СИМВОЛІЧНИЙ ЛАНДШАФТ СВІДОМОСТІ: ЛЮДИНА МІЖ РЕПРЕЗЕНТАЦІОНІЗМОМ, ФУНКЦІОНАЛІЗМОМ І РЕЛЯТИВІЗМОМ

P. V. Kretov; O. I. Kretova

doi:10.15802/ampr.v0i12.119122

Authors

P. V. Kretov Cherkasy National University B. Khmelnitsky, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2593-3731
O. I. Kretova Cherkasy National University B. Khmelnitsky, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3947-4479

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i12.119122

Keywords:

symbol, symbolic landscape, functionalism, representationalism, relativism, object, thing, ontologization, religious symbol

Abstract

Purpose. The aim of the study is to clarify the changed interpretation of symbol in the context of the ontological turn in cultural anthropology and philosophical anthropology and their correlation with the functioning of the semantic field of culture, and in particular with religious symbols. The paper also considers an epistemological-ideological positions of representationalism, functionalism and relativism with respect to philosopheme of symbol. Methodology. The authors implemented theoretical and conceptual analysis in synchronic and diachronic aspects, the methodology of comparative consideration of the character within the analytical and existential paradigms in the 20th century philosophy. Originality. The work presents the study of correlation between aspect consideration of the nature and specific character in representationalism, functionalism and relativism within the philosophical projects of the cognitive position. The authors substantiated the position of symbol ontologization in the contemporary cultural and philosophical anthropology and the importance of convergence of the symbol concept and philosopheme with the concepts of an object and a thing. They fixed the value of the ontological turn in cultural anthropology for philosophical anthropology. The authors specifically examined the correlation between the declared symbol interpretation, project of object-oriented ontology and the modern philosophy of science. They substantiated ontological concept of symbolic landscape of modern philosophical anthropology, social philosophy and philosophy of mind. The symbol and religious symbolism have the significant importance for human identity, the symbol is considered to be the tool of human’s self-knowledge. Conclusions. The paper outlines the specific character of existence of symbol philosopheme in communicative field of modern man, the social media space, in particular the role of religious symbols for the construction of identity and self-positioning of modern man.

Author Biographies

P. V. Kretov, Cherkasy National University B. Khmelnitsky

Cherkasy National University B. Khmelnitsky (Cherkasy),
e-mail ataraksia@ukr.net

O. I. Kretova, Cherkasy National University B. Khmelnitsky

Cherkasy National University B. Khmelnitsky (Cherkasy), e-mail ekretova@ukr.net

References

Bibihin, V. V. (2007). Yazyik filosofii. Moskow: Nauka. (in Russian)

Biletska, B. H. (2012). Relihiynyy symvol: sutnist' ta osoblyvosti. Visnyk Kyyivs'koho natsional'noho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka. Filosofiya. Politolohiya, 109, 11-14. (in Ukrainian)

Vdovina, G. V. (2009). Yazyik neochevidnogo. Ucheniya o znakah v sholastike XVII v. Moscow: Institut filosofii, teologii i istorii sv. Fomyi. (in Russian)

Yachin, S. E., et al. (2011). Dao i telos v smyislovom izmerenii kultur vostochnogo i zapadnogo tipa: monografiya. Vladivostok: Izd-vo Dalnevost. federal. un-ta. (in Russian)

Karivets, I. (2016). Svidomist, relihiya ta buttya. Na shlyakhu do nenaukovoho ta neantropolohichnoho rozuminnya svidomosti. Philosophy & Cosmology, 16, 135-143. (in Ukrainian)

Kozlovskyy, O. R. (2007). Relihiyna svidomist i relihiyni praktyky naselennya suchasnoyi Ukrayiny yak predmet sotsialno-filosofskoho analizu. Kyiv: Stylos. (in Ukrainian)

Langer, S. (2000). Filosofiya v novom klyuche. Moskow: Respublika. (in Russian)

Lefevr, V. (2012). Chto takoe odushevlennost?. Moskow: Kogito-Tsentr. (in Russian)

Losev, A. F. (1995). Problema simvola i realisticheskoe iskusstvo. Moskow: Iskusstvo. (in Russian)

Manussakis, Dzh. P. (2014). Bog posle metafiziki. Bogoslovskaya estetika. Kyiv: Dukh i litera. (in Russian)

