Статья является первой в цикле работ, посвящённых попыткам методологического обоснования философской антропологии как науки. В данной работе обсуждается опыт обоснования Э. Гуссерлем идеала строгой науки через обоснование им феноменологии и феноменологического метода и попытку распространения этого метода на науки о человеке. В статье показано, что в стремлении к обоснованию строгой научности основатель феноменологии фактически приходит к выводам, известным с античной философии, согласно которым философия человека выстраивается не как учение или концепция, а как практика заботы о себе. Она так или иначе ведёт к тому, что сам философ определяет правила своей жизни, направленные на служение философии и выстраивающиеся по нормам практик заботы, опыт которых известен в истории философии, начиная с римских стоиков. В статье обращается внимание на то, что Э. Гуссерль фактически своей жизнью показал идеал философии как духовной аскезы, продемонстрировав пример дисциплины ума.
<p>The article ponders, if it is at all possible to include digital technologies into the process of mediation. The latter being the core of cultural-historical psychology by L. Vygotsky. In order to facilitate the discussion, the author outlines the nature of the virtual world, made by digital technologies. It was postulated by a number of researchers that digital technology could serve both as a tool and as a sing. And so — it can be part of the mediation practices. This article claims that digital technologies create a unique environment (virtual reality) that dictates particular ways of conduct, especially for children and teenagers. The author demonstrates how digital technology creates splinter segments in the mediation process, which makes an adult to leave the communication with a child. Which leads to so-called digital chasm, and a child descends into the virtual reality without living through the mediation process. This is why we claim that digital technology can’t serve as a sign, the way Vygotsky describes them. The article lists parameters and consequences of the digital schism, such as: event shift, narrative intervention, inversion of functions and flattening of the horizon of meaning. The article proposes a solution — a construction of a search scenario in schools. This search scenario consists of several stages: challenge, analysis, ask-search, discussion, reflection and articulation of knowledge. Each of these stages can include digital technologies in various ways. The article concludes the algorithmic nature of modern schools makes a pupil’s behaviour “digital” before digital technologies themselves. And so, in order to overcome the digital schism, one needs to establish search scenarios as a teaching model before introducing digital technologies during a lesson.</p>
The paper proposes the author's vision of a person's situation and a version of building a modern anthro-pological discourse in this situation. Within the framework of this discourse, concepts such as event ontol-ogy, anthropological navigation, life trajectory, anthropoid cartoid, etc. are introduced. It is proposed to consider the role of the dictionary of this discourse not as a system of definitions and terms, but as a map of landmarks and regulators. In this regard, the way of conceptual work is changing in the direction of building concept-guidelines. Within the framework of anthropological navigation, it is proposed to con-sider the types and genres of anthropological practitioners, such as the practices of taking care of oneself, anthropological practices of mapping personality, life trajectories and anthropoid cartoids. The modern human situation through the eyes of this discourse is seen as a situation of ontological disorientation, in which a person loses his basic guidelines, the norm to be. In this regard, the author proposes to consider the key task - the renormalization of a person, his own restoration of the norm to be in new conditions.
The paper analyzes the intellectual situation that developed in the 1920s, which led to what later became known as a philosophical split into two directions – continental and analytical philosophy. The author poses a problem: was this a split associated with the division of philosophy into scientifically oriented philosophy, on the one hand, and metaphysics, on the other? Or is this division quite controversial? Using the example of a famous episode, a philosophical discussion between Е. Cassirer and M. Heidegger in Davos in 1929, the author discusses another split in philosophy: into the so-called classical way of philosophizing based on spiritual tradition (represented by E. Cassirer) and the so-called non-classical, represented by M. Heidegger. In this regard, the topic of the development and overcoming of the neo-Kantian tradition, the topic of understanding the basic ideas of the philosophy of I. Kant, but in a new cultural situation is discussed. In his analysis, the author proceeds from the version proposed in the book by M. Friedman: “Philosophy at a Crossroads: Carnap, Cassirer and Heidegger”.
