roof of a church in kolin krasnaya, somewhere on the horizon, or the too obvious, whitewashed church vaults in a village club, such a guy lives in the film, it is absolutely clear that all the disco there takes place in the building, in the former. church building, finally in the story about

how a strong man edior shurygin knocked down a belfry, which did not bother him, but nevertheless decided to show himself, to curry favor with the outside world. well, on the other hand , the same annaferazin with whom the novel “i came to give you freedom” begins. a lot of stories are written about vodka, the same vodka that the villagers constantly eat in their eyes, is constantly reproached, and reproaches, according to shukhshin, are 20 times more than actually drunk, but despite this, it constantly appears even among drivers, where 75, where 100 each,

either the horns were knocked off, or the fence was torn down by drunks, or the treasury machine was ruined, there are other habits, just in case, to be afraid of demagogues, in all showdowns,

to inflate one’s own price as much as possible, subconsciously feeling that the price is everything still small, always wear a hat, a hat is always considered a city hat. again , the habit of getting up at dawn, which rural writers are very fond of, eating the eyes of the city ones, they say they keep waking you up, but a normal person gets up before dawn. this was never typical for shukshinn, he himself wrote at night and slept during the day, the city itself sported him, so the habit of getting up with the roosters for him was never some kind of special village merit, even from the village.

also quite early, 45 years is not an age - he was not attributed to village prose and was not attributed quite rightly, because countryside writers, for all their talent, are people who tend to overeat, close off their inner village world, idealize it, don’t let urban ones in, and it’s scary to be proud from within, oh, that’s how spiritual we have cut, this was never typical of shukhshan, he valued the villagers. he loved, but he didn’t embellish it in any way, he didn’t harbor any malice towards the city people either, with real hatred, vasily makarovich fell in love with his class brothers, the former villagers, these urban settlements that just moved to the city, put on a hat and are now eating

their eyes to all the village characters, as undereducated, unfinished people, generally second-class people, here at them... i was angry at to the fullest, although frankly, let’s say, he belonged to their class, he died as a muscovite, he was very seriously wounded, of course, by tragedy.

among the city he demanded, quite deservedly, he had a wonderful phrase: you know how to rejoice, rejoice, you know how to please, rejoice, this is what he, in fact, did throughout his 45 years, until the very moment he began acting with bandarchuk, they fought for the homeland, for this , too, for this, too, as i already said, i was angry with him, but frankly speaking, vasily makarovich... did not take on this matter for some barchin training and so on,

he needed to learn from bonderchuk, the most important talent that sergei fedorovich possessed better not only than anyone in russia, but better than anyone in the world, it was not for nothing that they took him to film in etherlow, and he needed the ability to control huge masses of troops on the set, it was necessary to know who, what... division to assign the task through the commander, when speaking with all the troops, to whom to attach the least, to whom they would understand anyway, in general, it was a science, a special craft that bandarchuk mastered, and shukshin wanted to take over the time on the eve of the production, too, the filming was special in the steppe , there were no more or less decent hotels with hot water in sight, they settled in villages, they still decided...

floating in the soviet years, which is also , probably symbolically, considering that shukhshin taught in his school and was even the director of the school, this final landing of his on the boundary - at the end of the stove became the basis for two of his best monuments, one stands just like this, sitting in a bass voice on the territory.. . musfilm, another in splices on his homeland, and

i can only finish this whole story with the same phrase, that’s it, guys, it’s over, it was a podcast of woe with fire and i’m its host denis gorel with a story about the ninety-fifth anniversary of the last genius of russian literature, vasily makarovich shukshin, in 5 years will be 100 years old, we will meet again a. you can find all episodes of the mount by fire podcast on the channel one website. no evil can befall a good husband, our soul is immortal. after death there will be a reward for the good, and punishment for the evil. these words are inscribed on the scroll that the fresco holds in in the hands of the hero of our conversation today.