Meyyasu, K. (2016). Posle konechnosti: Esse o neobhodimosti kontingentnosti. Ekaterinburg, Mosсow: Kabinetnyiy uchenyiy. (in Russian)

Navarriya, D. (2016). Simvolicheskaya antropologiya. Chelovek religioznyiy i ego opyit svyaschennogo. Kyiv: Duh I litera. (in Russian)

Osypov, A. O. (2009). Tilesnist' i symvol u dukhovnykh praktykakh (Avtoreferat... d. filosof. nauk.). Kharkivs'kyy nats. ped. un-t im. H.S. Skovorody, Kharkiv. (in Ukrainian)

Ostashchuk, I. B. (2009). Relihiyna symvolika: navch. pos. Vyd. 2. Ivano-Frankivs'k: Vyd. Tretyak I. Ya. (in Ukrainian)

Petrovskiy, V. A. (2013). Kosmizm refleksii Lefevra. Beseda s V. A. Lefevrom. Zhurnal Vyisshey shkolyi ekonomiki, 10(2), 7-23. (in Russian)

Petrushkevych, M. S. (2014). Religious communication in the context of cultural media. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, 5, 56-67. (in Ukrainian)

Spirova, E. M. (2011). Filosofskaya antropologiya kak sistema ponyatiy. Vestnik Finansovogo universiteta. Gumanitarnyie nauki, 3(13), 13–23. (in Russian)

Syicheva, S. G. (2007). Martin Haydegger o veschi, simvole i myishlenii. Retrieved from http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/martin-haydegger-o-veschi-simvole-i-myshlenii.pdf. (in Russian)

Syicheva, S. G. (2000). Problema simvola v filosofii. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tomsk. un-ta. (in Russian)

Tabachkovskyy, V. H. (2005). Polisutnisne homo: filosofsko-mystetska dumka v poshukakh «neevklidovoyi refleksyvnosti». Kyiv: Vyd. PARAPAN. (in Ukrainian)

Haydegger, M. (1993). Vremya i byitie : stati i vyistupleniya. Moskow: Respublika. (in Russian)

Harman, G. (2015). Chetveroyakiy obekt: Metafizika veschey posle Haydeggera. Perm: Gile Press. (in Russian)

Kholokh, O. (2015). Hermenevtyka buttya lyudyny u symvolichniy antropolohiyi K. Hirtsa. Visnyk KNTEU, 3, 72-86. (in Ukrainian)

Yung, K. G. (2003). Simvolicheskaya zhizn. In K. G. Yung (Ed.), Simvolicheskaya zhizn (pp. 295-315). Mosсow: Cogito-centre. (in Russian)

Adler, A. C. (2016). Celebricities: Media Culture and the Phenomenology of Gadget Commodity Life. New York: Fordham University Press. (In English)

Balibar É., Miller S. (2017). Citizen Subject: Foundations for Philosophical Anthropology. New York: Fordham University Press. (In English)

Barash, A. (2008). The Symbolic Construction of Reality: The Legacy of Ernst Cassirer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (In English)

Bazaluk, O., & Nezhyva, O. (2016). Martin Heidegger and Fundamental Ontology. In Annals of the University of Craiova. Philosophy Series, 38(2), 71-83. (In English)

Bielefeldt, H. (2003). Symbolic Representation in Kant's Practical Philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press. (In English)

Gregor, B. A (2013). Philosophical Anthropology of the Cross: The Cruciform Self. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. (In English)

Kashima, Y., Foddy, M., & Platow, M. J. (2002). Self and Identity: Personal, Social, and Symbolic. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (In English)

Keesing, R. M., & Haug, J. (2012). On not understanding symbols: Toward an anthropology of incomprehension. Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 2. Retrieved from http://www.haujournal.org/index.php/hau/article/view/hau2.2.023. (In English)

Paleček, M. (2012). Relativism and the Ontological Turn within Anthropology. Retrieved from http://lms.ff.uhk.cz/pool/download_16.pdf. (In English)

Ross, M. H. (2009). Culture and Belonging in Divided Societies: Contestation and Symbolic Landscapes. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. (In English)

Schirch, L. (2005). Ritual and Symbol in Peacebuilding. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press. (In English)

Schmidgen, H., & Custance, G.(2015). Bruno Latour in Pieces: An Intellectual Biography. New York: Fordham University Press. (In English)