Creating an Image of History in The Context of The Principles of The Scientific Picture of The World

 Abstract

The specificity of the organization of the picture of social and historical reality lies in the integral unity of conceptual-rational and emotional-irrational components of reflection, as a result of which the image of history acquires the characteristics of mythologism. The author concludes that the mythologema resulting from the organic synthesis of objective characteristics of history and subjective institutions of sociocultural discourse is an integral feature of the organization of the picture of social and historical reality.

Introduction

The boundary of the XX-XXI centuries became the period of another revision of the fundamental grounds for the development of social history, which could not but touch upon the issues of the status of historical knowledge, the conditions of its formation and assessments of its content. The formation of a methodology for interdisciplinary analysis has greatly expanded the space for philosophical analysis of being in general and of certain aspects of social life in particular. However, historical studies obviously lack a link to the analysis of structures directly affecting the formation of the picture of social and historical reality. The development of the sphere of social and human sciences has clearly demonstrated the counterproductive exclusion of historians - "practitioners" from the analysis of conceptual bases of organizational and methodological institutions of their research. In this regard, the establishment of systemically important characteristics of the formation of a picture of historical reality takes on a special heuristic view.

Materials  and  methods

Materials and methods are conditioned by the proposition of mythologeme as an attributive form of history reproduction. The implementation of the phenomenological approach allowed to reveal the system of objectification of the subjective as the most important principle of the formation of the historical image. The methods of logical-theoretical analysis and synthetic reduction were used to study the basic research paradigms of socio-historical reflection and derive their own position in determining the essence of the foundations of the picture of socio-historical reality as a whole.

Literature Review

The initial ideas about history were framed in the form of mythical images, which obviously attempt to explain the phenomena of social evolution, by including in the picture the historical content of facts and their interpretations (myths, stories, legend) as equivalent.

The medieval stage of the organization of the picture of history provides a fundamentally different understanding of social development, which was based on a discrete world perception, which leads to the formation of a dualistic image of reality: mountainous and mountainous worlds, respectively, and history is divided into secular and sacred. Historical being is defined as a process having a beginning and a finite purpose, (it) begins with the act of creation of man and is expressed in the existential antagonism of the Grad of the Earth and the Grad of God, with the subsequent completion of history in the "Terrible Judgment," which confers the historical process on the conducted meanings.

During the Renaissance and New Time, the formation of the image of history was linked to the cultivation of the Galilean-Newtonian model of reality as the most effective instrument for designing a picture of the world. In this regard, the foundations of social history were associated with the patterns of mechanistic principles of science, the extrapolation of whose achievements to the vision of social life entailed the creation of a picture of history based on the principles of empirical experiment and rationalist analysis aimed at overcoming idols of subjectivity and chance. At the same time, it is not possible to talk about the organic inclusion of historical knowledge in the system of classical scientific picture of the world at this stage. G. Galileo noted that really scientific knowledge can be obtained only in the field of research of nature properties, but impossible in the sciences of society.

I. Kant presented the teleological concept of the development of history, in which the accidents of social evolution were leveled by the expediency of harmony of cultural-reasonable and natural-natural beginning of human nature. At the same time, the "Kantov program of social knowledge mastering states that science about man is impossible, (as the italic Stepanov A.G.)... man goes beyond the world of phenomena subject to a causal pattern..." [1. p. 148]. G. Hegel, describing history in the context of the deployment of the potential of the world spirit, identifies the original, reflexive and philosophical history, noting that the creation of an objective picture of the social and historical process is in any case impossible, as the picture of history is not so much a reflection of historical reality, as it is, but a means of demonstrating certain principles of the organization of historical knowledge [8].

The next stage of scientific knowledge development led to the formation of a non-classical picture of the world, in which the view of reality as a structure in which each of the levels has its own specificity of organizational principles was established. In this context he considered the history of society M. Weber, believing it as the realization of complex interaction, political, economic, religious institutions each of which has independent meanings, motives, qualities, goals. [29]. The principles of the formation of history within the paradigm of the non-classical scientific picture of the world were based on the desire to establish principles for changing the levels of the social system and the system of correlation relations between them.

In the post-classical picture of the world, ideas are realized about reality as a complex of self-organizing systems, the development of which is connected with multivariance, nonlinearity, contradictions, a combination of divergence with convergence, ordering with chaotic, diversity with homogenization. Images of history are based on a synergistic model of reality mastering. Changes in the social system are linked to external challenges that society responds to according to its nature. The beginnings of such a vision of the socio-historical world can be seen in A. Toynby `s theory of challenges and answers and K. Popper `s writings. The latter in the work "Open Society and its Enemies" proposed a methodology of interpretation of value-normative and scientific-reflexive aspects of the gnoseological potential of the subject, and historical theories characterized as an expression of the historian `s view on an objective series of events [18].

