Hermeneutics as a Methodology of the Post-Modern and Post-Post-Modern Eras
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The contemporary world stands at the threshold of the sixth technological structure the basis of which must be comprised of the knowledge-intensive, or “high” the technologies, the contours of which are already beginning to form in the developed countries of the world. The material foundation of the Post-Modern and Post-Post-Modern eras is comprised of the achievements of the fifth and sixth technological structures. The culture of the contemporary post-industrial society is the culture of technics, technology and information. All knowledge materializes itself in texts.
The necessity for achievement of a multitude of semantic planes demands reflection and intuition. The aim of the
present article is to clarify the specificity of the understanding of hermeneutics in the philosophy of post-modernism.
Anti-rationality as the main characteristic feature of post-modernism has stipulated the intensification of its attention
towards the sphere of the creation of the subject of knowledge. Jacques Derrida examines reality as a text in which the
hermeneutic method presents the opportunity of mastering the meaning of signs of any type of thinking activity. Michel
Foucault examines culture as an aggregate of texts presenting various aspects of life. The method of hermeneutics
in Post-Modernism possesses a conceptual meaning. Through empathy and intuition hermeneutics is capable of
reconstructing the picture of events which present a different perspective of the picture of the world. Post-Modernism
interprets understanding as a means of existence of the human being, and for this reason it endows the hermeneutical
method with an ontological status. In the new model of culture the existing concepts and categories become basic for
the creation of new meanings, ideas and a new cultural paradigm. What becomes a natural occurrence is the transferal
into the sphere of consciousness, which generates the problem of the creator and his creation. As the result of wide
functionality the hermeneutical method in the philosophy of Post-Modernism is considered to be the most important
for analysis of the contemporary human being and the world.
Keywords: the technological mode, the Post-Modern, the Post-Post-Modern, the philosophy of Post-Modernism,
the hermeneutical method, the text of culture, supra-rational methods of cognition, intuition, subject of cognition.
Article Details
Copyright
The rights on the results of intellectual activity and equated means of individualization are protected in accordance with Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The authorship, author's name, executor’s name, inviolability of the work and result of execution are protected by the rules of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation of the author or executor, regardless of providing legal protection of such results of intellectual activity at the time of their forming.
Copyright laws regulate the civil legal relations for using works of science, literature and art. Such relationships are formed as the result of the author’s writing his or her texts. In this case the author can rightfully claim copyright of the work.
The author has certain rights to reuse the work (see: “Ethical Aspects in Terms of Multifold Publications).
Licenses
All copyrights on the articles belong to their authors. The author transfers the rights on using the article the publisher.
PDF versions of scholarly articles of the journal PMN are published by using the license Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives cc by-nc-nd, allowing loading and distributing works on the assumption of indicating the authorship. The works may not be changed in any way or used for commercial interests.
Criteria for Authorship, Co-authorship
The term “author” refers to all persons (co-authors) who have made a substantial contribution to conducting the research and creation of the manuscript and responsible for its content. The person (author) who has submitted the manuscript to the editorial board shall bear responsibility for the complete list of the group of authors and the changes made to the manuscript in accordance with the results of the peer reviewing and editing.
1. Authorship is based on the following criteria:
1) The author made a substantial contribution to the research activity and development of concept, collected the data, made analysis and interpretation of the data.
2) The author carried out the writing of the text of draft articles and edited it attentively and substantially.
3) The author approved the final version of the article prior to its submission.
4) The author bears responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript.
2. The authors shall guarantee that the submitted manuscript is the original work.
3. Scholarly reviews for some issue or other should be objective, present material in a wide range and at the same time take into account the views of the author of the review.
4. The authorship of scholarly publications is obligated to reflect accurately the contribution of individuals to the research activity, with specific information about the authors.
5. The authors may not mislead the readers by publishing acknowledgements of gratitude to people who were not actually involved in writing the work. Other persons who made contribution to the work, but are nevertheless not the authors, may be listed in the rubric of “Acknowledgements,” with indications of the type and extent of their activities.
6. Authors are obligated to provide a description of their contribution to the publication.
7. The order of authorship must be a joint resolution of co-authors. The authors should be ready to explain the order of their enumeration and listing.
8. The authors shall be entirely responsible for the correct definition of authorship acting in accordance with the rules adopted in their institution.
9. Investigators must ensure that only those persons who meet the criteria for authorship (that made a significant contribution to the work), shall be considered the authors, and the researchers who do not merit authorship will be excluded from the list of authors.
References
2. Artashkina T. A. Spetsifika upravleniya rossiyskim obrazovaniem v sovremennykh usloviyakh [The Specificity of Management of Russian Education in Present-Day Conditions]. Professional'noe obrazovanie v sovremennom mire [Professional Education in the Modern World]. 2018. Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 1750–1760.
