Department of Political and Social Sciences Community after Totalitarianism. The Eastern Orthodox Intellectual Tradition and the Philosophical Discourse of Political Modernity Kristina Stöckl Thesis submitted for assessment with a view to obtaining the degree of Doctor of Political and Social Sciences of the European University Institute Florence, September 2007 EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE Department of Social and Political Sciences Community after totalitarianism. The Eastern Orthodox intellectual tradition and the philosophical discourse of political modernity Kristina Stöckl Thesis submitted for assessment with a view to obtaining the degree of Doctor of Political and Social Sciences of the European University Institute Examining Board: Prof. Dr. Peter Wagner, University of Trent and former EUI (Supervisor) Associate Prof. Dr. Evert van der Zweerde, Radboud University, Nijmegen (External Co-Supervisor) Prof. Dr. Bo Stråth, University of Helsinki and former EUI Prof. Dr. Alessandro Ferrara, University of Rome Tor Vergata © 2007, Kristina Stöckl No part of this thesis may be copied, reproduced or transmitted without prior permission of the author Stöckl, Kristina (2007), Community after Totalitarianism. The Eastern Orthodox Intellectual Tradition and the Philosophical Discourse of Political Modernity European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/11273 Stöckl, Kristina (2007), Community after Totalitarianism. The Eastern Orthodox Intellectual Tradition and the Philosophical Discourse of Political Modernity European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/11273 Stöckl, Kristina (2007), Community after Totalitarianism. The Eastern Orthodox Intellectual Tradition and the Philosophical IV Discourse of Political Modernity European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/11273 Abstract Starting with a definition of political modernity from the angle of its greatest trial, namely totalitarianism, this study pursues two questions: How to conceptualize community after the experience of totalitarianism? And, what can the Eastern Orthodox intellectual tradition contribute to this debate? In both parts of Europe, totalitarianism raised the same political philosophical challenge: How to conceptualize the relationship between the individual and community in the light of the absolute communization of society and the simultaneous absolute atomization of individuals which totalitarianism had brought about? In contemporary Western political philosophy, the reflection upon this experience has taken three principled directions: the unequivocal embrace and conceptual elaboration of liberalism for which the works of John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas are exemplary, the communitarian critique of liberalism for which the works of Charles Taylor and Alasdair MacIntyre are representative, and the postmodern critique which, most clearly expressed in the works of Jean-Luc Nancy, ties the question of community back to the singular human being. In the present study, I add to these three approaches a viewpoint which challenges the limits of all of them. Focusing on the works of Sergej Horužij and Christos Yannaras, I demonstrate how these authors, while accepting the lesson of totalitarianism, seek foundations for their conceptualization of community and human subjectivity in the spiritual and intellectual tradition of Eastern Christianity. My aim is to re-think the political problematic of modernity from the East and beyond liberal, communitarian and postmodern political philosophy in order to extend the interpretative space of political modernity, to sharpen the problematic of community and the human subject after the experience of totalitarianism, and to single out those elements which are especially pertinent for a post-totalitarian philosophy of community: the quality of freedom, the role of practices, and the meaning of tradition. Stöckl, Kristina (2007), Community after Totalitarianism. The Eastern Orthodox Intellectual Tradition and the Philosophical V Discourse of Political Modernity European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/11273 Stöckl, Kristina (2007), Community after Totalitarianism. The Eastern Orthodox Intellectual Tradition and the Philosophical VI Discourse of Political Modernity European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/11273 Acknowledgements I would like to thank, in the first place, Peter Wagner from the European University Institute/University of Trent and Evert van der Zweerde from the Department of Philosophy and the Centre for Eastern Christian Studies at Radboud University Nijmegen for their supervision and continuous support. Without their encouragement, intellectual guidance and critical comments this thesis could not have been written. I also want to thank Bo Stråth from the University of Helsinki, formerly Robert Schuman Centre and the History