the fresco is located in the annunciation cathedral of the kremlin, and the hero's name is socrates. hello, dear friends, alexey pavlovich kozyrev, dean of the faculty of philosophy at moscow university, igor evgenievich surikov, chief researcher at the institute of general history of the russian academy of sciences. dear friends, i am vladimir ligoydov. let's talk about socrates. igor evgenovich, come on. let's start with how, in fact, this fresco, you wrote a lot about it, how it appeared in annunciation cathedral, that's what i know, that in general all these sayings are like socrates. there are other madritsas there, including the so -called external madritsas. in general, the sayings on it were written quite arbitrarily. and what was, so to speak, what is called the complex of the sayings of socrates, we will find in this no more these phrases than in any other thinker. well, especially since, as you know, socrates did not write philosophical texts, yes, they usually say, he did not write anything, not quite

so, yes, some texts, but not of a philosophical nature. well, at least it's very interesting anyway, maybe. let's get back to this, you know what the first question is, for you personally, even if we abstract ourselves from purely professional pursuits as much as possible, first of all, socrates is who, alexey pavlovich, meme, generally speaking, because that there is not only socrates, the ancient greek, but there is also the moscow socrates, nikolai fedorov, and the georgian socrates, mirab mamadashvili, that is, socrates was usually called a person who... prefers oral culture to written culture, who remained in culture as a storyteller, as an interlocutor, and not as the author of a multi-volume collection of works, and here, again, if we turn to one ancient russian text, here is gelyan mikhailovich prokhorov published, yes, about plato and pythagoras, plato

proclaimed in good words, but pythagoras preferred for the better to remain silent, because further. “socrates would have been flogged with a completely impossible chatter, well, in fact, socrates is, first of all, a figure, as they say now super-promoted, this is the most famous, certainly the most famous, the most famous of all the ancient greeks, even people who have never thought about antiquity at all, have no idea about it, still somehow heard something about socrates, about things ,

they say well, every schoolchild knows this, so in socrates it’s definitely not just any schoolchild, many preschoolers have heard and know that he was like that...” socrates, this is some kind of grandiose figure, it becomes that in fact he embodies and almost replaces all ancient philosophy, as perceived by non- specialists, at least. you know, here we then directly run into a question that i cannot get around, this is still the possibility of reconstruction in general, yes, to what extent is a historical socrates possible. you say in your wonderful monograph that you are leaving this question out of the equation, because it is, well, in some sense unsolvable, if i remember correctly, and i recently... leafed through william guthrie, yes, the author herself, as far as i understand, on today's full book on ancient philosophy, a multi-volume edition, and he, it seemed to me, was very optimistic, guthrie says that in general, this is how they describe him, this is how he was, he just seemed like this to plato, yes, to xenophon differently , and he, by the way,

gives an interesting quote from schweitzer, guthrie, where schweitzer says that this is our description of christ. much more reliable, since simple fishermen wrote, the difficulty with socrates is that outstanding people wrote, but plato alone is enough, that’s how it is between these two, actually designated positions, to what extent the problem of the historical socrates is solvable and to what extent it needs to be resolved, well, after all, since the same event, the trial of socrates, was described by both plato and xenophon, in general, these descriptions are different, but this.. . description of the same event, yes, we can verify that it really happened in history, and the trial, condemnation, and execution, the death of the righteous, at one time, when we read about polodius socrates with yuri anatolyevich shichalin in in ancient greek, he said the following phrase:

after all, this is the death of the righteous, in a sense this precedes the gospel, this precedes death. christ, and indeed, this is the fact that in culture there are such system-forming, meaning-forming events, socrates is probably not just a person, he is such a cultural event, but still , this is how resolvable, igor evgenevich, and is it necessary to try to resolve the question of the historical socrates, well, on socrates, let’s put it this way, maybe, how many people, so many views there can be, my view on this is the view historian, if we take it from the point of view of strict facts, then the life of socrates. she didn’t like to go out, she said that i was there, i was only interested in people, i was interested in nothing else, what the same nature, the same meadows or rivers would tell me, it is known that he took part in campaigns three times, showed

