TY - JOUR

T1 - Антропологический поворот в исследованиях мировоззрения

T2 - теоретический и практический аспекты

AU - Lvov, A. A.

N1 - Funding Information: * This research was supported by a grant from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project 19-011-00603 “Science as social institute in projects of the Russian modernization”). Publisher Copyright: © 2020 Saint Petersburg State University. All rights reserved. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2020/6/30

Y1 - 2020/6/30

N2 - The concept of worldview is quite ambiguous in modern humanities. Philosophers and scholars insist that there is such a spiritual or cognitive basis of each people, person or language, which finds its expression in the way they behave, think, or speak. Current Russian-speaking colleagues hold that there are different levels or types of worldview (such as mythological, religious, and scientific). All this testifies that the term of worldview lacks preciseness either in Russian and in foreign discourse. The main task of the article is to justify the possibility of a different approach to the study of worldview as a special phenomenon. The question can be raised of what exactly we analyze when dealing with worldview. The author is convinced that it would be better to work with the concept of worldview not as “what”, but rather as “how”. In developing his argument, the author focuses on three main aspects of the issue: (1) the accuracy in describing and conceiving worldview as the issue of philosophy; (2) the historical and contemporary examples of the worldview typology; (3) the refutation of such a dichotomy of “science — worldview” and the proposal of an integrated approach to the issue. The alternative way advocated by modern and classical authors is to turn to a more theoretically fruitful method of studying worldviews, that is, to the anthropological perspective.

AB - The concept of worldview is quite ambiguous in modern humanities. Philosophers and scholars insist that there is such a spiritual or cognitive basis of each people, person or language, which finds its expression in the way they behave, think, or speak. Current Russian-speaking colleagues hold that there are different levels or types of worldview (such as mythological, religious, and scientific). All this testifies that the term of worldview lacks preciseness either in Russian and in foreign discourse. The main task of the article is to justify the possibility of a different approach to the study of worldview as a special phenomenon. The question can be raised of what exactly we analyze when dealing with worldview. The author is convinced that it would be better to work with the concept of worldview not as “what”, but rather as “how”. In developing his argument, the author focuses on three main aspects of the issue: (1) the accuracy in describing and conceiving worldview as the issue of philosophy; (2) the historical and contemporary examples of the worldview typology; (3) the refutation of such a dichotomy of “science — worldview” and the proposal of an integrated approach to the issue. The alternative way advocated by modern and classical authors is to turn to a more theoretically fruitful method of studying worldviews, that is, to the anthropological perspective.

KW - Anthropological turn

KW - Bernhard Groethuysen

KW - Heinrich Gomperz

KW - Philosophy as a rigorous science

KW - Typology of worldview

KW - Worldview

KW - Worldview as the issue of philosophy

KW - Worldview studies

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85096468817&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.21638/SPBU17.2020.206

DO - 10.21638/SPBU17.2020.206

M3 - статья

AN - SCOPUS:85096468817

VL - 36

SP - 279

EP - 290

JO - Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология

JF - Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология

SN - 2542-2278

IS - 2

ER -