Modern directions of analysis of social and historical knowledge within the framework of formation of a popular scientific picture of the world are connected with trends of emergence of post-classical scientific picture of the world. The purpose of historical research is to master the processes of changing the ontological status of man. "The understanding of history has passed several stages: naturalistic, mythological, monoreligious, philosophical, and finally scientific: first positivist, and later postpositivist (which actually set the framework of the standard concept of science for understanding the relationship between empirical facts, empirical generalizations, and theoretical laws of metaistory)" [24. p. 147-148]. The condition of historical knowledge is expressed in realization of "synthesis of historical and historiographic methodologies" today, at the same time the historical ontology", the assuming diversity (diversity) of history" "is formed" [In the same place].

Results

Summing up the analysis of the conceptual bases for the construction of a picture of social and historical reality, we must state that the theories of the formation of the image of history are directly related to the context of the perspective of their information and heuristic potential, which has proved to be able to ensure the effective solution of specific research tasks. Choosing "a way of knowing social processes... Becomes dependent on socio-cultural nature,... societies …" [13. p. 51]. At the same time, specific characteristics of the organization of historical research retain principle invariants.

There is no doubt that the specificity of historical reflection lies in the dominant role of the reproductive mode of reflection, which is inseparable from the sociocultural determinations of the subject. "The historian faces difficult tasks: to find and make sense of information, about a particular event. Historical information does not speak for itself, archives are incomplete, ambiguous, contradictory, confusing. The historian needs to interpret the pieces of evidence and collect them into a coherent, truthful history "[15.p. 3]. The picture of social and historical reality, which arises in the context of the information limitations of the materials involved in the formation of the historical image, obviously accumulates both the facts and institutions that arise in the cancers of operations to supplement the unknown by the known, which inevitably brings a substantial subjective aspect to the image of history.

The next specific parameter of the organization of the picture of social and historical reality is the factor of pre-knowledge. Pre-knowledge is information within the framework of which a preliminary image of the investigated activity formed before the beginning of the purposeful activity on formation of the knowledge system is created. "When Soloviev began writing the first volume of his" History of Russia, "the process of Russian historical life, as he understood it, was already clear to him, and it was only necessary to state it in detail..." [12. p. 138]. The content of the picture of social history is an alloy of information incoming (new), with the system of knowledge established earlier. The image of history is updated by the historian in the context of values already included in the established sociocultural paradigm, and not necessarily in the perspective in which his actual organization was carried out. "Why should we define and infer the facts of the past in more detail than is necessary?" [5. p. 439]. The picture of history thus organized acquires properties mediated by the complex of subjective bases of the theory involved.

The noted situation forces the historian to appeal only to those images that are able to provide an effective solution to a specific research problem. "The multidimensional nature of historical knowledge makes it possible in different research situations to emphasize different aspects of the relationships of the studied factors. For example, relationships treated within some research situation as causal, in another research situation, say, with a wider time frame, should be treated as functional "[11. p. 15]. In such a case, it is possible to assert the variability of the interpretation of a single process of historical evolution, which entails the inevitable "weakening of such fundamental supports of the philosophy of science as" reality "and" objectivity "of scientific knowledge" [19. p. 84]. The reproduction of the picture of social history may become only in the context of the satisfaction of sociocultural, heuristic or other requests of the subject, which reflect not only the needs to master the past, but also the present and potential future of the subject. This circumstance introduces into historical theory the nature of probable assumption, hypotheses that in science are defined as institutions that do not have the resources to provide definitive, exhaustive knowledge. It is necessary to state that "the boundary between scientific and premeditated knowledge becomes unstable, and the interweaving of the meanings of historical obvious" [14. p. 18]. In such conditions, a set of perceptions of social and historical reality can be realized only in the context of its conformity with a certain basis of a particular concept, which does not allow it to be characterized as an expression of objective parameters of the historical process. Its content, along with objective reflection factors, inevitably involves a system of assumptions formed within the framework of the established sociocultural paradigm, presented as the most reasonable version of disclosure of the essence of the investigated. "The historian always, freely or unwittingly, finds himself subjective in his interpretation of the past: the researcher interprets it on the basis of the conceptual and ideological constructions of his own era, guided by personal preferences and subjective choices..." [21. p. 4]. The picture of social and historical reality is a kind of social and psychological project to establish information correspondence of subjective image of history, objective imperatives of sociocultural conditions. The historian, mastering the sphere of history, operates not on the qualities of the data studied directly, but only on the information of the reworked institutions of our imagination.