military valor, well, of course, especially well -known in the last period, he was very hard, yes, he was a hoplite, interestingly, what says about him as a person, well, not quite as poor half-hearted as he is portrayed, because in armies every warrior purchased armor and weapons at its own expense, the state did not supply it. now, the teaching of socrates from the point of view of strict facts is something elusive, i have already said that he, in the voices

of many, almost embodies the whole of philosophy, in fact, his enormous role in the development of philosophy cannot be overshadowed, even to the point that the entire history of philosophy is divided into before socrates and after socrates, but what exactly this role was, this is a very problematic point, let’s say, which would deserve a separate conversation, it is generally accepted that socrates...

these are the ideas of virtues, first of all wisdom, courage, justice, then for plato all things have ideas, even dirt, even

a poker, yes, that is, i think that it is in this is the departure from socrates that plato made, but in general, of course, so i understand that plato did not like the sophists so much, yes, that partly our attitude towards the sophists has been for a long time, so we looked at srism.

that, well, correct me if i’m not entirely accurate here, that this is the understanding of the famous expressions of the ancient greek know yourself, which are attributed to one of the seven wise men, yes, it was precisely from the time of socrates and thanks to socrates that it began to be perceived, just as we perceive it today, yes, by studying, well, your own, your personality, there, your inner world, pay attention, so to speak, to yourself, yes, but originally, it meant something completely different, oh, it was a famous saying, one might say, this... archaics are one of the main slogans of all life, gnotis outton, know yourself , it was it would even be knocked out at the entrance to the delhi temple, it belongs to one of the seven sages,

the sources there do not agree, well, this... it doesn’t really matter, initially in the self-archaic sense, what it means to know oneself, this is a kind of subordination of living beings, a certain subordination of the cosmos, at the top of this subordination are the gods, man, let’s say, occupies far from the highest position in this hierarchy, and he must remember this and not rise too high, not strive to become a god, knowing himself in essence speaking, to know your place in this world, it is not that high, to know your place, it ’s possible a little. "alexey pavlovich kozyrev, dean of the faculty of philosophy of moscow university, igor evgenich surikov, chief researcher at the institute of general history of the russian academy of sciences, i am vladimir ligoido, we continue, and if we return, perhaps not to the teachings of socrates, to his method, yes , then, probably, one also cannot help but say about the method that, while describing it, he recalled his mother, the old woman, yes, well..." in fact

maeftika, maeftika is the art of a midwife, that is, we need to help a person come to the truth, not even give birth to the truth, remember it, because according to socrates we already know everything, here are births, we just forgot, maybe something happened to us then a birth trauma, this is how i talk with a person, ask him some questions that lead to a search for truth, a person can himself and... prove the name of pythagoras and generally come to any knowledge, but that’s why socratic dialogue is an immortal tool not only knowledge, but education, we know not only the name of the father is socrates, phroniscus, yes, but also the mother, yes, and what is very rare for greek culture, usually, usually, let’s say, the greeks did not like it when their women were trash-talked, but here was a special case, this was a rare

woman. in a public profession, a woman is a prenatal grandmother, that is, as a midwife is now expressed, let’s put it this way, that is , usually women led a lonely life in a reclusive life, but when such a profession does not work out here, they inevitably had to go to other houses to help in childbirth and so on, that is, let's say this woman was known, because they have reached our time, well , we can probably assume that it somehow influenced little socrates, since there are so many years old, but in my opinion, this is what he says in all the dialogues , abbreviated by plato, that it is i who follow by his mother.

