Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-9-45-49
Mustafa I. Bilalov
The article provides an overview of the primary author’s ideas and publications on forming the concept of “cognitive culture”. It appears as the author’s concept with some components of logically interrelated issues of understanding the subject of cognition, types, genera, and types of cognitive culture, and its relationship with the problem of truth. Pointing to his numerous publications, the author argues that refining subjective metrics in modern science and culture is difficult both by the complexity of isolating individual consciousness from the collective one and by the existentialization of subjective operations in which human interest is maximized. The author’s work traces the dynamics of the subject in its epistemological and epistemological sections from “elimination of the subject” to “death of the subject”. According to the author of the article, classification into rational and irrational types of cognitive culture is productive in clarifying the connection between truth and knowledge, substantiating the idea of inquiring and extra-knowing existence of truth, which is essential for defining truth. Identifying the complex influence of subjective levels, operational mechanisms, and their creative products on concrete-historical interpretations of truth allows us to establish the correspondence of a particular kind of cognitive culture to the general concepts of truth. As a result, the philosophical and conceptual understanding of truth is quite correctly admissible by the methodology of the polylogue of cognitive cultures.
{"title":"Cognitive Culture and Notions of Truth","authors":"Mustafa I. Bilalov","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-9-45-49","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-9-45-49","url":null,"abstract":"The article provides an overview of the primary author’s ideas and publications on forming the concept of “cognitive culture”. It appears as the author’s concept with some components of logically interrelated issues of understanding the subject of cognition, types, genera, and types of cognitive culture, and its relationship with the problem of truth. Pointing to his numerous publications, the author argues that refining subjective metrics in modern science and culture is difficult both by the complexity of isolating individual consciousness from the collective one and by the existentialization of subjective operations in which human interest is maximized. The author’s work traces the dynamics of the subject in its epistemological and epistemological sections from “elimination of the subject” to “death of the subject”. According to the author of the article, classification into rational and irrational types of cognitive culture is productive in clarifying the connection between truth and knowledge, substantiating the idea of inquiring and extra-knowing existence of truth, which is essential for defining truth. Identifying the complex influence of subjective levels, operational mechanisms, and their creative products on concrete-historical interpretations of truth allows us to establish the correspondence of a particular kind of cognitive culture to the general concepts of truth. As a result, the philosophical and conceptual understanding of truth is quite correctly admissible by the methodology of the polylogue of cognitive cultures.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134890557","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-10-169-180
Liubov B. Karelova
The ideas of Nishida Kitaro, in particular his concept of the “logic of place,” had a significant impact on many Japanese philosophers of the 20th century, and not only those who belonged to the Kyoto school. We can say that the very category of place has acquired the status of a universal cognitive (ontognoseological) metaphor, widely used in a variety of contexts. Nakamura, like many other modern Japanese philosophers, uses the concept of place as a frame that allows us to view reality as a dynamic network of multi-level connections and interactions. The works of the Tokyo philosopher Nakamura Yujiro, whose scientific activity took place in the last third of the 20th – early 21st centuries, is a vivid example of the further development of the theory of place at the modern level, confirming its heuristic possibilities. The article is devoted to the analysis of Nakamura’s views in his books Topos Theory, Common Sense Theory and Predicative World and Systems, which demonstrate the effectiveness of the use of topological metaphors in various fields of both natural science and philosophy, contributing to the development of modern ontological and epistemological theories. The conducted research demonstrates the potential of Asian philosophical traditions, which should be taken into account while solving the problems facing modern philosophy.
