[ПСИХОЛОГІЯ І СУСПІЛЬСТВО ]
Головна » 2016 » Серпень » 16 » Anatoliy V. FURMAN "VOLODYMYR ROMENETS AS ARCHITECTOR OF METHODOLOGY OF HUMANITARIAN COGNITION" Part 1
12:39
Anatoliy V. FURMAN "VOLODYMYR ROMENETS AS ARCHITECTOR OF METHODOLOGY OF HUMANITARIAN COGNITION" Part 1

VOLODYMYR ROMENETS AS ARCHITECTOR OF METHODOLOGY OF HUMANITARIAN COGNITION

Anatoliy V. FURMAN                                                              Copyright © 2016

УДК 167/168 : 159.9.019

Анатолій В. Фурман

ВОЛОДИМИР РОМЕНЕЦЬ ЯК АРХІТЕКТОР МЕТОДОЛОГІЇ ГУМАНІТАРНОГО ПІЗНАННЯ

 

V. A. Romenets – Builder

of Ukrainian philosophical-psychological school

 

Flow of everyday life is inexorable. Ninety years passed from the moment when in the Kyiv family of officer Andriy and Iryna Romenets was born  Volodya, to whom destined to become the builder of Ukrainian philosophical-psycho­logical school of exceptionally productive and perspective culture-forming format and flashed almost eighteen years when his earthly life ended and according to ancient thinkers, he joined the majority. A lot of light, argumented, meaningful was told by Ukrainian and Russian well-known scientists about academician V. A. Romenets as a talented philosopher and psychologist, histo­rian and logician, culturologist and pedagogue. It’s gratifying to be stated that especially intensive mastering mental immense theoretical continent of this great nugget of nation was occurred in recent years: have seen the world as special edition of the journal “Psychology and society” (2011. – №2 [11]) as two fundamental collections of works – “Psychology of the deed by ways of creativity of V. A. Romenets” (2012 [10]) and “Academician V. A. Romenets: creativity and works” (2016 [1]) that studying, detailing and enrich its creative heritage and dedicated to this giant of Ukrainian spirit – two-volume textbook of P. A. Myasoid (2011, 2013 [6]) and monograph of A. V. Furman and S. K. Shandruk “The essence of the game as committing” (2014 [30]) and P. A. Myasoid “Psychological cognition: history, logic, psy­cho­logy” (2016 [9]).

And still, participation in interdisciplinary roundtable at the Faculty of Psychology of the Kyiv National University named after Taras Shev­chenko with this solemn occasion (20. 05. 2016 [2]) and active interpersonal commu­ni­cation with students and successors of V. A. Ro­­menets clearly indicates that creative mastering and intellectual humanizing his yet little ap­prehensible by ideas, concepts, episteme and generalizations of theoretical mainland only beginning. It is obvious that today it is needed not only to quote, retell and propagandize to world, without doubt, genius scientific achieve­ments of this famous Ukrainian but also take into consideration original forms, methods, ways and means of its psycho-sophian metho­dologization, with help of which there is a possibility to solve the most complex problems of human being – consciousness and un­consciousness, life and death, freedom and responsibility, committing and life way, cog­nition and self-creation etc. In other words, at the foreground of creative reflection of modern worthy people of intellectual discourse in the bosom of interdisciplinary theories appears Volodymyr Romenets as methodologist who creates and samisno practicing proposed by him system of methodology of humanitarian cognition. Especially since well-known: trans­mitted not only knowledge, research experience but also ways-methods of their extraction, construction, design, so valuable not opening themselves as a result of intellectual efforts but those methods with help of which they are carried.

In this analytical context, in 2011, we con­ducted a pilot research which indicated that the historical figure of Volodymyr Romenets affects not only the titanic work, colossal erudition and significant creative achievements but also a perfection of dialectical committing thinking that in the complementarity enabled to create a “universal theoretical world” exceptional com­pleteness and multi-system perfection. There was substantiated a thesis that “V. A. Romenets – it’s Hegel in psychology” in connection with what presented logical content and purely procedural parallels between their encyclopedic teachings. In particular underlined that both thinkers are united by not only methodological instruction and premise of think-activity but also dialectical method, which is carried in the creativity of Ukrainian worthy man by commit­ting principle. In the end, proved that it is thanks to the method of committing dialectic, academician Romenets managed to identify committing archetype, to create psycho-sophia of the deed and new synthetic direction of deve­lopment socio-humanitarian knowledge – canoni­cal psychology (see. [10, p. 108–116], [20]).

