RAS History & PhilologyРоссийская история Rossiiskaia istoriia

  • ISSN (Print) 0869-5687
  • ISSN (Online) 3034-5790

In Defense of the Analytical Approach

PII
S004287440005727-4-
DOI
10.31857/S004287440005727-4
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Volume/ Edition
Volume / Issue 7
Pages
69-74
Abstract

The article presents a critical response to the project of the synthetic philosophy of M.N. Epstein. The author of the article partly agrees with the main intention of the project: modern philosophy should more actively perform a projective function in society, developing and justifying new types of cognitive and cultural practices. At the same time, the article emphasizes that philosophers still retain the traditional tendency to create synthetic constructions that claim to universality, whereas modern philosophy has largely got rid of such illusions of previous philosophy. The latter circumstance sets the context in which the project of synthetic philosophy proposed by M.N. Epstein, causes objections. In particular, the article shows that at an early stage of its development, analytical philosophy can indeed be regarded as the antithesis of a constructive and synthetic understanding of philosophy. But from the middle of the last century, the situation began to change, and nowadays fundamental metaphysical problems are discussed in analytical philosophy - from the nature of human consciousness to conditions of freedom and justice. In light of this, the contrast between the synthetic approach and the analytical approach seems to be unfounded. The article also discusses the nature of concepts, their difference from notions and their various interpretations in modern philosophy.

Keywords
analysis, synthesis, analytical metaphysics, philosophy of consciousness, concept, notion
Date of publication
28.07.2019
Year of publication
2019
Number of purchasers
89
Views
940

References

  1. 1. Askoldov, Sergei A. (2012) ‘Concept and the word’, Askoldov S.A. Epistemology: Articles, Moskovskaya Patriarkhiya Pub., Moscow, pp. 157?177. (In Russian).
  2. 2. Bochenski, Jozef M. (1987) Sto Zabobonow. Krotki filozoficzny slownik zabobonow, Instytut Literacki, Pariz (Russian Translation, 1993).
  3. 3. Demjankov, Valery Z. (2001) ‘Notion and concept in fiction and in the scientific language’, Voprosy Filologii, 1, pp. 35?47, Moscow (In Russian).
  4. 4. Epstein, Mikhail N. (2019) ‘From Analysis to Synthesis: on the Vocation of Philosophy in the XXIst century” Voprosy Filosofii, Vol. 7 (2019), pp. ?–?
  5. 5. Filatov, Vladimir P., Mikhailovsky, Alexander V., Nikiforov, Alexander L., Ignatenko, Antonina S. (2009) ‘We discuss the article concept’, Epistemology and philosophy of science, XXII, 4, pp. 161?170. (In Russian).
  6. 6. Neretina, Svetlana S. (2009) Concept // Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, Kanon +, Moscow, p. 387?389. (In Russian).
  7. 7. Wierzbicka, Anna (1993) ‘A conceptual basis for cultural psychology’, Ethos, 21, 2, pp. 205–231 (Russian Translation, 1996).
QR
Translate

Индексирование

Scopus

Scopus

Scopus

Crossref

Scopus

Higher Attestation Commission

At the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Scopus

Scientific Electronic Library