{"title":"Nakamura Yujiro’s Concept of “Place”","authors":"Liubov B. Karelova","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-10-169-180","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-10-169-180","url":null,"abstract":"The ideas of Nishida Kitaro, in particular his concept of the “logic of place,” had a significant impact on many Japanese philosophers of the 20th century, and not only those who belonged to the Kyoto school. We can say that the very category of place has acquired the status of a universal cognitive (ontognoseological) metaphor, widely used in a variety of contexts. Nakamura, like many other modern Japanese philosophers, uses the concept of place as a frame that allows us to view reality as a dynamic network of multi-level connections and interactions. The works of the Tokyo philosopher Nakamura Yujiro, whose scientific activity took place in the last third of the 20th – early 21st centuries, is a vivid example of the further development of the theory of place at the modern level, confirming its heuristic possibilities. The article is devoted to the analysis of Nakamura’s views in his books Topos Theory, Common Sense Theory and Predicative World and Systems, which demonstrate the effectiveness of the use of topological metaphors in various fields of both natural science and philosophy, contributing to the development of modern ontological and epistemological theories. The conducted research demonstrates the potential of Asian philosophical traditions, which should be taken into account while solving the problems facing modern philosophy.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134890771","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-1-186-197
T. Skorokhodova
Indian Rammohun Roy and Russian Pyotr Tchaadaev are juxtaposed as cross-cultural philosophers in Modern social thought. Being at the crossroads of the West and the East cultures in their countries, they have demonstrated the special resemblance in their worldviews and paradigm of thinking. Based on comparative analysis of philosophers’ existential circumstances and texts, the author describes them as ‘problematic thinkers’ (M. Buber) who destruct quietness in their societies, form the problematic field of social thought and philosophy in the epoch of modernization, and create grounds for the self-understanding by Indian and Russian societies. The conventional description of paradigm of thinking by Rammohun Roy and Pyotr Tchaadaev is presented in the article. The universalistic approach is laid down in the paradigm ground; it permit to search for a unity and universality in diversity of natural and human worlds. The unity discovers through relation of their own social reality with the Other one (this role plays the West). Problems are raised and resolved in special trajectory “understanding of the Otner – thinking on their Own – a creation of some project of Eastern – Western synthesis”. Owing to the paradigm as well as the raised themes R. Roy and P. Tchaadaev have created the epochs in the history of thought and culture in India and Russia respectively.
{"title":"Rammohun Roy and Pyotr Tchaadaev: Philosophers at the Crossroads of Western and Eastern Cultures","authors":"T. Skorokhodova","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-1-186-197","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-1-186-197","url":null,"abstract":"Indian Rammohun Roy and Russian Pyotr Tchaadaev are juxtaposed as cross-cultural philosophers in Modern social thought. Being at the crossroads of the West and the East cultures in their countries, they have demonstrated the special resemblance in their worldviews and paradigm of thinking. Based on comparative analysis of philosophers’ existential circumstances and texts, the author describes them as ‘problematic thinkers’ (M. Buber) who destruct quietness in their societies, form the problematic field of social thought and philosophy in the epoch of modernization, and create grounds for the self-understanding by Indian and Russian societies. The conventional description of paradigm of thinking by Rammohun Roy and Pyotr Tchaadaev is presented in the article. The universalistic approach is laid down in the paradigm ground; it permit to search for a unity and universality in diversity of natural and human worlds. The unity discovers through relation of their own social reality with the Other one (this role plays the West). Problems are raised and resolved in special trajectory “understanding of the Otner – thinking on their Own – a creation of some project of Eastern – Western synthesis”. Owing to the paradigm as well as the raised themes R. Roy and P. Tchaadaev have created the epochs in the history of thought and culture in India and Russia respectively.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68531016","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-1-198-208
Andrei Yu. Filippov
The article is devoted to the influence exerted by the imyaslav disputes on the formation of Russian religious metaphysics. The declared theme is considered on the example of philosophical projects of two authors: V.F. Ern and A.F. Losev. The attitude of these thinkers to the controversy around the Name of God is placed in the context of the development of their philosophical views. Parallels are traced between the metaphysical projects of Ern and Losev, considered as a part of a long process of development of Russian religious thought. The question of the deep kinship of the key aspect of the imyaslav disputes with the main problems of Russian philosophy is touched upon, which, according to the author’s hypothesis, made this initially purely theological controversy such an important event for the intellectual biography of a number of Russian thinkers. We are talking about the problem of the possibility of experiential knowledge of God, which has traditionally occupied an important place in Russian ontology and epistemology and has become the subject of theological discussion in the context of imyaslav movement. Ern and Losev develop their projects in this traditional way, inheriting the Slavophiles (primarily I.V. Kireevsky), Vl.S. Solovyov and S.N. Trubetskoy. At the same time, they accepted the problematics of imyaslav movement, in which they saw the embodiment of “ecclesiastical Platonism”, opposed to “ecclesiastical Kantianism”, thus including it in the discussion of key philosophical issues. The article touches upon the problem of numerous parallels between the works of Ern and Losev and the possible influence of the first on the second one. Based on Losev’s early works, the author seeks to trace his way to the formation of a large-scale metaphysical synthesis in later works.