Recently, we have made the study of creati­vity of V. A. Romenets not so much as powerful, disjoint theoretic-humanist but – and that’s we note, the most important – as a bright, consistent and productive methodologist “who with his own self-cognition mastered a new way of develop­ment the science about human – committing ca­nonical scheme of organization the humani­tarian cognition as reflexive think-activity of spe­cial – psycho-sophian – type” [1, p. 204]. Actually proposed research, based on just received scientific material, from now on the level of over-task, detailing and enriches the system of methodological knowledge about the fundamental principles and basic forms of philosophical methodologization of academician Volodymyr Romenets that thesis delineated by A. A. Furman (see [19).

 

Rising of the idea

of methodological revolution

in the sphere of science

 

For most of deeply-thinking researchers who professionally work on the field of humanitarian cognition, in the last decades of the twentieth century was clearly understood that the defini­tion of primary sources of separate science (above all psychology, sociology, culturology, history or pedagogy) scilicet the substantiation of its object, subject, fundamental problems, leading method and basic categories, is non theoretical task but purely methodological. Thus, Imre Lakatos back in 1972 emphasized that namely taking this or another version of methodology of science, we will get essentially different rationally interpreted its histories (see. [33]). He pointed on four versions (induc­tivizm, conventionalism, falsificationism, metho­dology of research prog­rams) which are motion-step of science accordingly measure out either by opening unrebutted facts and their inductive generalizations or by inventing the detail of simpler classification of system or by nomination of theories and their rebuttal in the decisive experiments or  by competition and ousting of scientific programs.

Obviously, to this it is rightly to add at least two well-known conceptual views of historic dissemination of science: it is develops by opening that confirms reflexive analysis of its step by scientists themselves from the internal positions of this intellectual sphere or thanks to scientific revolutions, the result of which is a change of paradigms (Thomas Kuhn, see. [32]). Nevertheless, named variants of understanding of how can be measured shifts in science methodologically doesn’t clarify the situation because in the first case it doesn’t make any difference about which actually discoveries it is talking about – about new facts, concepts, theories or classification systems (such as table of I. Mendeleev) and in the second – not clarified are staying internal mechanisms of development the science and thus – that important aspect that highlights the real reasons of change of one paradigm to another because here “crisis” points only on impossibility of scholars com­munity to work as before.

Regarding methodological concept of T. Kuhn paradigms’ change, let’s note  that it having both advantages and limitations in the field of socio-psychological cognition (see. [27]) “can’t be directly applied in the field of humanitarian sciences because it is a theoretical model of reconstruction the historical movement-step of natural and tech­nical directions of scientific cognition, acts like framework condition of organization life activity of scientific community and that’s why needs essential logical-content enrichment in projection on the specific of acquiring psychosocial know­ledge – its problem-thematic filtering, paradig­matic selection, conceptual compaction and multi-theoretical reformatting ” [24, p. 84]. That’s why we not only examined the possibility of conducting interdisciplinary paradigm resear­ches but also we argued their multilevel, analy­tically characterized genesis of multi-paradigm of psychological knowledge in the context of episteme prospects of  philosophizing (posi­tivism, criticism, constructivism, methodologo­vism) substantiated variability of paradigmatic-research cards with help of which scientific com­munity (school, organization) moves in solving secrets-of regularities of social everyday reality and social being of the human in general, finally proposed criterion weighted typology of paradig­matic-research methodologies (see. [23], [24]).

In this problem situation the substantiation of essential shifts in the development of science and even greater extent socio-humanitarian (main­ly considering the exceptional complexity and recursivity of its disciplinary subject) there is a change of the methodological approach, namely from self-sufficient analysis episteme units (facts, hypotheses, problems, theories, decisive experiments, research programs, scien­tific lines or schools, etc.) to the conditions and schemes of organization scientific sphere and basic forms of scientists’ cognition  inside its intellectual and personal organized life. In other words, it is necessary heuristically change the focus of methodologization from singling out a number of knowledge elements to those organi­zation structures (co-vital, cultural, mental, activity) which ensure “life” and dynamics of becoming of these elements, scilicet opening new differently-decorated knowledge as the main product of scientific creativity. The scheme and what’s more form, organization of cognition contently covers both institutional and jointly-rational reality scientific masses. And this means that under conditions of its separate realization is achieved specific correspondence between  means and methods, organization forms of thinking and empirical searching, criteria of selection tasks and problems, understanding of what is knowledge and how it should be used, at last between organization of works (resear­ches, communications, cooperation and etc.)and activity and functions of appropriate institu­tio­nal formations.