express his views, and he has a different method, namely this very oral, oral dialogue, in these dialogues, if by the way you read, it’s interesting, carefully read these dialogues, as socrates ordered them, well, the early dialogues, as plato predicted, plato's early theologians are considered relatively authentic in terms of conveying the view of socrates, here, say, the theme of the deologue takes some value, say wisdom or courage or piety, and never... in the end they do not find this definition, somehow they always seem to have something would interfere, so to speak, then a person needs to leave, then they search, search, and this is an interesting feature, socrates does not give recipes, he is the one who, as they say, excites the mind, stirs up the mind, for this, too, by the way, many do not loved, but the irony of socrates, of course, is a topic that cannot be avoided, not only moeutics, but irony and dialectics are also elements of the socratic method. moreover

, dialectics is understood not in the hegelian sense and not in the marxian sense, yes, as the unity of the struggle of opposites, but dialectics as the ability to conduct a conversation, as the ability to move through speech, put together statements, irony is also not mocking irony or even romantic irony, which brings signs of fatigue, disappointment in life, yes, the collapse of all hopes, and... this positive irony is also associated with speaking, but maybe with the fact that socrates is modeling some situations, such as, for example, in apology , all the inhabitants of athens improve young men, and i spoil them, corrupt them, and what about horses, horses, everyone improves or one rider, but still a rider makes a horse.

here is the same famous imagination: i don’t know anything, it’s just him, the only time he threw her away was when he was on trial, that’s when he spoke really proudly, and this, by the way, was also one of the factors that led to his to his to his condemnation, they saw for the first time

another socrates, proud, speaking with great self -esteem, showing, showing with all convincingness that he was not guilty of any of what he was accused of, that on the contrary, he brought us all the time only for the benefit when the time came for him.. socrates has such an account that one of the most prominent athenian orators of that time, lyseus, who wrote things for others, like a lagograph, so to speak, as if, he offered to write a speech for free before socrates, socrates said to me, my demonia, what demonia is, i hope. , we

today we’ll understand, my demon and my divine voice forbid me to accept such a favor from you, i’ll somehow cope with the speech myself, he said the speech in a completely different spirit from what was said then, he didn’t even try to survive, he writes directly , he would have been ready, he wanted to defend the truth at that moment, this has also become such a, well, cultural model, but you know, we recently discussed the genre of detective stories and detective stories, so to speak, with colleagues, and i remembered that someone from american translators at one time drew my attention to the fact that colombo, the hero of the series about columbo, is porfiry petrovich, from the crime of punishment, for some reason he walks around there and somehow everything is so humble, and when my colleague, a young philosopher, said this

, this is absolutely socratic irony, sometimes for this model of irony, even in our country, the word yurost is used in something, well , let’s say, he was a little yurt about something somewhere, let’s say, everyone knew that i was still a person, but he, i don’t know anything, and of course there are demons, daemonia, yes, probably the most accurate word would be socrates as a certain voice, well, daimonia is so scary, it’s just literally something divine, few people know, it’s like daimonion, few people know that the greek word is daimon. from which our later demon came, this is initially just one of the terms for denoting a deity, it’s almost the same as theos, let’s say, well, there are some nuances, but now i won’t go into them, that is, socrates said that i have there is a divine voice, as he said, for me it started with

childhood, suddenly i hear a certain voice, plato says this, which does not give me direct advice to do something, but when he wants to turn me away from something, i want it, he turns me away from xenophon, another famous student of socrates, who wrote about him he has a little memory.

yes, he walked, which should indicate, go there, do this, it is rather an inner voice, and maybe the voice of conscience, where a person knows virtue, listens to his own. the one who acts badly acts like this, that he does not know how he should act, well, exactly like that

same as the word nus, today we will translate as mind, spirit, after all, in our country the spirit and the mind are divided, the spirit is something religious, yes, and the mind is an intellectual, this is a science, so, in antiquity this is connected into one , socrates, in my opinion, is still standing somewhere, well, close to where...