{"title":"Imyaslav Disputes in the Formation of Russian Metaphysics: V.F. Ern and A.F. Losev","authors":"Andrei Yu. Filippov","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-1-198-208","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-1-198-208","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the influence exerted by the imyaslav disputes on the formation of Russian religious metaphysics. The declared theme is considered on the example of philosophical projects of two authors: V.F. Ern and A.F. Losev. The attitude of these thinkers to the controversy around the Name of God is placed in the context of the development of their philosophical views. Parallels are traced between the metaphysical projects of Ern and Losev, considered as a part of a long process of development of Russian religious thought. The question of the deep kinship of the key aspect of the imyaslav disputes with the main problems of Russian philosophy is touched upon, which, according to the author’s hypothesis, made this initially purely theological controversy such an important event for the intellectual biography of a number of Russian thinkers. We are talking about the problem of the possibility of experiential knowledge of God, which has traditionally occupied an important place in Russian ontology and epistemology and has become the subject of theological discussion in the context of imyaslav movement. Ern and Losev develop their projects in this traditional way, inheriting the Slavophiles (primarily I.V. Kireevsky), Vl.S. Solovyov and S.N. Trubetskoy. At the same time, they accepted the problematics of imyaslav movement, in which they saw the embodiment of “ecclesiastical Platonism”, opposed to “ecclesiastical Kantianism”, thus including it in the discussion of key philosophical issues. The article touches upon the problem of numerous parallels between the works of Ern and Losev and the possible influence of the first on the second one. Based on Losev’s early works, the author seeks to trace his way to the formation of a large-scale metaphysical synthesis in later works.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68531159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-1-15-28
A. Smirnov
The key feature of human consciousness is our ability to access and practice svyaznost’ (coherence, connectivity) grounded in tselostnost’ (wholeness). This ability is common to humans and animals in one of its aspects (comprehending the world as an order of things), though animals do not share its other core manifestations (coherent speech and thought as a practice of svyaznost’). The commonplace understanding of language as a sign system falls short of grasping the development of svyaznost’ and therefore needs to be reconsidered. Though universal for humans in its unfolded state, svyaznost’ ability may be practiced only in one the few variant versions and never as an invariant universal. Any of its variant versions lays down the foundations of one of the big cultures which are reflected upon in its philosophical tradition. Plato’s and Aristotle’s teachings mark major milestones of elaborating the substance version of svyaznost’. The foundations of Arab-Islamic big culture, its autochthonic philosophy included, were laid down by elaboration of the process version of svyaznost’. Tkachenko paradox (any big culture cannot be described and analyzed using the theoretical means of a different big culture) and Jullien paradox (foundations of any philosophical tradition cannot be grounded and justified by the means of that tradition) are analyzed. Only the logic of sense is capable of finding the way around both paradoxes by elaborating on svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ through their variant versions to escape the limits of the initial circle of logical laws and basic categories that form the basis of any philosophic tradition in this or that big culture.
{"title":"The Scope of Philosophy","authors":"A. Smirnov","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-1-15-28","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-1-15-28","url":null,"abstract":"The key feature of human consciousness is our ability to access and practice svyaznost’ (coherence, connectivity) grounded in tselostnost’ (wholeness). This ability is common to humans and animals in one of its aspects (comprehending the world as an order of things), though animals do not share its other core manifestations (coherent speech and thought as a practice of svyaznost’). The commonplace understanding of language as a sign system falls short of grasping the development of svyaznost’ and therefore needs to be reconsidered. Though universal for humans in its unfolded state, svyaznost’ ability may be practiced only in one the few variant versions and never as an invariant universal. Any of its variant versions lays down the foundations of one of the big cultures which are reflected upon in its philosophical tradition. Plato’s and Aristotle’s teachings mark major milestones of elaborating the substance version of svyaznost’. The foundations of Arab-Islamic big culture, its autochthonic philosophy included, were laid down by elaboration of the process version of svyaznost’. Tkachenko paradox (any big culture cannot be described and analyzed using the theoretical means of a different big culture) and Jullien paradox (foundations of any philosophical tradition cannot be grounded and justified by the means of that tradition) are analyzed. Only the logic of sense is capable of finding the way around both paradoxes by elaborating on svyaznost’ and tselostnost’ through their variant versions to escape the limits of the initial circle of logical laws and basic categories that form the basis of any philosophic tradition in this or that big culture.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68531242","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-189-196
Liliya G. Roman
This work is devoted to the problems of true knowledge in Indian philosophy. As a starting point of the study, the author analyzes the article of the American philosopher and indologist Karl Potter (1927–2022) “Does Indian Epistemology Concern Justified True Belief?” The author of the introductory article briefly outlines the main problematics of Potter’s work concerning the problem of the truth of knowledge in the Indian philosophical tradition, which is built around the Sanskrit term prāmāṇya and the classical controversy between the theories of svataḥ-prāmāṇya and parataḥ-prāmāṇya, and also the author analyzes the interpretation of the term prāmāṇya proposed by Potter from the point of view of a pragmatic attitude, expressed by the concept of workability, borrowed from representatives of American pragmatism.