3. Bell D. Gryadushchee postindustrial'noe obshchestvo: opyt sotsiologicheskogo prognozirovaniya [The Future Post-industrial Society: An Experience of Social Prognosis]. Moscow: Academia, 1999. 786 p.
4. Varygin D. V. Problema ponimaniya v sovremennoy germenevtike [The Issue of Understanding in Modern Hermeneutics]. Rossiyskiy gumanitarnyy zhurnal [Russian Humanitarian Journal]. 2012, pp. 23–27.
5. Gavrilina L. M. Kaliningradskiy tekst kak metatekst kul'tury [The Kaliningrad Text as a Meta-Text of Culture]. Kantovskiy sbornik [Kantian Compilation]. 2010. No. 3. URL: http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kaliningradskiy-tekst-kak-metatekst-kultury (17.11. 2017).
6. Glazyev S. Yu. Vybor budushchego [The Choice of the Future]. Moscow: Algoritm, 2005. 350 p.
7. Gurko E. Zhak Derrida. Dekonstruktsiya: teksty i interpretatsiya [Jacques Derrida. Deconstruction: Texts and Interpretation]. Minsk: Ekonompress, 2001. 367 р.
8. Derrida Zh. Vvedenie v dekonstruktsiyu [Derrida, Jacques. Introduction to Deconstruction]. Moskovskie lektsii [Moscow Lectures]. Sverdlovsk, 1991, pp. 6–46.
9. Derrida Zh. Grammatologiya [Derrida, Jacques. Grammatology]. Moscow: Ad Marginem, 2000. 540 р.
10. Derrida Zh. Pis'mo i razlichie [Derrida Jacques. Writing and Difference]. Moscow: Academicheskiy proekt, 2000. 432 р.
11. Derrida Zh. Sila i znachenie [Derrida Jacques. Strength and Importance]. Pis'mo i razlichie [Writing and Difference]. Moscow, 2000, рр. 9–56.
12. Dyakov A. V. Mishel Fuko i ego vremya [Michel Foucault and his Time]. St. Petersburg: Aleteyya, 2010. 668 p.
13. Iglton T. Teoriya literatury. Vvedenie [Eagleton T. The Theory of Literature: Introduction]. Ed. by M. Mayatskiy. Moscow: Territoriya budushchego, 2010. 296 p.
14. Kondratyev N. D. Bol'shye tsikly kon'yunktury i teoriya predvideniya: izbrannye trudy [Large-Scale Cycles of Economic Activity and Theory of Foresight: Selected Works]. Moscow: Ekonomika, 2002. 765 p.
15. L'vov D. S. Effektivnost' upravleniya tekhnicheskim razvitiem [The Efficiency of Management of Technological Development]. Moscow: Ekonomika, 1990. 255 p.
16. Maklyuen G. M. Ponimanie media. Vneshnie rasshireniya cheloveka [McLuhan G. M. Understanding Media: The Outward Extensions of Man]. Moscow; Zhukovskiy: KANON-press-C, Kuchkovo pole, 2003. 464 p.
17. Mitroshenkov O. A. Chto pridet na smenu postmodernizmu? [What will Come to Replace Postmodernism?]. METAMODERN: zhurnal o metamodernizme [METAMODERN: Journal on Meta-Modernism]. URL: http:// metamodernizm.ru/chto-pridet-na-smenu-postmodernizmu/ (17.11. 2017).
18. Mol' A. Sotsiodinamika kul'tury [Moles A. The Socio-dynamics of Culture]. Moscow: LKI publ., 2008. 416 p.
19. Simbirtseva N. A. Kul'turologicheskiy potentsial kategorii «tekst kul'tury» [The Culturological Potential of the Category “Text of Culture”]. Chelovek v mire kul'tury [The Human Being in the Context of Culture]. 2013. No. 3, pp. 27–32.
20. Fuko M. Slova i veshchi. Arkheologiya nauchnogo znaniya [Foucault M. Words and Things. Archaeology of Scientific Knowledge]. St. Petersburg: Gumanitarnaya literatura, 1994. 321 р.
21. Khaydegger M. Vremya i bytie [Heidegger M. Time and Being: Articles and Speeches]. Moscow: Respublika, 1993. 468 р.
22. Tsareva N. A. Problemy filosofii cul'tury v russkom simvolisme i evropeyskom postmodernisme [The Problem of the Philosophy of Culture of Russian Symbolism and European Postmodernism]. Vladivostok: Vladivostok State University of Economics, 2010. 390 р.