On worldview, its structure and relation to philosophy
Philosophy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2018-2-191-202Keywords:
Weltanschauung, decision-making, values, explanation, justification, laws and principles, rationalityAbstract
Integration of higher education sphere with the service sector strikes painfully the humanities and especially philosophy. The number of Russian and Western publications about the meaning of philosophy and its place in culture, increasing over the past five years, may be regarded as an indirect evidence of this trend. Another reason for the author’s scientific interest in this topic is hidden in the contradictions of globalization. Many of the UN projects are running into difficulties, which, partly, originate from the differences in worldview. The currently made attempts to analyze those are based on narrow — «two-dimensional» — models of the subject. It is not yet possible to draw a strict line between information as a part of Weltanschauung and other knowledge. The paper proposes a model which unites the current interest in the nature of philosophy with the analysis of the worldview structure. The main ideas are: 1) the structure of worldview represents a decision-making situation; 2) such a situation includes three components: some options for the subsequent advance in the course of life; then conditions, being insufficient, under which any of the alternatives can be implemented; and, finally, the criteria for selecting one or another option; 3) historical types of worldviews differ by the model of explanation, the mode of criteria justification (values, in other words), and by the level of the agent’s freedom admitted by behavior programs. These types are mythological, religious and philosophical. It seems that philosophyused to develop according to requests on rationalization of one or another part of the worldviewReferences
Витгенштейн Л. О достоверности // Витгенштейн Л. Философские работы. Ч. 1. М.: Гнозис, 1994. 612 c.
Гегель Г.Ф. Философия права. М.: Мысль, 1990. 524 c.
Дворкин Р. О правах всерьез. М.: РОССПЭН, 2004. 392 c.
Кант И. Критика способности суждения // И. Кант. Сочинения на немецком и русском языках: в 4 т. М.: Наука, 2001. Т. 4. 1120 с.
Степин В.С. Теоретическое знание. М.: Прогресс–Традиция, 2000. 744 с.
Хазиев В.С., Хазиева Е.В. Мировоззрение как субъективная реальность. Уфа: Изд-во БГПУ, 2004. 296 с.
Цонев В. Картина на света и нейнота светогледна и методологична роля. София: Наука и изкуство, 1987. 126 с.
Audi R. Theoretical Rationality: Its Sources, Structure, and Scope // The Oxford Handbook of Rationality / ed. by A.R. Mele, P. Rawling. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2004. P. 17–44. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195145397.003.0002.
Conradie E. Views on Worldviews: An Overview of the Use of the Term «Worldview» in Selected Theological Discourses // Scripture. 2014. Vol. 113, no. 1. P. 1–12. URL: http://scriptura.journals.ac.za/pub/article/view/918 (accessed: 12.01.2018).
Hiebert P.G. Transforming Worldviews: An Anthropological Understanding of how People Change. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008. 368 p.
Hornby A.S. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2004. 1540 p.
Kearney M. World View. Novato, CA: Chandler & Sharp, 1984. 248 р.
Sartini S., Shri Ahimsa-Putra H. Preliminary Study on Worldviews // Humaniora. 2017. Vol. 29, no. 3. P. 265–277. DOI: 10.22146/jh.v29i3/29690.
Sire J.W. Naming the Elephant. Worldview as a Concept. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010. 202 p.
References
Audi R. (2004). Theoretical Rationality: Its Sources, Structure, and Scope. The Oxford Handbook of Rationality, ed. by A.R. Mele, P. Rawling. New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 17–44. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195145397.003.0002.
Conradie, E. (2014). Views on Worldviews: An Overview of the Use of the Term «Worldview» in Selected Theological Discourses. Scripture. Vol. 113, no. 1, pp. 1–12. Available at: http://scriptura.journals.ac.za/pub/article/view/918 (accessed: 12.01.2018). Dworkin, R. (2004). O pravakh vserez [Taking Rights Seriously]. Moscow, ROSSPEN Publ., 392 p.
Hegel, G.F. (1990). Filosofiya prava [Philosophy of Right]. Moscow, Mysl’ Publ., 524 p.
Hiebert, P.G. (2008). Transforming Worldviews: An Anthropological Understanding of how People Change. Grand Rapids, Baker Academic, 368 p.
Hornby, A.S. (2004). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. New York, Oxford University Press, 1540 p. Kant, I. (2001). Kritika sposobnosti suzhdeniya [The Critique of Judgement]. I. Kant. Sochineniya na nemetskom i russkom yazykakh: v 4 t. [Kant’s works in german and Russian: in 4 vols.]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., vol. 4, 1120 p.
Kearney, M. (1984). World View. Novato, Chandler & Sharp., 248 р.
Khaziev, V.S., Khazieva, E.V. (2004). Mirovozzrenie kak subektivnaya realnost’ [Worldview as a subjective reality]. Ufa, BSPU Publ., 296 p. Sartini, S., Shri Ahimsa-Putra, H. (2017). Preliminary Study on Worldviews. Humaniora. Vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 265–277. DOI:10.22146/jh.v29i3/29690.
Sire, J.W. (2010). Naming the Elephant. Worldview as a Concept. Downers Grove, IVP Academic, 202 p.
Stepin, V.S. (2000). Teoreticheskoe znanie [Theoretical Knowledge]. Moscow, Progress-Traditsiya Publ., 744 p.
Tsonev, V. (1987). Kartina na sveta i neynota svetogledna i metodologichna rolya [Picture of the world and its global and methodological role]. Sofia, Nauka i izkustvo Publ., 126 p.
Wittgenstein, L. (1994). O dostovernosti [On Certainty]. L. Wittgenstein. Filosofskie raboty, Ch. 1 [L. Wittgenstein. Philosophical works. Pt. 1]. Moscow, Gnozis Publ., 612 p.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Perm University Herald. Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
