ANTHROPOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE CONCEPT OF "CRIME" IN HISTORICO-PHILOSOPHICAL DISCOURSE

IF 0.5 0 PHILOSOPHY
I. Kovnierova
{"title":"ANTHROPOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE CONCEPT OF \"CRIME\" IN HISTORICO-PHILOSOPHICAL DISCOURSE","authors":"I. Kovnierova","doi":"10.15802/ampr.v0i17.206727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose. The paper considers the establishment of the paradigmatic determinants of the understanding of crime on the basis of fundamental changes in understanding of the essence of a man in ancient, medieval, Renaissance, modern and postmodern philosophy. Theoretical basis. The author determines that the understanding of the concept of crime is possible only in the combination of historical, philosophical, legal and sociological approaches. The interpretation of the essence of this concept dynamics and relevant legal practices is based on structuralist, post-structuralist and hermeneutical methodological principles. Originality. The author has proved that the concept of \"crime\" is not a constant but a historically variable category whose dynamics of meanings is linked to a change in philosophical anthropological paradigms. Its understanding is primarily related to the interpretation of the essence of a man and the imperatives of his behavior. This allows a new understanding of the philosophical foundations of modern criminology. Conclusions. The article establishes that in the history of Western philosophy, there are five anthropological paradigms that differ in a thorough rethinking of the essence of a man. The first cosmocentric regards man as a microcosm, his soul and actions must be in harmony with the harmony of the Cosmos. The second Theocentric considers a man the image and likeness of God, though he is at the same time burdened with original sin. In the era of early Modernism, the third paradigm, which we called cognitive-centric, becomes dominant, since the essence of a man is reduced primarily to his mind. It gradually changes to the fourth – sociocentric, which focuses on the social essence of a man. However, despite its continued existence in our time, at the end of the XX century, there is a transition to the fifth paradigm – postmodernist, which deconstructs the essence of a man, reducing it to the role of an element of power systems. These paradigms, with a certain synchronicity, create the corresponding concepts of \"crime\": from violation of polis-space laws to identification with sin, from non-observance of mental and moral standards to social deviance. Contemporary understandings of crime are, for the most part, relativistic and constructivist, which is consistent with the postmodern anthropological paradigm. However, the diversity of interpretations of the concept of \"crime\" that exists in the current scientific literature needs further comprehension.","PeriodicalId":42650,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i17.206727","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose. The paper considers the establishment of the paradigmatic determinants of the understanding of crime on the basis of fundamental changes in understanding of the essence of a man in ancient, medieval, Renaissance, modern and postmodern philosophy. Theoretical basis. The author determines that the understanding of the concept of crime is possible only in the combination of historical, philosophical, legal and sociological approaches. The interpretation of the essence of this concept dynamics and relevant legal practices is based on structuralist, post-structuralist and hermeneutical methodological principles. Originality. The author has proved that the concept of "crime" is not a constant but a historically variable category whose dynamics of meanings is linked to a change in philosophical anthropological paradigms. Its understanding is primarily related to the interpretation of the essence of a man and the imperatives of his behavior. This allows a new understanding of the philosophical foundations of modern criminology. Conclusions. The article establishes that in the history of Western philosophy, there are five anthropological paradigms that differ in a thorough rethinking of the essence of a man. The first cosmocentric regards man as a microcosm, his soul and actions must be in harmony with the harmony of the Cosmos. The second Theocentric considers a man the image and likeness of God, though he is at the same time burdened with original sin. In the era of early Modernism, the third paradigm, which we called cognitive-centric, becomes dominant, since the essence of a man is reduced primarily to his mind. It gradually changes to the fourth – sociocentric, which focuses on the social essence of a man. However, despite its continued existence in our time, at the end of the XX century, there is a transition to the fifth paradigm – postmodernist, which deconstructs the essence of a man, reducing it to the role of an element of power systems. These paradigms, with a certain synchronicity, create the corresponding concepts of "crime": from violation of polis-space laws to identification with sin, from non-observance of mental and moral standards to social deviance. Contemporary understandings of crime are, for the most part, relativistic and constructivist, which is consistent with the postmodern anthropological paradigm. However, the diversity of interpretations of the concept of "crime" that exists in the current scientific literature needs further comprehension.
历史哲学话语中“犯罪”概念的人类学基础
目的。本文以古代、中世纪、文艺复兴、现代和后现代哲学对人的本质的理解的根本变化为基础,探讨了对犯罪理解的范式决定因素的建立。理论基础。作者认为,只有结合历史、哲学、法律和社会学的方法,才能理解犯罪的概念。对这一动态概念的本质和相关法律实践的解释是基于结构主义、后结构主义和解释学的方法论原则。创意。作者证明了“犯罪”概念不是一个不变的概念,而是一个历史上可变的范畴,其意义的动态变化与哲学人类学范式的变化有关。对它的理解主要与对一个人的本质和他的行为准则的解释有关。这使得人们对现代犯罪学的哲学基础有了新的认识。结论。本文认为,在西方哲学史上,有五种不同的人类学范式,它们都在对人的本质进行彻底的反思。第一种宇宙中心主义认为人是一个微观的宇宙,人的灵魂和行为必须与宇宙的和谐一致。第二个神权中心认为一个人的形象和上帝的形象,虽然他在同一时间背负着原罪。在早期现代主义时代,第三种范式,我们称之为认知中心,成为主导,因为一个人的本质主要归结为他的思想。它逐渐转变为第四种——以社会为中心,关注人的社会本质。然而,尽管它在我们这个时代继续存在,但在20世纪末,出现了向第五种范式的过渡-后现代主义,它解构了人的本质,将其减少到权力系统的一个元素的角色。这些范式具有一定的同步性,创造了相应的“犯罪”概念:从违反政治空间法到认同罪恶,从不遵守精神和道德标准到社会越轨。当代对犯罪的理解在很大程度上是相对主义和建构主义的,这与后现代人类学范式是一致的。然而,目前科学文献中存在的对“犯罪”概念的多样性解释需要进一步理解。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
66.70%
发文量
13
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信