{"title":"Prāmāṇya’s Interpretation Question","authors":"Liliya G. Roman","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-189-196","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-189-196","url":null,"abstract":"This work is devoted to the problems of true knowledge in Indian philosophy. As a starting point of the study, the author analyzes the article of the American philosopher and indologist Karl Potter (1927–2022) “Does Indian Epistemology Concern Justified True Belief?” The author of the introductory article briefly outlines the main problematics of Potter’s work concerning the problem of the truth of knowledge in the Indian philosophical tradition, which is built around the Sanskrit term prāmāṇya and the classical controversy between the theories of svataḥ-prāmāṇya and parataḥ-prāmāṇya, and also the author analyzes the interpretation of the term prāmāṇya proposed by Potter from the point of view of a pragmatic attitude, expressed by the concept of workability, borrowed from representatives of American pragmatism.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134887412","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-61-65
Nadezhda A. Kasavina
The text is devoted to the architectonics of philosophical autobiography as the author’s building the integrity and significance of his own history in the context of acquiring a professional vocation. Understanding the sources of personal unity, linking the emotional impressions of childhood and adolescence and the subsequent vector of creative life, the search for the beginning of individuality, the discovery of “tying acts” and their event unfolding are considered as aesthetic facets of self-reflection. The concept of “architectonics” refers to the creation of the integrity of the work, its composition, which conveys the author’s perception of life, sets its semantic structure, and determines its main factors and lines. It is an attempt to connect life and vocation, to see the influence of one on the other, to consider the origins of one’s present and from these positions to recognize the past, which always remains alive, changing, flickering. It remains a call to understanding, it is never complete, and needs the author’s involvement. To ask questions about the past, to answer them from the position of what has been passed means to gain access to the versatility of your current state. Using G. Marcel’s existential autobiographical works the author shows the importance of self-history narrative for understanding personality and history. Appeal to the past acquires the character of revealing in it those “requirements” that largely determine the creativity of a person and his life path, and become available through personal work with his experience.
{"title":"The Past as a Call: the Architectonics of a Philosophical Autobiography","authors":"Nadezhda A. Kasavina","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-61-65","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-61-65","url":null,"abstract":"The text is devoted to the architectonics of philosophical autobiography as the author’s building the integrity and significance of his own history in the context of acquiring a professional vocation. Understanding the sources of personal unity, linking the emotional impressions of childhood and adolescence and the subsequent vector of creative life, the search for the beginning of individuality, the discovery of “tying acts” and their event unfolding are considered as aesthetic facets of self-reflection. The concept of “architectonics” refers to the creation of the integrity of the work, its composition, which conveys the author’s perception of life, sets its semantic structure, and determines its main factors and lines. It is an attempt to connect life and vocation, to see the influence of one on the other, to consider the origins of one’s present and from these positions to recognize the past, which always remains alive, changing, flickering. It remains a call to understanding, it is never complete, and needs the author’s involvement. To ask questions about the past, to answer them from the position of what has been passed means to gain access to the versatility of your current state. Using G. Marcel’s existential autobiographical works the author shows the importance of self-history narrative for understanding personality and history. Appeal to the past acquires the character of revealing in it those “requirements” that largely determine the creativity of a person and his life path, and become available through personal work with his experience.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"102 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134887414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-9-50-59
Tatiana Yu. Sidorina
The development of labour in its classical sense over the centuries was accompanied by philosophical reflection, which took shape in the 19th century into the “philosophy of labour” as a direction of interdisciplinary thought, based on the postulates of the relevant culture and ethics of labour, which evolve and come into conflict with the emerging philosophy of life, experiencing a conceptual crisis in the crisis of European culture. In the article, we turn to current labour paradigm and its foundations in the era of mass automation and digitalization of human activities. Our focus is on the emerging anthropological type – a new subject of employment in the digital age – “homo irretitus / a person in the network”, which opposes not only the classical model “homo faber / a person creating the world with the help of tools”, but also a representative of the “creative class”, non-material labour worker. The analysis showed that, insisting on the need to free from labour, theorists of the digital economy do not answer the questions of what will replace labour in its meaningful position in life, and what activity will replace labour.
