| Abstract: | To help the reader understand the strangeness and absurdity of the tradition of ignoring the work of Shpet, I shall start with his reflections on the classic problem of thought and word, with which all the psychologists mentioned above have dealt. When he says that the cause of thought is sensuously given, Shpet defines it as a springboard from which we vault to the "pure object": Having pushed off the springboard, thought must not only overcome material resistance but also use it as a supporting medium. If it had to drag along its entire corporeal veshchnyi] baggage, it would not go far. But, by that same token, it would not survive in an ideal environment, whether in an absolute vacuum or in absolute formlessness, i.e., without expedient adaptation of its form to that environment. Its image, form, appearance, and ideal flesh are the word. |
