The Turn to Relationality: Problem Statement and Its Origins

Abstract

In classical European metaphysics, and after it in anthropology derived from it, preference was given to the category of essence (substance) over the category of relation. At the end of the 19th – early 20th centuries this situation has drasti­cally changed due to the “turn to relationality” that took place in the fields of philosophy. As a result, recognising the constitutive role of relativity, the cate­gory of being – what it means to be – was reassessed. If before to be (being real) meant being substantial, then after the «turn» to be means to be in relation above all. The formation of the substantial language of describing the world and man began in classical antiquity, in the process of which Aristotle played a key role. At this stage relation is accidental and it doesn’t affect the identity of things. The ontology of substance had a number of consequences in the thinking about man that appeared to be autonomous, intelligible, disembodied, predetermined and static. In the 20th century such a conceptual complex turned out to be un­suitable for understanding the modern anthropological experience. Moreover, it evoked a whole range of socio-political restrictions and injustices from the very beginning.