{"title":"Homo Irretitus & Homo Faber: a Worker at Risk","authors":"Tatiana Yu. Sidorina","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-9-50-59","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-9-50-59","url":null,"abstract":"The development of labour in its classical sense over the centuries was accompanied by philosophical reflection, which took shape in the 19th century into the “philosophy of labour” as a direction of interdisciplinary thought, based on the postulates of the relevant culture and ethics of labour, which evolve and come into conflict with the emerging philosophy of life, experiencing a conceptual crisis in the crisis of European culture. In the article, we turn to current labour paradigm and its foundations in the era of mass automation and digitalization of human activities. Our focus is on the emerging anthropological type – a new subject of employment in the digital age – “homo irretitus / a person in the network”, which opposes not only the classical model “homo faber / a person creating the world with the help of tools”, but also a representative of the “creative class”, non-material labour worker. The analysis showed that, insisting on the need to free from labour, theorists of the digital economy do not answer the questions of what will replace labour in its meaningful position in life, and what activity will replace labour.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"160 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134887503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-217-219
Andrei Ye. Zimbuli
{"title":"Home / Archives / No. 8 (2023) / Book Reviews YEMEL’YANOV, Boris V. (2022) Three Centuries of Russian Philosophy. Chronograph of the 18-20th Centuries","authors":"Andrei Ye. Zimbuli","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-217-219","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-217-219","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134887650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-116-128
Andrey V. Vdovichenko
In Joseph V. Stalin’s work Marxism and Problems of Linguistics (1950), a number of general issues of the theory of the verbal process are touched upon, the interpretation of which is generally consistent with traditional (including modern quantitatively predominant) linguistic views on the phenomenon of “language”. The linguistic consensus is observed in several positions that arise as a result of theoretical simplification (inaccurate metaphor): 1) “language” exists as objective verbal forms, constitutes a unity that ensures communication between people and which can be an object of study and description; 2) “language” is grammar and vocabulary; 3) “language” is connected with thinking; there are no thoughts without “language”; 4) “language” is a common property for a given collective (nation, people), “language” unites all those who speak it; 5) “language” is a mystical (“magic”) object. This article proposes a critique of the Marxist-linguistic consensus from the point of view of the communicative model. A simplified (linguistic) model of a word-containing semiotic process is the result of excessive attention to the verbal substrate (“words”), of an attempt to present verbal units as self-organized semantic-formal modules responsible for everything that happens in the field of communicative meaning (sense) formation. As a result, a theoretical construct “language” is created, designed to save researchers’ a priori attitude to the matter of words (which, at the right moment, when confronting with reality, is casuistically replaced by “speech”, which, however, is also verbal). The inefficiency of “language” (and “speech”) lies in the imposition of its own action on verbal “bodies”, while the generation of meaning in natural word-containing communication is entirely carried out by the complex personal impact of the semiotic actor.
{"title":"Fundamentals of the Theory of “Language” in the Bilateral Consensus. Stalin’s Marxism and Problems of Linguistics from the Standpoint of the Communicative Model. Part II","authors":"Andrey V. Vdovichenko","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-116-128","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-116-128","url":null,"abstract":"In Joseph V. Stalin’s work Marxism and Problems of Linguistics (1950), a number of general issues of the theory of the verbal process are touched upon, the interpretation of which is generally consistent with traditional (including modern quantitatively predominant) linguistic views on the phenomenon of “language”. The linguistic consensus is observed in several positions that arise as a result of theoretical simplification (inaccurate metaphor): 1) “language” exists as objective verbal forms, constitutes a unity that ensures communication between people and which can be an object of study and description; 2) “language” is grammar and vocabulary; 3) “language” is connected with thinking; there are no thoughts without “language”; 4) “language” is a common property for a given collective (nation, people), “language” unites all those who speak it; 5) “language” is a mystical (“magic”) object. This article proposes a critique of the Marxist-linguistic consensus from the point of view of the communicative model. A simplified (linguistic) model of a word-containing semiotic process is the result of excessive attention to the verbal substrate (“words”), of an attempt to present verbal units as self-organized semantic-formal modules responsible for everything that happens in the field of communicative meaning (sense) formation. As a result, a theoretical construct “language” is created, designed to save researchers’ a priori attitude to the matter of words (which, at the right moment, when confronting with reality, is casuistically replaced by “speech”, which, however, is also verbal). The inefficiency of “language” (and “speech”) lies in the imposition of its own action on verbal “bodies”, while the generation of meaning in natural word-containing communication is entirely carried out by the complex personal impact of the semiotic actor.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134887652","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：