К проблеме смысла в социальной семиотике: глубокая семиотика как концептуальное расширение социальной семиотики
Semiotic systems are closely associated with social practices, within which the former record, store, and disseminate social experience. These systems affect the human consciousness to change the semantic picture of the world, behaviour, and the way one perceives reality. Almost all cultural artefacts perform the function of a sign. As a semiotic system develops, special signs emerge to replace the artefacts by denoting them. Iconic signs are based upon
resemblance, index signs upon a causal relationship, and symbols on social conventions. Language is the most important system of symbolisation. Indeed, language serves as a guide to the systems of rules, values, and socio-cultural practices. In this paper, I present a model of deep semiotics, which is interpreted as a semantic structure of social experience objectified into a sign. This structure includes the material form, the referential meaning, and the personal meaning (attitudes and experiences) of the sign. This model describes the levels and dynamics of the assimilation and subjectification (de-objectification, understanding) of social experience. At the same time, the model demonstrates the objectification of experience. The components of the semantic structure represent the levels of understanding – identification, referencing, interpretation, evaluation, and empathy.
The article shows the importance of philosophy Ricker for theoretical sociology. Perspectives of sociology associated with a combination of theories and theories of action events. Action theory developed in sociology and theory of events is not. Ricoeur philosophy - one of the possible intellectual resources in order to change this situation.
The paper discusses the problem of personality development in its reflexive aspect and realization of its capacities within relationship with another person. Methodological bases of the study are psychology of personality, ontology and philosophy of life, existential philosophy; philosophy of language, phenomenology. Being a part of "general personology", a new area of psychological science, the study uses the methods of hermeneutics, reflection, and theoretical modelling in order to extract and generalize the existing knowledge about the capacities of the I. Based on the ideas of M. Heidegger, J.-P. Sartre, and P. Ricoeur, the author develops a hermeneutic model of the multidimensional capacities of the I that are revealed within relationship with the Other. The model describes the genesis of these capacities and of awareness, of the I as a source of reflective mediation, and the forms these capacities take in the relationships of personality. It summarizes the types and dynamics of the capacities of the I in the dimensions of “between I and the Other”, “I-in-the-Others”, “the-Other-in-me”. The reflexive model of the capacities of the I can be used within practices of dialogical self-experience and self-development using retrospective analysis of oneself and one's past expressions, as well as a practice of development of relationship with the Other. The vocal dialogue between the I and the Other is viewed within the life context of each of its participants, which reveals its personological nuances not represented in other human sciences.
The article focuses on investigation of personal attitudes toward oppositions of life. This research is following the principles of psychology of personal life attitudes and cultural psychology of personality. Some ways of explication of psychological knowledge about intuitive and reflexive personal attitudes to oppositions from cultural sources are suggested. As a data for hermeneutic analysis, texts of folk tales and Renaissance self-cognition text are provided. Author concentrates on self-developing and self-forming aspects of personal attitude to life oppositions.
There were attempts to discovered the nature of the unique dialogue between philosopher Strahov and his famous contemporaries and opponents: Tolstoy, Dostoevsky and others in the monograph
The purpose of the research is to substantiate the development of integral branch of modern psychology of personality which is defined as personology. The research stresses the need to change dominating analytical approaches to the study of personality for the synthetic approach defined as «science of synthesis». It will reflect multiple ties between different theories and consulting personality models; experience of creating a single semantic space for personality cognition; unity of theoretical, cultural and practical psychology of personality. This triple format of personology is focused on discovery and realization of self-cognition of the personality as well as personality of the personologist being the subject of hermeneutics, theoretical studies and practical activity. The research defines the subject of personology based on positions of synthesis as well as defines the foundation for integration of the personological knowledge, structure of personology, content, method and forms of interaction between cultural, fundamental and consulting psychology.
This article discusses work that is part of a larger project intended to explore the importance of values in a wide variety of contexts. The project addresses three broad questions about values. First, how are the value priorities of individuals affected by their social experiences? That is, how do the common experiences people have, because of their shared locations in the social structure, influence their value priorities? And, how do individuals’ unique experiences affect their value priorities? Second, how do the value priorities held by individuals affect their behavioral orientations and choices? That is, how do value priorities influence ideologies, attitudes, and actions in the political, religious, environmental, and other domains?
Human communication is basically the exchange of information. How can this be realized? Each communicant proceeds from a subjective perception of an objective reality; however in order to exchange information relating to this reality communicants are obliged to coordinate their perceptions. Each of us entertains personal experiences based on individual impressions and associations. But communication presupposes the presence of a common experience and the possibility of the coordination of subjective perceptions. It is presumed that communicants share common experiences: this seems to be the natural premise of communication.
How is this possible? How can I be certain, for example, that my interlocutor understands the words in the same way I do? How can we correlate our understanding? It seems obvious that the necessary condition of communication is an agreement between the communicants. But how can this agreement be reached? Where is the initial point of the coordination of individual experience of different persons?
The present book deals with this and related questions. Special attention is given to the role of deixis in the process of communication and to the mechanisms of linguistic comprehension.
On the one hand, Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics is admittedly the integrative part of the history of phenomenological movement. On the other hand, the hermeneutical subject area, as well as disciplinary self-awareness of hermeneutics, diverges considerably from that of the initial E. Husserl's phenomenological project. This fact serves as a motif for reconstruction of the intrinsic logic of the phenomenological movement. The aim of such reconstruction is to answer the following questions: What is the reason for including philosophical hermeneutics into phenomenological philosophy? What role does hermeneutics play in the history of the phenomenological movement? The interpretation of phenomenological subject area in terms of primordial phenomenality serves as a horizon for this reconstruction of the essential logic of phenomenological research. Such understanding of phenomenological philosophy focus has priority over conventional characteristics of phenomenological subject matter as a variety of phenomena accessible within special methodological attitude. It allows, first of all, to avoid fragmentation of the area of primordial, i.e. phenomenological phenomena and to minimize presuppositions. The totality of phenomenality blocks constructivism inherent to descriptive phenomenology and in consequence limits the application field of reflexive or methodological approaches. The process of disclosing or articulating primordial phenomenality can be described as phenomenologising. Eventually, phenomenology as an explicative method is regarded as the first part of the two-level process of phenomenologising. The second part of this process is the spontaneous self-disclosing of primordial phenomenality. The idea of two-level phenomenology (phenomenology as a method and as a spontaneous event) has been differently realised in Heidegger's and Gadamer's phenomenological-hermeneutical conceptions. From the very beginning Heidegger stands up for the performative, i.e. existential-practical understanding of phenomenological explication. According to him, phenomenology does not so much explicate phenomena but points at those areas and forms of experience where that explication occurs spontaneously. Still, Heidegger is oriented at the explication of static structures of these experiences (which he calls existentialities), which allows us to speak about rudimentary transcendentalism of his philosophical position. In his late works Heidegger emphasises the world-disclosing potency of ontic experiences. Gadamer develops this tendency considering various everyday experiences such as perception of art, participation in rituals, reading, and etc. to be areas of spontaneous phenomenologising.
The present article continues the investigation of the Soqotri verbal system undertaken by the Russian-Soqotri fieldwork team. The article focuses on the so-called “weak” and “geminated” roots in the basic stem. The investigation is based on the analysis of full paradigms (perfect, imperfect and jussive) of more than 170 “weak” and “geminated” Soqotri verbs.