So, it is talking not so much about scientific revolutions which are characterized by great uncertainty of what really changes in the sphere of science(let’s say  – standards of evidence, priority for scientists problems, the way of intel­lectual community life-activity, dominant type of ontological pictures, criteria of evaluating the successfulness of research programs or all these integral parameters or its certain set) and about methodological revolutions which decisi­vely ensure evolution of science (G. G. Kopylov [4]). And it is caused by that fact that onto­logical pictures and idea, traditionally named by scientific discoveries, primarily caused by accepted and processed at a particular historical period scheme of organization cognition and realization scientific knowledge and that’s why represent a secondary product concerning ap­proaches and methods of acquisition of such knowledge and regarding found exemplar or the order of their use. Today, as in the past, science and its segmental directions – natural, technical, socio-humanitarian – are developing from basic forms (schemes) of organization cognition to creation new forms or schemes. Therefore, “all “scientific revolutions”, all acts of development the sphere of science are happening from metho­dological positions” [ibid, p. 118]. That’s why it is naturally that those worthy men of humanity who proposed new schemes of organization thin­king and activity, built the original conceptual framework or languages of science, enriched the world culture with not only authentic knowledge but also with original methodological concepts and samples of researches of new type, are metho­dologists of the first magnitude.

 

Volodymyr Romenets – methodologist of psyco-sophian spirit

 

Methodologist of the highest cultural class in the sphere of humanitarian cognition is outstanding Ukrainian psychologist-philosopher of the second half of the twentieth century Vo­lodymyr Andriyovych Romenets (1926–1998). Internally opposing to ruling ideology of that time and massive conventional everyday, by own titanic work he created historical-psychological science, theories of creativity and act, canonical psychology and unique methodological optics of committing-dialectical view on Human and World in their unstable attitude and dialectical unity, multiplicity of canonical decorations and phenomenal presence and after all, realized as founder of a new philosophical-psychological system of general-human cultural significance. Figure of scientist impresses not only by exces­sive hardworking and concentration of passionate to the verity and the truth thought-conscious­ness, enormous erudition and significant creative achievements but also perfection of dialectical committing thinking that in complementarity enabled to bring up “universal theoretical world” (P. A. Myasoyid) exceptional completeness and multi-system perfection. As a philosopher-hu­manist he managed to embrace with his fiery mind the immense array of historical-psycholo­gical material, accumulated by titans of hu­manity and filter it by incredible power of reflective consciousness with help of built by himself during decades the method of committing dialectics (see. [20]). This method has become the “magical crystal” through which was inter­preted the history of psychology and on the basis of which was proposed original model of psychological knowledge integration (M. S. Gu­sel­tseva [3, p. 92]) that covers whole spiritual history of mankind and has no analogs in world practice of humanitarian cognition. In addition “thinking of V. A. Romenets, according to           P. A. Myasoyid, – postnonclassical it’s a thinking of alive, spiritual human, canon of tireless, inspiring and majestic searches which are opened to those who are involved to them, new vision of man and the science that studies it “[9, p. 470]. As a process that self-organizing by committing law, this thinking creates and continues itself: “one idea becomes a push to another, one spiral of thinking goes into the next” [ibid, p. 463]. In such way in the face of the creator-author, continuously lasted dialec­tical existence of its own think-committing with the task of creating a theoretical world about extremely complex relationship in the triad of “Man – act – World”, hence about direct pre­sence of psychic in the world, about conscious­ness as a way of human existence in the universe, about dialectic of the life and death (worldly and otherworldly), about searches and goal-oriented changes of life sense.  