Discussions

The main consequence of these circumstances is the mythologemization of the content of the picture of social history. Mythologemization in the broadest sense is the process of implementing a certain type of interaction between objective and subjective institutions of social reflection involved in creating a picture of social and historical reality. Mythologema is a specific technology of organization of the picture of social and historical reality, directly related to the assertion in public consciousness of the actual image of history. Unlike mythologization, which is the transformation of reality into unmotivated social conditions and irrational settings, mythologemization includes in its content rationalized stories that allow to design the picture of reality necessary to solve the problems of today. Initiated by the specific conditions of existence of history, mythologemization is realized as a cognitive complex based on the integrative base of scientific facts and axiological preferences of culture. "It is that the perception of a thing possesses a halo of background contemplations" [27. p. 98].

Creating a picture of socially historical reality, "man begins a unique work, turning disproportionate objects to his forces into a state commensurate with his forces. This is done by creating "representatives" of these forces and objects in the game: roles and roles - for people; Objects and models - for the forces of nature; Toys - for objects. So, the child, instead of the horse he can `t handle, takes a rod; A girl unable to cope with a living infant makes a doll; Scientist, unable to manipulate planets, creates a theoretical model" [18. p. 57].

Knowing consciousness transforms impossible things to explore into objects available for reflection. The subject in historical knowledge, deals with a symbolic image of reality, in the content of which the patterns of his inner world are inherent. In this regard, the formation of a picture of socio-historical reality is the result of speculation by its symbolic images. This provision means that each stage of the formation of a system of historical knowledge is based on a relative, approximate idea of the essence of historical phenomena. Man chooses a certain perspective of the reflection of history and thus sets a mythologemic aspect of its content. The historical phenomenon is presented to the historian, artist, psychologist, conservative, liberal, materialist and idealist, in excellent angles. The historical reality embodied in the picture of social history is defined by the subject not as the result of projections of the content of his consciousness on the image of the historical event, but as its reflection as it was in reality. In this process there is not only projection of properties of historical phenomenon into consciousness, but also projection of theoretical constructs of consciousness of the subject into content of historical. The images of history emerging in this way are not experienced by man as products of the organization of reflection resources, but as a world that really exists outside of us and independently of us. At the same time, "concepts and theoretical structures are not a literal reflection of historical reality - they are only a tool that allows this reality to study and solve issues that facts themselves do not raise and resolve" [21.p. 31].

Conclusions

The picture of social and historical reality, which arises as a result of the reconstruction of the historical event, inherently integrates both real facts and designs that have no potential for objectivity. This circumstance betrays the content of images of social history characteristics of mythologema. Thus, the picture of historical reality combines both rational-justified, theoretically proven and verified knowledge, and an information field initiated in the sphere of aggregates of external projection of images of subjective reflection, expressed within the framework of common sense, principles of formal consistency, norms of situational logic. The mythologema of the picture of social and historical reality is a specific attribute of the organization of historical knowledge integrating into its content objective parameters of the historical event with resources of its reflection, realized within the framework of the given sociocultural discourse.

 

References:

  1. Antipov G. A. About Adam Smith `s "Invisible Hand" and formation of a scientific picture of the social world epistemology and philosophy of science//Journal of Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University. - 2017. - № 1 (31). – P. 138-52.

  2. Dawes G. W. Identification of Pseudoscience: a social Process Criterion // Journal for General Philosophy of Science. 2018. 1-16.

  3. Demin V. A. The problem of correlation of history and memory in the philosophical and historical concept of Alan Meghan  // Bulletin of the Samara humanitarian Academy. The Series Of Philosophy. Philology. 2018.  . 1 (23). P. 56-68.

  4. Feldbacher-Escamilla C.J. Philosophy of Science Between the Natural Sciences, the Social Sciences, and the Humanities: Introduction // Journal for General Philosophy of Science. September 2017. Vol. 48. P. 317–326.

  5. Fihte I. G. The main features of the modern era. - SPb.: Mifril, 1993. - P. 499.

  6. Gashkov S. A. Michel Foucault and Claude Lefort: towards a postclassical philosophy of history // History of Philosophy. 2019, Vol. 24, No. 1, P. 89-100.

  7. Griffith A. M. Social construction: big-G grounding, small-g realisation // Philosophical Studies. 2018. Vol. 175, Issue 1. P. 241-260.

  8. Hegel G. V. F. Philosophy of History. - SPb.: Science, 1993. - 479 p.

  9. Herubel J. Observations on revised art history dissertations published by university presses // Journal of Scholarly Publishing.  2016. Vol. 47, Issue 4.  P. 336-346.

  10. Hvidtfeldt R. Interdisciplinarity as Hybrid Modeling // Journal for General Philosophy of Science. 2017. Vol. 48, Issue 1. P. 35-57.

  11. Khostova K V., Finn V. K. Gnoseological and logical problems of historical science. - Moscow: Science, 1995. - 176 p.

  12. Kluchevsky V. O. Writings in Nine Volumes - M.: Thought, 1987. Vol. 7. - 476 p.

  13. Knandev N. A. Substantive and methodological features of philosophy of education//Journal of Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University. - 2015. - № 1. - P. 46-55.

