The article analyzes the essence of the so-called "Linguistic Turn" in philosophy. The "Linguistic Turn" is considered in the context of the original model of evolutionary development. This model of development is based on the conception of inverse relations (internal contradictions), their development and resolution. During the progressive development of humanity, a series of revolutionary leaps (aromorphoses) takes place, one of them is being observed at the present time. Within those leaps, the accumulated systemic contradictions (inversions) are eliminated, but the prerequisites for new contradictions are created. The article demonstrates that the current stage of humanity development has been depicted and anticipated in the "Linguistic Turn".
Represents an attempt of philosophical analysis of the inversional relations in society. The author describes inversions of elements in the social hierarchy and postulates opposition of the order and inversion. While the order is the arranged social and economic hierarchy, the inversion on the contrary means functional revolution of subordinated elements or subjects. It is argued that the accumulation and development of inversional socioeconomic relationships lead to social turmoil. In this regard, a study of inversional relations obtains both social and wider philosophical meanings.
The article examines the current situation related to the prospects for further development of philosophical knowledge. It is pointed out that in the interpretation of a number of authors, philosophy is now actually reduced to the history of philosophy, turning into a purely historical discipline. Philosophical thought boils down to the analysis and systematization of what was created before, but not to the free search and creation directed to the future. The current situation has been created due to the practice in which every thought does not arise by itself, but is necessarily based on previously expressed thoughts. Philosophy deals mainly not with the actual, but with the previously described and interpreted reality. Therefore, it is almost impossible for modern philosophers to create on virgin soil. In addition, the amount of philosophical knowledge has reached such a volume that it is almost impossible to keep it within individual human memory. A significant part of philosophical research at present is actually aimed at studying the history of philosophy, while such works sometimes do not contain their own thoughts at all. This situation is considered in philosophy as a systemic inversion: the service, subordinate element of the system acquires a dominant meaning in it. Of course, the role of the history of philosophy in this discipline itself cannot be disputed. Philosophy is a kind of cumulative knowledge in which the past is inseparable from the present and the future. However, it is impossible to identify the history of philosophy with philosophy itself, because this approach closes any path leading to the future for philosophical thought. It is implied that philosophers from now on should be engaged exclusively in rethinking what was created earlier. The further development of philosophical thought with this approach is actually denied. However, Aristotle pointed out that even the complete denial of philosophy implies the use of philosophical argumentation, and therefore, willingly or unwittingly forces one to accept the existence of a philosophical discipline. The most important point is that philosophy is a discipline of interest not only for philosophers themselves. Philosophy is not a 'toy for philosophers', it is a cognitive tool that is in demand in all other areas of human knowledge. And since science and practice as a whole continue to develop, philosophy will remain in demand precisely as a living, developing discipline, and not as a frozen collection of accumulated thoughts.
The article presents a socio-philosophical analysis of such a phenomenon as a falsehood. The analysis of falsehood is based on the study of inverse relations in a hierarchical system. Since the lie itself can be considered as a hierarchical system, and in addition, it is implemented in a hierarchical social system, this approach is reasonable. Inversion is a form of system relations in which some lower element takes on a dominant value. This situation is observed, in particular, when a falsehood occurs. The ability of the system to form inversions depends on the organizational principles that determine the hierarchical subordination of elements in the system. System inversions occur when one organizational principle contradicts another. Inversion, which has developed in a hierarchical system, is an increase in internal contradictions that can destroy this system from the inside. The very fact of falsehood is generated primarily by the peculiarities of human thinking. A verbal thought is significantly different from a verbal utterance in the process of communication. What matters, however, is the strength and direction of these differences. The falsehood itself can be considered as a hierarchical system in which at least four organizational principles can be identified. The first such principle distributes statements according to the degree of their inconsistency with the real state of affairs. The second principle places statements in a hierarchy according to their degree of plausibility. The third principle is based on the degree of anti-sociality of the falsehood. Finally, according to the fourth principle, the hierarchical relationship between statements depends on whether the statement affects the reflection of facts or opinions. As a result of the interaction of these statements, inverse relations are formed in the system of falsehood.
The article deals with one of the particular applications of the concept of "simulacrum". The article also shows under which circumstances there was a need to use the concept of "simulacrum". In this case, the simulacrum is presented as a form of simplified and distorted perception of system objects. The main form of a system organization is a hierarchy. Hierarchical systems have the property of forming inverse relationships. Inversion occurs when a subordinate element of the hierarchy acquires dominant properties in it, but does not move to a higher position. This relationship is possible because there are several organizational principles in the system, and these principles collide with each other. A distorted perception of hierarchical systems occurs when inverse relationships are ignored. As a result, an image of the system is formed that is distant from reality (simulacrum). Over time, this image becomes less realistic, as changes occur in the real system caused by the development of inversions. Inversions are the cause of intra-system dynamics; they can lead a system object to decay and destruction. They also, under certain circumstances, contribute to the self-development of the system. However, if we consider only the simulacrum of this system, this ability to self-destruct remains unnoticed. The system's ability to develop itself remains unrecognized. This concept has become relevant as a result of inversion in the hierarchical system of human activity. The subordinate level of activity that is responsible for subject actions comes to the fore because of the increasingly technical aspects of human activity. The highest, symbolic level of activity moves to a subordinate position. The activity level responsible for subject actions also operates with signs and is responsible for using language as a sign system. Hence, there comes the need for the concept of "simulacrum", which is "the signifier without the signified".
This paper is a detailed review of the article by P.A. Orekhovsky and V.I. Razumov 'The Carnival Time: Russian Higher School and Science in the Postmodern Era'. The author considers the main problems shown in this article. In order to study these problems the author uses a method of analysis of inverse relations in hierarchical systems as a theoretical basis. System inversion is a form of relations in hierarchical systems, in which the lowest element receives the dominant value in the system, formally remaining in the same subordinate position. This situation can occur both in the social hierarchy and, for example, in the hierarchy of values. As a result of the developed inversion, contradictions accumulate in the system, which can lead to the collapse of this system or to a radical transformation. Such processes can be observed in modern education. This is why there is a priority of the visible over the existent, as it happens in the situation of 'carnival'. The article by P.A. Orekhovsky and V.I. Razumov examines the postmodern cultural context in which modern education functions. In this regard, the author presents an interpretation of the postmodern situation from the point of view of analyzing system inversions. The current state of the educational sector is determined by the resolution of inversion in the system of human activity. This inversion covers the instrumental and symbolic aspects of human activity. Due to this, there are features of educational activities related to the introduction of digital technologies, which P.A. Orekhovsky and V.I. Razumov pay special attention to. The authors of the article describe the status of the modern teacher's activity as 'spiritual prostitution'. Indeed, the activities of some teachers can be described by this term. However, this happens when both the teacher and the student experience a value inversion (as is the case with ordinary prostitution). Instead of this model of behavior, the author suggests another one, more worthy, – a 'soldier of culture'. 'Soldiers of culture' do not 'provide educational services', they have a mission to broadcast and enrich culture, which is the highest, terminal value.
