Suchergebnisse

Narrative both as a phenomenon and practice is constituted in philosophical methodology and the humanities due to non-classical philosophical projects in the 20th century. Ultimately, it is the fundamental theoretical and methodological problematics, in which the word is considered as the source of cognition (E. Husserl, M. Heidegger, P. Ricoeur, G. Shpet), that become essential for the following comprehension of history, culture and science through the prism of narrative. Today, the problematics of the narrative is gaining more and more attention from representatives of different scientific disciplines (methodologists of science, psychologists, philologists, sociologists, jurists, historians, culturologists) who comprehend the influence of cultural factors on a scientist's motivation, on the ways of functioning and translation of knowledge in society and also on forming and saving the ecology of culture as an exceptional phenomenon, which emphasizes significance and diversity of the narrative approach in modern conditions. In this context, V. S. Stepin's philosophical and methodological developments, in particular, the ideas of "human-sizedness" and "human-sized system" ("human sized complexes") formulated by him take on a specific dimension. The article suggests that an appeal to narrative themes in a socio-cultural and ecological context makes it possible to fix the role and place of a person in human-sized systems, as well as to clarify the boundaries of these systems. It is precisely about the ecological culture of a technogenic civilization: civilization is impossible without culture, without value-based, aesthetic and humanitarian components. The narrative is included in the study of the human-sized system, since the person himself is immersed in the cultural situation of the narrative.

The modern philosophy of science pays special attention to the processes of social regulation of the researcher's activity. In fact, today, the epistemologist is approaching the boundaries of the sociology of science. Rather often, his reasoning turns out to be consonant with the concepts of specialists in the field of social management. But when the discussion begins on how to build a particular "program", sociologists, as a rule, will not include in their research the historical experience of knowledge. Nevertheless, both epistemologists and sociologists agree that meaningfulness forms the basis of the productivity of human activity (in any sphere). But how to achieve it? Under what social conditions does a person have the intent to think? The article actualizes the ideas of social programming aimed at creating such conditions. The author refers to the intellectual heritage of Russian philosophers and humanities scholars of the early 20th century, L.I.Petrazhitsky and Ya.E.Golosovker, to show the methodological effectiveness of their reasoning about "motivation" and "interest", as well as the fundamental ideological consonance of their philosophical research programs. Petrazhitsky speaks of motivation from the philosophical and legal fields, while Golosovker proceeds from the logic of the imaginary. But both of them understand the importance of story (narrative) for the emergence and cultivation of motivation and interest in knowledge.

"What is the meaning of a rational relationship to the nature"? This ecologically based and at the same time philosophical question is of particular importance to­day. After all, the future of mankind depends on the answer to it. The trajectories of our reasoning on this topic are determined by how we interpret the concept of "rational" and what characteristics we fill its content with. In the 1990s, in the Russian philosophy of science, it was precisely the concept of "rational­ity" that turned out to be at the forefront of discussion (some philosophers fo­cused on its logical components, others on historical ones). P.P. Gaidenko tried to find her own way. She proposed to look at rationality through the prism of a person's historically changing attitude to the world as to his immediate, and therefore concrete, environment ("life world"), the sphere of semantic certainty and symbolic comfort. From the point of view of P.P. Gaidenko, the types of sci­entific rationality change historically precisely because a person not only "cog­nizes" the world as something external, opposing him (as an object of consump­tion), he actually creates the surrounding "life" world and himself in it, and, what is especially important, does it conscious, i.e. expresses in the narration (telling, narrative) his attitude towards it. P.P. Gaidenko immerses the con­cept of "rationality" in the history of philosophy in order to show its specific nature, on the one hand, and to update the phenomenological interpretations of "rationality" in science, on the other. In this regard, the conceptual analysis of E. Husserl's ideas, undertaken in Gaidenko's works, is especially important. Such approach reveals the ecological potential of the very idea of distinction of types of rationality. The author believes that such a turn of the relevant topic is defiantly presented precisely in the epistemological narrative. The article notes that the current task of forming environmental consciousness in society thus ac­quires a theoretical personal dimension.