Several years ago, we outlined milestones of creative way of academician Volodymyr Rome­nets as methodologist who not only created multi-theory of act as system of systems but also discovered and in everyday practice of his own think-activity realized, mainly thanks to newly mastering type of thinking, the method with which he moved from theory of creativity and history of world psychology to psycho-sophia of committing and theory of canonical psycho­logy (see. [20]). In addition, idealized statics of indicated multi-theory is easily changing by dynamics of discursive actualizations, positioning and thinking provided reflexively habilis usage of its ideas, principles, approaches, methods and means to setting and solving of new class of scientific and social problems. By think-activity potential to this method there is no equal on socio-humanitarian spaces of modern human thought and its author along with Aristotle, Bacon, Galileo, Newton, Descartes, Kant, La­katos, Shchedrovitsky and other, becomes also methodologist of genius greatness considering grandiosity of that House – Temple of sophianity – which he has built.       

At the same time not less important that fact that in the first approaching also at that time we have substantiated but yet didn’t supported by any successor or supporter of the creativity of Ukrainian thinker-worthy man, metaphorical thesis: “V. A. Romenets – it’s a Hegel in psychology”. For it confirmation are presenting logic-content and purely procedural parallels between encyclopedic teachings of both thinkers, noted that they are united by not only metho­dological instruction and premises of think-activity but also dialectical method, implemen­ted in the works of Ukrainian nugget by commit­ting principle. Unequivocally proved that na­mely method of committing dialectics gave to V. A. Romenets an ability to detect a committing archetype, to create psycho-sophia of the deed and new synthetic direction of socio-humani­tarian knowledge – canonical psychology. And all this become possible thanks to gradual deployment of the deed (in its situational, motivational, active and after active definitions) in the bosom of motion-step of self-creative thought as unity of principles, forms, methods and means of committing methodologization. In such way realizing committing canon and the method of committing dialectic multiplies the potential of the human spirit and enriches cul­ture.

 

V. A. Romenets

as thinker-evolutioner and

as methodologist-revolutioner

 

The purpose of this research is an argumented illumination of methodological optics of creative way of academician Volodymyr Romenets as decisive in the construction of historical-psycho­logical science and multi-theory of the deed in cultural-humanist position and its main task is to substantiate innovation and exceptional heuristic of basic forms of methodological orga­nization the research activity of this giant of Ukrainian national spirit, namely distinctive principles, approaches, methods and techniques as important instruments of its everyday philosophical-psychological methodologization. Their logical fundamentals are based on the fact that working out and demonstrating samples of researches of new type, confirming committing form-scheme of organization humanitarian cog­nition, scientist step by step creates distinctive methodological concept which in multi-theore­tical runway of reflective considerations covers full range of forms, methods, techniques and means of think-activity, its system products from the beginning are psychology of creativity and history of world psychology (HWP) and on the top of creative ascent of thinker – philosophy of transient, psycho-sophia of deed and canonical psychology.

For example, it is gratifying to note that the center of proposed by V. A. Romenets psycho-sophia of the deed is really methodological, whereas episteme content is its worldview background or sophian context that spreading as actual infinity which generates a finite – all-general wisely-giving cleverness of the human – and returns it mainly in human deeds and creations into its bosom, characterizing the integrity and exact unity of meaning rhythms of social being, its experiences as indivisibility of instantaneity and eternity. Moreover in ratio of purely theoretical and methodological compo­nents in illumination psycho-sophian horizon of committing to which constructed steps of ecstatic (scilicet the highest by the level of personal admiration and inspiration) being, obviously dominates the second. Thus in two sections of “History of Psychology of the twentieth century” [15, p. 710–721, 771–783] directly devoted to the indicated problematic, existing only four thematic lines of theorizing. Proof of this is that psycho-sophia, the wisdom of the deed is inter­preting as:

a)         “holistic system of ideas about regularities of becoming and detection in committing action the essence of individual human being”;

b)         “exact psychology and philosophy of being wisdom” in its inspiration as readiness and  ability of human to feel, to experience the state of comprehension the quintessence of life;

c)         logical-psychological essence of the deed in which “is observing certain dialectic of the cognition subject: if on the stage of general theorizing, the deed appears as complex multi-content phenomenon, synthesized for its nature which has to be considered with certain degree of abstraction from reality of individual life of personality, then on the stage of applied theo­rizing, specific being features of committing activity of individual appears as primary, output and namely they determine that content cut in which are studying, investigating, analyzing external and internal content layers of action  human in the world”;

d)        sophianity, wisdom as exact harmonized unity of semantic fullness of human being in the format of spiritual merging with absolute essence, as “dramatic disclosure of characters, situations, self-disclosure of the world in which people see each other and find between each other mutual understanding”.