  14. Kuznetsova N. I. Historical epistemology in search of symbolic status//Epistemology and philosophy of science. - 2017. - (51) № 1. – P. 29-32.

  15. Little D., Zalta N. E. Philosophy of History // The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. – 2017. – P. 2-7.

  16. Mourtzis D., Dukas M., Giannoulis S. Conclusion-fundamentals of knowledge reuse for historical product and production information retrieval // Procedia CIRP. 2016. Thom. 41. - P. 472-477.

  17. Pietsc W. A Causal Approach to Analogy // Journal for General Philosophy of Science. October 2019. P. 1–32.

  18. Popper K. Poverty of Historicism. - M.: Progress, VIA, 1993. - 188 p.

  19. Porus V. N. Contextualism in Philosophy of Science // Epistemology and Philosophy of Science. - 2018. - (55) №. 2. - P. 75-93.

  20. Reid A. J., Brooks J. L., Dolgova L., Laurich B., Sullivan B. G., Szekeres P., Wood S. R. L., Bennett J. R., Cooke S. J. Post-2017 Sustainable Development Goals still neglecting their environmental roots in the Anthropocene // Environmental Science & Policy. 2017. Vol. 77.  P. 179-184.

  21. Repina L. P., Zvereva V. V, Paramonova M. Yu. History of historical knowledge. - M.: Drofa, 2004. – 288 p.

  22. Sher G. Truth and Scientific Change // Journal for General Philosophy of Science. 2017. Vol. 48. P. 371–394.

  23. Skempton S. The Informational Fallacy in the Philosophy of Consciousness // Philosophical Forum. October 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/phil.12238

  24. Smyrnov G. S. Noospheric history of mankind as a process of coevolution of the world intelligentsia: collective monograph. Ivanovo: Ivan. State. unstitute, 2008. - 258 p.

  25. Stepanov A. G., Tikhonov A. S. The concept of reverse projection in the system of institutions of formation of the picture of socio-historical reality. Problems of scientific and extra-scientific cognition. Collection of scientific articles of the Department of philosophy and methodology of science. Cheboksary, 2017. P. 129-134.

  26. Tucker E. The Subject of History: Historical Subjectivity and Historical Science // Journal of the Philosophy of History 7. 2016. P. 205-229.

  27. Volkova S. V. Phenomenology of Electronic Educational Technologies//Journal of Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University - 2018. - № 1 (8). - P. 93-106.

  28. Waters K.C. An Epistemology of Scientific Practice // Philosophy of Science. P. 585–611.

  29. Weber M. History of the farm. - Moscow: Canyon Press-C, Kuchkovo Field, 2001. - 575 p.

  30. Wray K.B. Method and Continuity in Science // Journal for General Philosophy of Science.   2017. Vol. 47, P. 363–375.

 

Stepanov A. G., associate Professor, candidate of philosophy, associate Professor. Department of philosophy, sociology and pedagogy, faculty of management and social technologies, Chuvash state University. I. N. Ulyanova. Cheboksary, Russia. 428000. Cheboksary, Moskovsky prospect 15. stalex73@bk.ru. 89176674873.

Kuzmin, Y. A., senior lecturer. Department of criminal law disciplines, faculty of law, Chuvash state University. I. N. Ulyanova. Cheboksary, Russia. 428000. Cheboksary, Moskovsky prospect 15. kya70@ mail.ru. 89030667732.

Tolstova M. L. associate Professor, candidate of economic Sciences, associate Professor. Department of financial law, faculty of law, Chuvash state University. I. N. Ulyanova. Cheboksary, Russia. 428000. Cheboksary, Moskovsky prospect 15. maryaleon@yandex.ru.       89278452448.

Kupirova C. S., associate Professor, candidate of legal Sciences, associate Professor. Department of criminal law disciplines, faculty of law, Chuvash state University. I. N. Ulyanova. Cheboksary, Russia. 428000. Cheboksary, Moskovsky prospect 15. chulpan27@bk.ru.

Arsenteva S. I., associate Professor, candidate of philosophy, associate Professor. Department of philosophy, sociology and pedagogy, faculty of management and social technologies, Chuvash state University. I. N. Ulyanova. Cheboksary, Russia. 428000. Cheboksary, Moskovsky prospect 15. sarsenteva@mail.ru. 9276673083.

Key words

Scientific picture of the world, image of socio-historical reality, mythology, objectivity, subjectivity.

Posted by: Stepanov Aleksey Georgievich, associate Professor, candidate of philosophy, Department of philosophy, sociology and pedagogy, faculty of management and social technologies, Chuvash state University. I. N. Ulyanova. Cheboksary, Russia, Russian Federation (20-Nov-2019)
Follow Us
F Twt Li YT