The methodology of cultural studies: nomadology and the non-linear being of man

Tatiana Uvarova, Oksana Gosteva, Svitlana Pohasiy
{"title":"The methodology of cultural studies: nomadology and the non-linear being of man","authors":"Tatiana Uvarova, Oksana Gosteva, Svitlana Pohasiy","doi":"10.55383/amtap.2023.1.19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article updates the problem of cultural studies as a specific field of humanitarian knowledge. It has been stated that, with a certain similarity in the understanding of the ontology of culture (and in relation to the general boundaries of the problem field of humanitarian knowledge), the knowledge about various aspects of the cultural life of man and society is separated by the existing boundaries of the scientific competence of various social and human sciences, which contradicts the process of understanding the integrity of the cultural phenomenon itself. Cultural studies, learning culture as a whole, already by virtue of this circumstance cannot be a humanitarian science „among others”. This circumstance complicates the process of self-determination of cultural studies as an independent science (including the reflection of its method). Despite the fact that the emphasis on cultural studies as a specific area of theoretical knowledge is recognized by the Humanities, however, the problem of identifying the scientific method, which is associated with the final legitimization of this field of knowledge of culture, has not been sufficiently convincing yet. It is concluded that the Humanities are in dire need of rigor and improvement of their scientific status. With the exception of the descriptive part in these sciences, everything else remains the opinion of individual authors.","PeriodicalId":518989,"journal":{"name":"Studiul artelor şi culturologie: istorie, teorie, practică","volume":"813 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studiul artelor şi culturologie: istorie, teorie, practică","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55383/amtap.2023.1.19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article updates the problem of cultural studies as a specific field of humanitarian knowledge. It has been stated that, with a certain similarity in the understanding of the ontology of culture (and in relation to the general boundaries of the problem field of humanitarian knowledge), the knowledge about various aspects of the cultural life of man and society is separated by the existing boundaries of the scientific competence of various social and human sciences, which contradicts the process of understanding the integrity of the cultural phenomenon itself. Cultural studies, learning culture as a whole, already by virtue of this circumstance cannot be a humanitarian science „among others”. This circumstance complicates the process of self-determination of cultural studies as an independent science (including the reflection of its method). Despite the fact that the emphasis on cultural studies as a specific area of theoretical knowledge is recognized by the Humanities, however, the problem of identifying the scientific method, which is associated with the final legitimization of this field of knowledge of culture, has not been sufficiently convincing yet. It is concluded that the Humanities are in dire need of rigor and improvement of their scientific status. With the exception of the descriptive part in these sciences, everything else remains the opinion of individual authors.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
文化研究的方法论:游牧学与人的非线性存在
本文更新了作为人道主义知识特定领域的文化研究问题。文章指出,由于对文化本体论的理解具有某种相似性(以及与人道主义知识问题领域的一般界限有关),有关人类和社会文化生活各个方面的知识被各种社会科学和人文科学的现有科学能力界限所隔离,这与理解文化现象本身的完整性的过程相矛盾。文化研究作为对文化的整体性研究,在这种情况下已经无法成为 "其他科学 "中的 "人 道科学"。这种情况使得文化研究作为一门独立科学的自我决定过程(包括对其方法的反思)变得更加复杂。尽管强调文化研究是一个特定的理论知识领域得到了人文学科的认可,但是,与这一 文化知识领域的最终合法化相关的科学方法的确定问题还没有足够的说服力。结论是,人文学科亟需严谨和提高其科学地位。除了这些科学中的描述性部分外,其他所有内容都是作者个人的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Prolegomena about the cluster-network model organization of the educational system in musical academies of Ukraine The ploughman and the pain of the soil – the exegesis of a Romanian folkloric motif The methodology of cultural studies: nomadology and the non-linear being of man The value of lithography in artistic creation Formation of the genre of clavier sonata in Austria: sonatas by Leopold Kozeluch (from the music collection of the Razumovskys)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1