| Article | |
|---|---|
| Article name | Existential Ontognosiology: Resistance to Methodological Mediation |
| Authors | Fatenkov A.N. Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, kfa@fsn.unn.ru |
| Bibliographic description | |
| Section | PHILOSOPHY OF THINKING AND COGNITION |
| UDK | 165.2 |
| DOI | 10.21209/1996-7853-2018-13-2-123-131 |
| Article type | |
| Annotation | The place of ontognosiology in the structure of philosophical knowledge is specified. Conceptual contours of existential ontognosiology are outlined. Critically, in the context of insubordination to the unique, the role of methodology and its mediation in intellectual practices are examined. The selected doxography of the critical perception of the method expansion is given. The tool allowing correctly (self-critically) to discuss the methodological paradigm as such is, in the author’s view, the existential dialectics. With reference to it in the text of the article, statements are made and estimates are given. The genealogy of methodological dictatorship originates in Socratic ironically unkind maieutics, whose figure is reconstructed with reference to the conceptual sketches by F. Nietzsche. Having become a privileged discipline in the philosophy of modern times, the methodology tendentiously demonstrates egalitarian slyness and dogmatic criticism. The author of the article dwells on three methodological works, dated to the XXth and the XXIst centuries. In the aspect of the ontological gaps in nominalism, the negative-dialectical “project” of J.-P. Sartre is examined. In the aspect of criticism of the actor-network matrix is the “guide” by B. Latour and the method of assembling fractional objects by D. Lo. The pathos of the article lays 1) in preventing the cessation of the cognitive act from its subject, never reducible to the complex of cognitive means; 2) in suppressing the reduction of the subject to the object. |
| Key words | philosophy, ontology, gnosiology, ontognosiology, existential ontognosiology, methodology, mediation |
| Article information | |
| References | 1. Adorno, T. W. Introduction to Sociology. Moscow: Praksis Publ., 2010. (In Rus.) 2. Arslanov, V. G. Ontognosiology of Plastic Value (M. Nesterov, A. Platonov, L. Leonov). Philosophical Sciences, no. 5, pp. 79–93, 2016. (In Rus.) 3. Debreu, R. Introduction to Mediology. Moscow: Praksis Publ., 2010. (In Rus.) 4. Latour, B. Reassembling the Social: an Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Moscow: HSE Publ. House, 2014. (In Rus.) 5. Lifshitz, M. What is a Classic? Ontognosiology. The Sense of the Word. The True Middle. Moscow: Iskusstvo XXI vek Publ., 2004. (In Rus.) 6. Law, J. After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. Moscow: Gaidar Institute Publ., 2015. (In Rus.) 7. Nietzsche, F. The Will to Power. Moscow: Kul’turnaya Revolyutsiya Publ., 2005. (In Rus.) 8. Nietzsche, F. Beyond Good and Evil. Voprosy Filosofii, no. 5, pp.122–149, 1989. (In Rus.) 9. Sartre, J.-P. Search for a Method. Moscow: Akademicheskii Proekt Publ., 2008, pp. 7–174. (In Rus.) 10. Taisina, E. A. Theory of Knowledge. St. Petersburg: Aleteiya Publ., 2014. (In Rus.) 11. Fatenkov, A. N. M. A. Lifshitz’s Thought in the Realistic Turn of Russian Philosophy. Humanitarian Vector, vol.12, no. 1, pp. 123–132, 2017. (In Rus.) 12. Fatenkov, A. N. Existential Ontognosiology: Conceptual Traits. Philosophical Thoughtб no. 2, pp. 166–199, 2012. (In Rus.) 13. Heidegger, M. The Source of the Art and the Purpose of Thought in Heidegger, M. The Works and Reflections of Different Years. Moscow: Gnozis Publ., 1993: 280–292. (In Rus.) 14. Heidegger, M. Ponderings II–VI: Black Notebooks 1931–1938. Moscow: Gaidar Institute Publ., 2016. (In Rus.) 15. Jünger, F. G. The Perfection of Technology. Machine and Property. St. Petersburg: Vladimir Dal’ Publ., 2002. (In Rus.) |
| Full article | Existential Ontognosiology: Resistance to Methodological Mediation |
| 0 | |
| 0 | |