and Civilization Department at the EUI, for his friendly support, especially for making it possible to organize, in May 2006, a workshop on the topic of this thesis. I am most grateful to Sergej Horužij and Christos Yannaras for having, at different occasions, shared with me some of their ideas and reflections. I hope to have succeeded in approaching their texts with due respect and appropriate criticism. I also thank Sergej Čursanov, Aleksandr Dobrohotov, Nikolaj Gavrûšin, Andrej Kuraev, Ol'ga Sedakova and Aza and Elena Taho-Godi for their readiness to meet and speak to me in Moscow during the summer of 2005. For the impulses and valuable support they have given me during and even before starting this project, I would like to thank Alexander Agadjanian from the RGGU Moscow, Basilio Petrà from the Theological Faculty of Central Italy, Marcello Garzaniti from the University of Florence, Georgi Kapriev from Sofia University, Ilias Papagiannopoulos from Panteion University Athens, and Peter Zeillinger from the University of Vienna. My deepest gratitude for the emotional, intellectual and practical support during all these years goes, first of all, to my parents, Helmut and Hedi Stöckl, and to my friends, especially to Irena Bozadjieva, Odeta Barbullushi, Eva Bauer, Christine Reh, Volker Balli and Herwig Reiter. Grazie Andrea per la fiducia, l'allegria ed il coraggio nella vertigine di questi anni; e grazie anche a tutti gli amici della palestra +gaz. This is a text about community and about the uniqueness of the singular person. In memory of Juan Diego Canelón (1978-2004). Stöckl, Kristina (2007), Community after Totalitarianism. The Eastern Orthodox Intellectual Tradition and the Philosophical VII Discourse of Political Modernity European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/11273 Note on transliteration and translation The present study adopts the International Organization for Standardization Code ISO 9 (1995) for the transliteration of Cyrillic into Latin script. ISO 9 is a one-letter-to-one-letter transliteration. The letters я and ю are transliterated â and û, pronounced ya and yu. The letter х is transliterated h and pronounced as an aspirated kh. In the case of authors who belong to the second generation of the Russian diaspora, the transliteration into Latin script can be considered as established. Their names are therefore not adapted to ISO 9-style: ex. V. Lossky, Meyendorff, Schmemann The same applies to contemporary Russian authors who publish in German or English: ex. Agadjanian, Kharkhordin, Kostjuk. In the body of the text, titles and special terms are used in the transliterated form in italics and are translated in brackets when they occur for the first time. ex. Vehi (Signposts) Only English-language quotes are included in the body of the text. Full-text quotes from languages other than English are reproduced in the footnotes. Quotes in German and Italian are not translated, quotes in Russian are. All translations from Russian are, unless otherwise indicated, done by myself. The bibliography is divided into two parts, Latin-script and Cyrillic-script. In the references and bibliography, Cyrillic is used for Russian books and articles. A transliteration of the author's name and a translation of the title is provided in the first citation of each text and in the bibliography. Stöckl, Kristina (2007), Community after Totalitarianism. The Eastern Orthodox Intellectual Tradition and the Philosophical VIII Discourse of Political Modernity European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/11273 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION 1 I.1. TOTALITARIANISM AND THE QUESTION OF COMMUNITY IN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 3 I.2. THE EASTERN ORTHODOX SPIRITUAL AND INTELLECTUAL TRADITION 6 I.3. THE MODERNITY OF EUROPE 13 1.3.1. MODERNIZATION AS A PROCESS 14 1.3.2. MODERNITY AS A CONDITION 16 I.4. METHODOLOGY 22 II. THE INTERPRETATIVE SPACE OF POLITICAL MODERNITY 25 II.1. THE POLITICAL PROBLEMATIC OF MODERNITY 27 II.1.1. FREEDOM AND REASON 27 II.1.2. THE SITUATIVE DIMENSION OF THE POLITICAL 31 II.2. THE EXPERIENCE OF TOTALITARIANISM AND ITS IMPACT ON RIVAL INTERPRETATIONS OF COMMUNITY IN CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 34 II.2.1. THE LIBERAL APPROACH: THEORIZING THE POLITY 35 II.2.2. THE COMMUNITARIAN APPROACH: THEORIZING COMMUNITY 41 II.3.3. THE POSTMODERN APPROACH: THEORIZING THE HUMAN SUBJECT 49 II.3. THE LIMITS OF THE INTERPRETATIVE SPACE OF POLITICAL MODERNITY 54 III. TRADITION UNDER CONDITIONS OF MODERNITY: EASTERN ORTHODOXY 57 III.1. SETTING UP THE PAST: FROM BYZANTINE THEOLOGY TO RUSSIAN RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY 58 III.1.1. PATRISTIC TERMINOLOGY 59 III.1.2. RUSSIAN ORTHODOXY AND RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY 63 III.1.3. THE BREAKING-POINT OF 1917 69 III.2. CONFRONTING MODERNITY: THE ORTHODOX INTELLECTUAL TRADITION IN THE