The intellectual heritage of thinkers of the Russian abroad today is increasingly attracting the attention of researchers of Russian philosophy of the first half of the 20 th century. Although the author clarifies, one can sometimes hear that we are talking about philosophers of a kind of "second place", since thinkers of the level of Berdyaev, Shestov, and Stepun are already quite fully and comprehensively represented in the relevant literature. The author of the article believes that it is not enough to limit oneself to only historical-philosophical academic interest in turning to the work of philosophers of this era. With great attention and breadth, sometimes anew, to the ideas of thinkers of the Russian abroad, we are forced to turn to the changing socio-spiritual situation of our time. The processes of globalization, the contacts of cultures, and civilizations make their heritage extremely relevant today. A striking example of this is the work of Pyotr Bitsilli. Based on several of Bitsilli's works, and in particular on his article Nation and Language, the author emphasizes the specific relevance of the methodological strategy of the philosopher and historian. In addition, the author reveals another specific aspect of Bitsilli's methodology — the interdisciplinary nature of his research. It is the breadth of intellectual horizons, as well as in-depth knowledge in the field of philosophy, history, and linguistics, that distinguish Bitsilli. His work is gaining particular semantic fullness at present, when the themes of the nation, language, culture, as well as their correlation, are given new perspectives in modern socio-cultural dynamics. The author of the article suggests that hermeneutic and narrative approaches allow them to acquire specific features in the philosophical interpretations of Bitsilli.

The article examines the process of transformation of the philosophical and sote­riological teachings of Buddhism in China as a result of the interaction of the Chinese and Indo-Buddhist civilizations. The substantiation is given that the transformation of Buddhism was a natural process of adaptation of Buddhism in China, which did not distort the original principles of maternal Buddhism. It rep­resented a logical process for the further development of Buddhism in the Far East. It is shown that Buddhism, which brought new soteriological and philo­sophical principles to this country, collided with traditional religious beliefs and a rich philosophical tradition, which necessitated its adaptation to the local men­tality and adaptation to the Chinese sociocultural bedrock. A comparative analy­sis of the religious beliefs of the Chinese and Indo-Buddhist religious principles, as well as the philosophical argumentation of Buddhism and traditional Chinese philosophy is given. The article notes the difficulties that Buddhism faced on its way, when entering the Chinese socio-cultural environment, as well as the objec­tive and subjective conditions that contributed to the spread of soteriological and philosophical attitudes in China. The canonical texts of Mahayana Buddhism are indicated, the content of which became accordant with the Chinese worldview and served for Tao Sheng to put forward his famous thesis about the instant at­tainment of Buddhahood, which served as the starting point for the development of a new soteriological trend in the Far East. The analysis of the process of adap­tation of soteriological principles to the Chinese mentality is given, the ontolo­gization of the philosophical attitudes of Buddhism as a result of its collision with the natural-philosophical teaching of Chinese philosophy is shown. It is substantiated that the formation of a new soteriological direction of Buddhism in China influenced the philosophical content of Buddhism, which determined the formation of a qualitatively new stage in the development of Buddhism in the Far East.

The intellectual heritage of the Russian philosopher and psychologist N.I. Zhinkin, turns out to be strikingly consonant with modern scientific research, in which scientists and philosophers are trying to identify the origins of possible syntheses and correlations in a wide variety of interdisciplinary interactions. The structure of modern science is changing, new forms of teamwork of scientists (collabo­rations) are being formed, requiring not only new methodological strategies in the study of applied problems, but also taking into account the scientific inter­ests of the participants. Interdisciplinary interactions do not develop on their own, but require mutual intellectual and existential efforts. And this means that the ways of expressing knowledge for each other must be adjusted. Thus, a form comes into the scientific consciousness, which was previously practically not taken into account in the communication of natural scientists: narrative. Under these conditions, Zhinkin's unique historical experience acquires special signifi­cance, to which science and art, phenomenology and psychology, life and knowl­edge are connected in a special way. The unifying principle in this experience of Zhinkin was, paradoxically, the cinema, in which the scientist saw the key to expanding cognitive aspirations and enriching the cognitive abilities of a per­son. Cinematography is not just a new art form, but it is a special technical form of the embodiment of the age-old aspirations of a person who is trying to express (repeat, reproduce) life in motion, to make "the former present". Zhinkin (fol­lowing his teacher G.G. Shpet) substantiates this idea of art as a special kind of cognition in the report Issues on Building a Scientific and Artistic Script, which was discussed on November 19, 1945 at the Moscow House of Cinema at the Section of the Scientific and Educational Film.

The article substantiates the idea that the ideas of W. von Humboldt had a sig­nificant impact on the formation of the thematic priorities of the Russian philo­sophical, scientific and humanitarian thought of the 20th century. In all spheres, one way or another concerning the nature of language and art, his reasoning turned out to be strikingly relevant and consonant with the intellectual searches of Russian philosophers of the last century. Thus, his concept of the internal form of language becomes a locus communis in their scholarly communication. In this article, the author outlines the themes that make it possible to reveal the artistic-aesthetic, hermeneutic, and epistemological significance of the intel­lectual continuity that goes from Humboldt to Russian thinkers. In the works of G.G. Shpet, P.A. Florensky, S.N. Bulgakov, and other philosophers of the first half of the twentieth century, dealing with the problems of language and the Word as unique humanitarian objects, one way or another, there is a connec­tion with Humboldt's reflections on art and language. It is noteworthy that in the second half of the twentieth century, the interest of Russian philosophers in the work of Humboldt did not weaken. This, in particular, is evidenced by the works of the representative of the philosophy of the Russian diaspora V.V. Weidle, in which the methodological transfer of Humboldt's ideas from the linguistic sphere to the artistic-aesthetic and theoretical-cognitive tradition of Russian philosophy is effected.

