Search results

In the given article, the author tries to defi ne historicism as an eff ective scientifi c principle in the fi eld of humanities, namely in the modern sociology of science. Trying to solve this task, the author focuses his attention on the B. Latour and G. Harman's discussion on the essence of material objects. Analyzing their positions, the author states that despite initially diff erent philosophical attitudes, both thinkers consider the subject of their research in a historicist way, that is, as dynamic and changeable in the course of the time. This way of thinking, in turn, forces them to solve their program tasks, using the instruments which were developed in the frame of classical historicist thought. So B. Latour chooses to use the historicist methodology and G. Harman, in turn, reproduces its specific ontology. Taking into consideration the results of the study and opinions of domestic and foreign researchers, the author concludes that despite the destructive criticism of postmodernism, historicism still remains a kind of organizing principle in humanities, which doesn't only set the context of modern discussions, but also forms prospects for further development.