The Ontology of Symbolic Reality in the Philosophy of F.T. Mikhailov

IF 0.6 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
K. Sorvin, A. Mert
{"title":"The Ontology of Symbolic Reality in the Philosophy of F.T. Mikhailov","authors":"K. Sorvin, A. Mert","doi":"10.17759/chp.2021170105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper addresses one of the main topics of the works of the famous Russian philosopher F.T. Mikhailov aimed at overcoming the oversimplified conception of the relation between the biological and the social origins of human being, in the context of the methodological problems in the social sciences that have characteristic representations of the transcendence of society over individual. It is shown that the solution proposed by the philosopher was related to the revision of the dominant notions about the ground of the subject-subject unity and the ontology of the symbolic objects that provide this unity. In particular, the disintegration of the ‘activity approach’ in psychology into the concepts of A.N. Leontyev and S.L. Rubinstein, that are called by Mikhailov ‘antinomical’, is associated with the limited reliance on the methodological traditions of Spinozism, in which there was no idea about the reflexive type of subject-subject relation as opposed to the methodology of \"late Fichte\", with his characteristic position on the initial identity based on multiple selves. It is argued that the most adequate categories for description of the ontological connections between the ideal content and the material form in symbolic objects that provide such an identity can be found in Hegel's aesthetic works.","PeriodicalId":44568,"journal":{"name":"Kulturno-Istoricheskaya Psikhologiya-Cultural-Historical Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kulturno-Istoricheskaya Psikhologiya-Cultural-Historical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2021170105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper addresses one of the main topics of the works of the famous Russian philosopher F.T. Mikhailov aimed at overcoming the oversimplified conception of the relation between the biological and the social origins of human being, in the context of the methodological problems in the social sciences that have characteristic representations of the transcendence of society over individual. It is shown that the solution proposed by the philosopher was related to the revision of the dominant notions about the ground of the subject-subject unity and the ontology of the symbolic objects that provide this unity. In particular, the disintegration of the ‘activity approach’ in psychology into the concepts of A.N. Leontyev and S.L. Rubinstein, that are called by Mikhailov ‘antinomical’, is associated with the limited reliance on the methodological traditions of Spinozism, in which there was no idea about the reflexive type of subject-subject relation as opposed to the methodology of "late Fichte", with his characteristic position on the initial identity based on multiple selves. It is argued that the most adequate categories for description of the ontological connections between the ideal content and the material form in symbolic objects that provide such an identity can be found in Hegel's aesthetic works.
米哈伊洛夫哲学中的象征现实本体论
本文论述了俄罗斯著名哲学家米哈伊洛夫(F.T. Mikhailov)著作的一个主要主题,其目的是在社会科学方法论问题的背景下,克服对人类生物起源和社会起源之间关系的过于简化的概念,这些问题具有社会超越个人的特征表征。结果表明,哲学家提出的解决方案与修正关于主体-主体统一的基础和提供这种统一的符号对象的本体论的主导观念有关。特别是,心理学中的“活动方法”分解为A.N.列昂季耶夫和S.L.鲁宾斯坦的概念,被米哈伊洛夫称为“反律法”,这与对斯宾诺莎主义方法论传统的有限依赖有关,在斯宾诺莎主义中,没有关于主体-主体关系的反身型的概念,这与“后期费希特”的方法论相反,他的特点是基于多重自我的初始认同。本文认为,在黑格尔的美学著作中,可以找到最恰当的范畴来描述象征对象中提供这种同一性的理想内容和物质形式之间的本体论联系。
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
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
13
审稿时长
12 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