In modern ecologically oriented interdisciplinary research, there is an increased interest in narrative methodology, which allows us to take a new look at seem­ingly well-established ideas about the relationship between nature and man. Nar­ratives about how a person destroys the world around him, and how dangerous his active intervention in biogeocenoses (where the person himself is immersed as a biological being) is, allows modern scientists to direct their efforts to de­velop not only technological innovations, but also to take into account risk inten­sity. In addition, the narrative focuses scientists' attention on already existing en­vironmental problems. As a result of such a narrative study of the problems that arise in the process of technological transformations of the surrounding world, the ecological consciousness of the scientific community returns to the historical origins of the modern global anthropological crisis, and which means to cultural and historical reflection on its' own activities. The narrative as an element of the scientist's self-awareness contributes to the orientation of research towards the search for strategies for overcoming ecological deadlocks. For a clearer indi­cation of the cultural and historical role of the ecological narrative, the author of the article refers to case-studies. In this context not only the narratives of specific scientists (ecologists, biologists, biochemists, etc.), which include a reflexive autobiographical component, but also of collective subjects performing an act of narration (for example, the interactive project "365 days. Our environmental diary") are of particular importance.

Conversation of editor of the journal Voprosy Filosofii I.O. Shchedrina with Full Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor, Main Research Fellow at the Institute of Philosophy RAS, V.A. Lektorsky on the history of the creation of the Philosophical Encyclopedia (1960‒1970), on the formation of a profes­sional philosophical community in Russia, on the features of encyclopedic texts on philosophy, and a new project of the electronic Philosophical Encyclopedia.

"Export" of intellectual culture or "transfer of ideas" is one of the most urgent problems of philosophy. The trajectories of the movement of thought are difficult to trace in historical contexts. The archive of the epoch becomes the foundation of such historical and philosophical research and requires, among other things, an un­derstanding of the epistolary heritage of intellectuals. We present the correspon­dence of two Russian humanitarians, R.O. Jakobson and N.I. Zhinkin, who be­longed to the same "sphere of conversation" in the 1920s and who resumed communication in the 1960s. They wrote letters to each other from 1958–1979, ex­changing publications and opinions on various scientific and methodological prob­lems, as well as discussing the possibility of translating Zhinkin's "Mechanisms of speech" (1958). Their correspondence makes it possible to clarify the trajecto­ries and transformations of phenomenological ideas in Russian intellectual culture of the second half of the 20th century. Zhinkin's book "The Mechanisms of Speech" is acquiring no less significance today. At its foundation, the author puts the idea of communication, which will allow him to reach such a complex method­ological problem as an interdisciplinary synthesis. Jakobson appreciated Zhinkin's research because he believed that such phenomena as language, speech, and thought require a holistic structural approach, where joint physiological, psycho­logical and philosophical research can give excellent results.

Humanity today is undergoing serious changes affecting almost all spheres of life, the entire environment of its habitat. In scientific and philosophical circles, this state is defined as an anthropological crisis. One can argue about its depth and prospects, but in this article we want to draw attention to the phenomenological tools that are being developed nowadays to counter this crisis, to overcome its negative consequences. At the same time, the relevant issues will be developed in the article based on the material of urban expert practices. The focus is on the social and humanitarian potential and the effectiveness of expertise in the outlined anthropological crisis. From the point of view of the author, the current disintegration of the perception of the urban environment as a whole, its ontological regionalization is a kind of spiritual ecological crisis, in overcoming which expertise can demonstrate its real effectiveness not as an abstract reasoning, but concretely, in the organization of relevant intellectual practices. It is this approach that allows us to bring to philosophical grounds the discussion of the prospects for overcoming the anthropological crisis (or rather, the constructive role of expertise, synthesizing the perception of "regional ontologies" as an integral intellectual habitat). Thus, the author of the article, on the one hand, rely on ideas, on general grounds (primarily on those laid down by phenomenology); and on the other hand, thanks to expertise as a subject of analysis, he projects these ideas onto the real human environment (In this way fixing the prospects for overcoming the anthropological crisis).