Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Philosophy and Culture
Reference:

Chesnov, Ya. V. Hermeneutics of Knowledge in National Culture (Special Theory of Anthropocenosis)

Abstract: The author of the article describes the process of anthropocenosis by the means of national culture in order to define the role of the two forms of primordial knowledge, locus knowledge and itinerary knowledge. Special attention is paid to the phenomenon of the name (identity). It turns out that this phenomenon lies in the basis of both the archaic thinking and modern scientific thinking. A particular case of naming is silence. Silence characterizes national culture more than speaking. Silence is associated with a special type of primordial knowledge that structures the process of anthropocenosis. Research methodology includes the hermeneutic method that involves exposition (fixation – description), understanding and interpretation and finally, explanation (in our case, determination of anthropocenosis). Modern humanitarian theory usually involves analysis of a macro community like state institution, civilization and etc. It does not touch upon the intimate human world while the author of the present article uses it as the main focus of hermeneutic analysis. At the end of the article the author makes quite an unexpected conclusion: the structure of the archaic knowledge is identical to the modern structure of science.


Keywords:

anthropocenosis, national culture, knowledge, archaic character, community of practice, the Golden Age, ethnos, customs, conscience, name (identity).


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Stepin V.S. Teoreticheskoe znanie. M., 1999.
2. Stolyarova O. Sotsial'nyy konstruktivizm: ontologicheskiy povorot // Vestnik MGU. Ser. «Filosofiya». 2003. ¹ 3, S. 39-51.
3. Hildreth, P.J. & Kimble, C. The duality of knowledge //Information Research, 8(1), paper no. 142, 2002: http://www.informationr.net/ir/8-1/paper142.html
4. Nosov N. A., Genisaretskiy O. I. Virtual'nye sostoyaniya v deyatel'nosti cheloveka-operatora // Trudy GosNIIGA. Aviatsionnaya ergonomika i podgotovka letnogo sostava. Vyp. 253. M., 1986. S. 147—155: Nosov N. Virtual'naya psikhologiya. — Moskva, Izdatel'stvo «Agraf», 2000
5. Merton. R. K. On Sociological Theories of the middle range // Merton R.K. On Theoretical Sociology. Five Essays. Old and New. N.-Y. Free Press, L.: Macmillan, 1967. P. 51-52
6. Gryaznov B. S. Logika, ratsional'nost', tvorchestvo. — M., 1982
7. Merton R.K. Referentnaya gruppa i sotsial'naya struktura. M., 1991.
8. R.G.Apresyan. Spetskurs «Filosofiya lyubvi» http://iph.ras.ru/uplfile/ethics/prog/apressyan_phil_love.html
9. Bogatyrev P.G. Voprosy teorii narodnogo iskusstva. M., 1971.
10. Bakhtin M.M. Tvorchestvo Fransua Rable i narodnaya kul'tura srednevekov'ya i Renessansa. — M., 1965;
11. Putilov B. N.Fol'klor i narodnaya kul'tura SPb., "Nauka" 1994 SPb., "Nauka"
12. Neklyudov S. Yu. Kak rabotaet narodnaya traditsiya . Interv'yu 16 iyulya 2009 g.// Sayt POLIT.RU
13. Terner V. Simvol i ritual. M.: Nauka; Glavnaya redaktsiya vostochnoy literatury, 1983)
14. Losev A. F. Filosofiya imeni. M., 1999. S. 33-34
15. Khaydegger M. Bytie i vremya. M., 2011. S. 124
16. S.N.Bulgakov. Narodnoe khozyaystvo i religioznaya lichnost' // Soch. v 2-kh tt. T.2. M., 1993. S. 362.
17. Gryaznov B. S. Logika, ratsional'nost', tvorchestvo. — 2-e izd. — M.: Editorial URSS, 2002
18. Nonaka Ikudziro. Kompaniya-sozdatel' znaniya//Harvard Business Review. Rossiya. Avgust 2013. (http://hbr-russia.ru/issue/31/345/)
19. Florovskiy G.V. Vera i kul'tura // Khristianstvo i tsivilizatsiya. Izbrannye trudy po bogosloviyu i filosofii. – SPb.: RKhGA, 2005.-S.650-670.
20. Solov'ev V.S.Sochineniya v 2 tomakh. T. 2, M., 1989. S. 220
21. Gurevich P.S. Filosofiya kul'tury. M., 2001. S. 37.