this internal regulator listened to him too

, but so to speak, how could he adhere to the advice, and here, of course, i involuntarily remember the apostle paul and who will say then it doesn’t matter to me what you or other people think about me, how i judge me i don’t judge myself because the lord is my judge, yes , of course, well, you can see a certain connection here, well, at the same time, such a slightly protestant attitude, yes, back to antiquity. in relation to traditional greek religiosity, it is no coincidence that there is a version, i don’t know, maybe my interlocutor will correct me, that the real initiators of the trial were the zhiryans, that anytus grinds elikon - this is so extra, here, but really the priests saw in socrates a certain threat, danger in relation to traditional religion. today we gathered with thoughts. regarding socrates, igor evgenievich surikov, alexey pavlovich kozarev, i’m vladimir

ligoida, let’s continue, well, the death of socrates, i even read a piece to the children, when socrates refuses to escape and communicate with friends, why didn’t socrates take advantage of this opportunity, you know , in fact, if he had used it, it would have been completely distorted into an image, he is before this, if my homeland legally, according to the laws, condemned me to death , i ... must obey the laws of my homeland, excuse me, but he was not judged by this undeservedly, it turns out that we ourselves begin to judge the law of our homeland, socrates would say, it turns out that everyone will decide which law is true and which is false, then the same sophistical subjectivism will come out, no, as they say, obey the laws of your homeland in everything , if she tells you to die, then die. alexey pavlovich, i think that the answer here is in aristotle’s definition of man, a social animal, dzon politikon.

years, this is already a decent age, this does not mean that people did not live longer, they lived according to we lived for 90 years, but at this age sometimes there arises... and some kind of weariness from life, maybe it was such a completely conscious move to challenge one’s city, which at the same time was supposed to make people better. remember how gogol wrote in his will: there is no need to erect monuments to me, but let everyone become better after my death, but

it seems oksakov said that gogol has completely gone crazy, he calls for people to become better. him and here is socrates, who did not know christ, he was a christian before christ, but he did not knew christ, nothing else and could not offer his inhabitants how to become better about his name, and his death was, in a sense, such a performance that was supposed to attract the attention of the inhabitants of athens to virtue, i wish we still don’t have much time left, i want to very briefly, maybe still return to the topic. plato and aristotle, after all, christianity had a different attitude towards the experience of antiquity, and not only positively, that’s what this assessment is connected with, what does it mean? and by the way, this quote that we started with, yes, which

scroll, despite the fact that, well, it’s hardly a quotation, so to speak, yes, it in some sense reflects socrates’ ideas on the one hand, and on the other. they lead precisely to this, yes, probably, well, i think, for justin, the philosopher, justin, the martyr apologist of the 2nd century, the main thing here was that these were people who knew how to live and lived a virtuous life, but it’s unlikely that they were invested here the idea of ​​the similarity of metaphysics or world order, but these are people who followed virtue, although they did not know about eternal life, reward, although socrates in general...

says, well, execute me, after death there will be one of two things, some say that there really is an afterlife, others say that it’s just a cessation of existence, well, if there’s a cessation of existence, then i’ll just kind of fall asleep and not to wake up, it’s okay, but if there is a huge world, then i will communicate there with the great denials of the past and how much pleasure i got, that is, then he still doubts one thing, now on the last day of everything he speaks firmly, apparently while he was sitting together in prison, he changed his mind a lot, clearly there was nothing to do, he even began to write poetry, he probably changed his mind a lot , including about life, about the soul and... he already firmly states that the soul is immortal and gives a number of beautiful, by the way, evidence does not contain evidence of the immortality of the soul, of course, not everyone may be advised to read this, it’s difficult, so he already says: that’s why i’m definitely not afraid of death anymore, because crito also says, that’s when to bury you, bury me, no, he

said this: bury if you catch , if they i’ll run away from you, let’s put it this way, that is, he is firmly convinced that he is simply moving into a new existence, moreover, from a sicker one to a healthier one. nikolaevich radeshchy on his treatise on man and his mortality and immortality.