Search
| # | Search | Downloads | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The philosophical concept of historical development created by Alexander Bogdanov (1873–1928) on the basis of general organizational science (tectology) laws is considered. The comparison of the Bogdanov’s concept with Hegel’s philosophy of history and historical materialism of Karl Marx is carried out; the strong and weak parties of the organizational method to an explanation of historical process are analyzed. The modern philosophy of «the end of history» developed by F. Fukuyama is criticized. Keywords: “the end of history”, philosophy of a history, development of a society, dialectics, Marxism, tectology, organizational laws. | 1514 | ||||
| 2 | This article contains critical analysis of Alexander Bogdanov’s scientific theories’ and political positions’ interpretation formulated by I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev in historical monography called “Stalinism”. Methodological and source-studying aspects of Velm's and Alekseev's views are considered in a context of world and Russian political mind of XXth century. Yu.V.Kupert and A. V. Lutsenko made analysis of extremely versatile proofs’ base which offered by I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev for acknowledgement of their research basic hypothesis about genetic relations between “social-organized experience (SOE) concept” with Alexander Bogdanov’s scientific and political views, on the one hand, and social and political practice of Stalin’s Soviet Union, on the other hand. I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev are thinking that the “SOE concept” is concentrating Bogdanov’s political philosophy and practice. This concept is based on the idea of allocation the special figure of personal organizer from the society. Organizer concentrates in his hands the power over all parties and branches of social life, including ideology. Velm and Alekseev are writing that organizer’s role in Soviet history was taken by Stalin whose political practice is presented in critically-publicistic style. The given feature of the sights statement of I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev is estimated by Yu.V.Kupert and A. V. Lutsenko from the scientific research methodology point of view and also from the source study analysis quality point of view. For this reason the special attention in the article is directed at the specific “additional sence method” used by I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev for original interpretation of Bogdanov’s views. Russian Marxist scientist and revolutionary is shown by Velm and Alekseev as “dark hero” who made for Stalin the totalitarian ideology on “SOE concept” base and who worked very hard for introducing this ideology into Soviet society life. For acknowledgement of this thesis I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev are broadly interpreting the involved materials (Bogdanov's texts, their critical analysis in works of V. I. Lenin and other contemporaries of the scientist), and they put in these used works their own sense which not always coincides with a position of primary sources authors. All materials of “Stalinism” are grouping not on their genetic relation, but on the basis of the emotionally-shaped associations, and it is methologically doubtful as attribute of belletristic literature, not of scientific research. Yu.V.Kupert and A. V. Lutsenko proved insufficient argumentation to position of I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev concerning communication between “SOE concept” and Bogdanov's scientific views. Keywords: Alexander Bogdanov, tectology, Marxism, Stalinism, empiriomonism, Machism, ideology, social organization | 1285 | ||||
| 3 | The article characterizes psychological and neurologic aspects of formation of philosophical outlook belonging to such different philosophers as systematic-materialist A. A. Bogdanov and mystic-existentialist N. A. Berdyaev. Marks the presence of steady interrelation between structure and functioning of the brain, on the one hand, and the features of attitude defining the character of philosophical and scientific thinking, on the other hand. Estimates the reasons and character of incompatibility between “left-hemispherical” rational-logic and “right-hemispherical” emotionallyshaped types of thinking. The special attention is given to the problem of the superconsciousness providing creative statement and scientific and philosophical problem solving. Keywords: rationalism, irrationalism, psychology, physiology of the brain, consciousness structure | 1339 | ||||
| 4 | The article considers the method of tectological system analysis which was developed by Alexander Bogdanov (1873–1928) for research of complex social, economic and political processes on the basis of natural sciences regularities. The author compares Bogdanov’s method with other later created forms of system analysis and estimates their comparative effectiveness in the sphere of historical events and forecasting of social crises. States the fact of some tectological key regularities adoption in the process of L. von Bertalanfi’s general system theory and N. Weiner’s cybernetics development. Shows the methodological limitation of the general system theory, cybernetics and I. Prigozhin’s synergetrics which can’t be applied for researching transformational processes in social, economic, political, cultural and ideological spheres of society’s life. Proposes an essentially new concept of historical process as an organized sequence of the facts unified by functionally chained causal relationships, the very existence of them which excludes multiplied interpretation of the events recorded in historical sources. The author proves that such perception of social reality (essential characteristic of which is a historical process) caused the hyper-crytical attitude to Bogdanov’s method of tectological system analysis om the part of scientists of the 20th and 21th centuries, though the heuristic potential of Bogdanov’s theory for historical events research remains high. Keywords: history of science, tectology, system analysis, forecasting, historical process | 1813 | ||||