This article is a continuation of the previous publication published under the same title (part 1). Both parts are devoted to the problem of understanding the split that once occurred in world philosophy and was embodied in the division of philosophy into two directions, continental and analytical philosophy. In the second part, the author continues to discuss the reasons for the split and the argumentation cited by various authors, proving the conceptual difference of directions. The article analyzes the main ideas of the authors of the Vienna Circle Manifesto and the argumentation of R. Carnap in his dispute with M. Heidegger, the subject of which is devoted to the so-called overcoming of metaphysics. The reason for writing both parts was the work of M. Fridman “Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer and Heidegger”, translated into Russian. The result of the second part is the conclusions formulated by the author of the article regarding the difference between the named directions. The author believes that it makes sense to discuss their differences not in the categories of truth and falsity of teachings and concepts, but in the categories of different orientations and attitudes, which do not deny but complement each other. On the one hand, analytical philosophy claims to be scientific orientation, clear and precise language, logic and mathematics. In contrast to it, continental philosophy does not pretend to be scientific, to a clear and precise language, but prefers innuendo, rejection of doctrinalism, and the exploratory nature of philosophizing.
The article is devoted to the birth and transformation of the Idea of the University as an institutional form within the German spiritual culture of the 19th – 20th centuries. The author traces the history of the Idea of the University from the works of I. Kant (through the prism of his idea of the Enlightenment), then in the works of W. von Humboldt, the attempt to revive the Idea in the works of K. Jaspers, and the death of the idea during Nazism on the example of the “Heidegger case” The article specifically examines the basic principles of the University of W. von Humboldt – academic freedom and unity of science and education. The latter is considered not in a narrow academic sense, but in the classical – the formation of a person's image, chasing his appearance. W. von Humboldt assumed the unity of three universes: the universe of man, the universe of knowledge and the university as an institution that creates conditions for “solitude and freedom”. Further, the author shows the transformation of the university in the modern world in connection with the change in the time vector, the reorientation of the educational paradigm from the past to the future and the search, in this connection, of a new identity for universities. Despite the actual death of the classical idea of the University of W. von Humboldt, the author shows that this idea can be revived in a new model of an entrepreneurial university, which also contains the basic principle of W. von Humboldt, which presupposes a constant scientific search and the formation of a person for whom personal development remains a value.
The article analyzes the concept of posthuman, proposed within the ideology of transhumanism. The author shows how, within the framework of this concept, the basic schemes of human reduction are built, due to which a person can be deduced from socio-cultural reality as a being and replaced by a special being, a posthuman. It is shown that it is due to the basic ontological and conceptual reductions that the temptation arises to replace a person with a new being, more perfect and almost immortal one. The article provides examples of the named reductions, such as: the reduction of a person as being to his biological body; reduction of human existence to the existence of separate biological bodies; reduction of human thinking to intellectual operations and functions, which, in principle, can be modeled and transplanted into a technical device; reduction of the highest human abilities (thinking, will, imagination, memory, feeling) to functional operations occurring in the brain, localized there, as a result of which they can be isolated, described, modeled, and then the model can be transplanted onto an artificial medium, having received artificial intelligence. The author proposes to develop a response to this challenge associated with the replacement of a person, proposes to develop a so-called anthropological alternative. The latter is, among other things, in building a new conceptual model, built using the already known basic scheme of mediation, developed within the framework of Russian cultural-historical psychology and anthropology. Thanks to this scheme of mediation, it is quite possible to build on a new basis a model of a man-symbol-machine system, with the help of which it is possible to build new cultural practices for the development and formation of a person's personality.
В 2017 году гуманитарный альманах «Человек.RU» (главный редактор С. А. Смирнов) и журнал «Личность.Культура.Общество» (главный редактор Ю. М. Резник) организовали и провели заочную дискуссию на тему, посвящённую ситуации в отечественной философии с точки зрения её институционального и концептуального развития.Мы предложили коллегам несколько вопросов.Ниже приводим эти вопросы и ответы тех авторов, которые прислали в наш гуманитарный альманах свои ответы.Материал других коллег, приславших свои ответы в журнал «Личность.Культура.Общество», читатель может посмотреть в этом журнале (
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)