Actualization of the ideographic method in culture studies
- Annotation
- Authors
- List of references
The article analyzes the ultimate methodological foundations of the theory of culture in the interdisciplinary synergetic
paradigm and its main ideologies. The heuristic limitations of the synergetic approach and its insuffi ciency for describing and
explaining the sociocultural reality are shown. The postulates that the laws of the development of culture are the continuation
of the laws of the development of nature, and the idea of the universal development of the Universe, subject to a single universal
law, are criticized. Substantiates the theoretical non-suffi ciency of the scientistic thesis of the synergetic paradigm as a universal
method of scientifi c cognition. It is shown that this paradigm, which is based on the idea of the universality of the laws of nature,
is a physicalist variation of the cognitive strategy of the postmodern version of the philosophical pragmatism. The thesis that
there can be no universal method of scientifi c research suitable for the study of all objects without exception is substantiated.
The postulate of I. R. Prigozhin is criticized, according to which any order is born out of chaos. It is shown that cultural life is
not determined by natural laws. It is argued that as a phenomenon of sociocultural reality, a person can not be expressed in
natural science and mathematical terms that are quite applicable to the description and explanation of natural phenomena. It is
assumed that as a unique extra-natural, cultural phenomenon, a person has a fundamental uncertainty, ineffi ciency, uniqueness,
incompleteness, irreducibility, and cannot be subject to natural scientifi c reduction. The impossibility of extrapolation of natural
science methods to the study of sociocultural reality is substantiated. It is shown that the ideographic (individualizing) method
is the only adequate and optimal way to describe and explain the sociocultural processes, and the necessity of its actualization
in modern cultural studies on the example of anthropological approach.
- Тимошевский Александр Васильевич
- 1. Vasil’kova V. V. Order and chaos in development of so-cial systems: synergetic and theory of social self-organization.Saint Petersburg: Lan’, 1999. 480 (in Russ.). 2. Prigozhin I., Stengers I. Order out of chaos: newdialogue between man and nature. Moscow: Progress, 1986.432 (in Russ.). 3. Mozheiko M. A. Idea of nonlinearity and phenomenonof non-determinism: methodological turn in modern science.Sotsiologiya. 2012. 2, 39–53 (in Russ.). 4. Timoshevskii A. V. Transgressive consciousness ascultural and historical phenomenon. Vestnik of Saint PetersburgState University of Culture and Arts. 2017. 2, 57–60 (in Russ.). 5. Mamardashvili M. K. Thought in culture. Filosofskienauki. 1989. 11, 75–81 (in Russ.). 6. Reznik Y. M. (ed.) Sociocultural anthropology: history,theory and methodology: encycl. dict. Moscow: Akademi-cheskii proekt: Kul’tura; Kirov: Konstanta, 2012. 1000 (in Russ.). 7. Rickert H. Limits of concept formation in naturalscience: logical introduction to n historical sciences. SaintPetersburg: Nauka, 1997. 533 (in Russ.).
