Page 52 - 6241

the Pedagogical Institute in Prague. He then worked at the University of Halle until
1945 and, after the war, taught at such leading universities as Marburg (1945-
1951) and Harvard (1951-1956). In 1956 he returned to Heidelberg, where he lived
until the end of the day. Since 1970 he has been Honorary Professor at the

University of Cologne. In Halle, Marburg and Heidelberg, D. Chyzhevsky founded
centres for Slavic studies.
Among the most significant themes of D. Chyzhevsky's scientific research is

the cultural phenomenon of the Slavic, in particular Ukrainian Baroque; G. Hegel's
influence on Slavic science and, more broadly, on Germanic philosophy on Slavic
culture; mysticism in the works of G. Skovoroda, M. Gogol, F. Dostoevsky; study

of the history of Ukrainian philosophy and literature.
In his scientific work, D. Chyzhevsky paid considerable attention and
specifically to the culturological problems. Thus, in the publication "The

Beginning and End of New Ideological Epochs", he explores the diverse nature of
the formation of ideological, actual cultural and historical epochs. The author
comes to the conclusion that "the beginning" of cultural epochs is of three types.
The first type of the beginning of the era is "sudden", which begins with one

thinker or one product, speech, etc., having the character of the manifesto. New
ideas and thoughts are now perceived as completely new and revolutionary. The

second type of the beginning of the cultural era is the beginning of almost
imperceptible, such that it was preparing for a long time and does not have a clear
reference point. The third type is the emergence of a certain ideological,
ideological program, appealing to some more ancient tradition.

The end of the same cultural-historical epochs, D. Chyzhevsky notes, is
never sudden. This is obstructed by the cultural tradition: cultural facts are hiding,
kept in tradition, which largely resembles the mechanism of individual human

memory. Therefore, the beginning of a new era in the worldview of culture is not
at the same time the end of the previous day. The tradition maintains the spiritual
content of the previous day, first as a whole, and later in its individual elements.

Consequently, Chyzhevsky concludes, "... spiritual periods have beginning, but
have no end." In this case, there is no reason to divide culture into "epochs",
"periods", etc.

Chyzhevsky believes that in cultural studies it is necessary to proceed not
from the historical position of the restriction and the definition of extreme
chronological fragments of the phenomenon, but from the elucidation of the
"maximum" intensity characteristic of a certain type of culture. "... Research in the

field of the science of spirit and culture should go not in width, but in height or
depth." D. Chyzhevsky sees the very first task of science on the culture is to
establish a certain cultural phenomenon, the definition of "top" of the development

51