От методологического плюрализма к дисциплинарному организму: случай психологии
In the article approaches to a problem of “methodological pluralism” in psychology are discussed. Instead of hierarchy of “explanation levels”, essentially reduced to a certain fundamental level, the idea of “topological system” of the interconnected explanations is offered. Then, the experimental refutation of the explaining hypothesis crashed not only this one (more generally: not only system of theoretical sets in which this hypothesis is put forward) but all complex of scientificallypsychological explanations which could not remain indifferent to such refutation. Psychology keeping the methodological pluralism would become a disciplinary organism with uniform “nervous system” reacting on results of empirical researches.
The article considers the Views of L. N. Tolstoy not only as a representative, but also as a accomplisher of the Enlightenment. A comparison of his philosophy with the ideas of Spinoza and Diderot made it possible to clarify some aspects of the transition to the unique Tolstoy’s religious and philosophical doctrine. The comparison of General and specific features of the three philosophers was subjected to a special analysis. Special attention is paid to the way of thinking, the relation to science and the specifics of the worldview by Tolstoy and Diderot. An important aspect is researched the contradiction between the way of thinking and the way of life of the three philosophers.
Tolstoy's transition from rational perception of life to its religious and existential bases is shown. Tolstoy gradually moves away from the idea of a natural man to the idea of a man, who living the commandments of Christ. Starting from the educational worldview, Tolstoy ended by creation of religious and philosophical doctrine, which were relevant for the 20th century.
The article is concerned with the notions of technology in essays of Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger. The special problem of the connection between technology and freedom is discussed in the broader context of the criticism of culture and technocracy discussion in the German intellectual history of the first half of the 20th century.