Instead of methodological lines of reflective analysis in mentioned sections at least twice more that brightly visualized themes concerning logic-content filling of psycho-sophian sphere of committing presence of human in the world and event driven presence of the world in the human life. It is saying, in fact, about comprehensive definition of psycho-sophia of the deed as:

–          means of cognition and worldview land­mark in choosing by human an affairs, life’s way;

–          cognitive means and cognitive system of scientifically substantiated and professionally oriented action, based on logic-historical regu­larities of existence investigated phenomena in the centre of phenomenal diversity of which is staying uniquely individual human being;

–          “peculiar functional model of individual existence which raises as system of specific knowledge” moreover both about its essence and about methods and means of their usage for achieving certain level of mastering the person, real technologies of self-ensuring of the efficiency of deployment own life action;

–          holistic model of any completed form of creative activity of human (artistic, scientific, spiritual, etc.) that presents not only a prototype of psycho-sophia of the deed but also “means of establishing, balancing, approval of parity-essen­tial relationship” between the world and man, its unique nature and existential abyss of being;

–          actually psycho-sophia – “a way to wis­dom, a way of how to be inspired, directed to the world as active, effective partner” able to master the system of means of committing self-practicing, peculiar “technology of being”;

–          vector of cognition the essence of the deed in acts of applied theorizing that foresees mandatory involvement of appropriate means, conducting multilevel analysis of the essential features of committing  activity of the subject, ensuring methodical integrity of research committing forms of life-activity by the way of usage adequate means (receptions, methods, techniques) theoretical and empirical compre­hension of the object of study or constructing.

At the same time psycho-sophia – it’s steps of cognition as wonderful guide in compre­hension the world (both external, material and internal, individual light of Self) through the deed that proposing for researcher to pass the sequence of certain analytical and interpretative actions in determining the essence of the object of the study and “rises as stages of existence and deployment of being”.

And finally, psycho-sophia – it’s completed system of activity concerning the appointment of the person as the creative disjoint personality who is able to catharsistic ups, to the balance between the phenomenon (real horizon of every­day) and noumenon (ideal plan of being) with saving the essential contradictions of them as impelling mechanism of “peculiar circulation of energy – creative, spiritual, humane, life-giving”.

Given argumented strengthening – only the local segment of confirmation the wide consump­tion by Volodymyr Andriyovych in self-sufficient philosophical-psychological discourse such defi­ning for him methodologically loaded conceptual markers as “path”, “means”, “method”, “vec­tor”, “steps-actions”, “technology”, “mecha­nism”. To this, of course, we must to add newly created by him scheme of organization his own thinking creativity that centered around logical-canonical structure of the deed in a cyclical succession of situational, motivational, active and post-active components in intellectual projections on history of world psychology and multifaceted phenomenology of human being. This scheme from the beginning, realized by Ukrainian wise man as the idea of deed-center of psychological system, further on its ground acquires importance committing principle of analysis of the history of psychology and modern for it subject field of theoretical, scilicet ca­nonical, psychology (“The deed is a canon of psychological knowledge because there is canon in the deed itself, in the deed center” [15, p. 827]). Further is developing cultural-humanistic approach as a strategic determination of interre­lated cognition and self-cognition, theorizing and methodologization, reflection and creation now philosophical-psychological system; and finally constructed and mastered committing way of human being as a pragmatic means of high­lighting the nature and the essence of psychic which serves as peculiar existential tool of self-reflection of the world. As a result, there is not only a canon psychological knowledge (histo­rical-theoretical line of thinker creativity) but also organization scheme of philosophical and applied methodologization, form of that unique psycho-spiritual practice in which a person “being a theorist and practitioner in one person” (P. A. Myasoyid [8] and also [25]), creates the world, itself in the world and the way and character of their coexistence. In fact, this points on clear singling out and predominance in cognitive creativity of V. A. Romenets, especially in its last period, methodological line that required from him as a great intellectual-volitional efforts and also caused in the result creative scientific achievements.

P. A. Myasoid as a tireless encourager and active popularize of creativity of his teacher, not unreasonably calls V. A. Romenets a revo­lutionist in psychology (see. [7], [9, p. 389-453]). However, this requires clarification. Thus, Volodymyr Andriyovych indeed proposed and mainly – implemented in multi-content format of his own creative life new – think-committing – scheme of organization the historic-humani­tarian cognition and appropriate to it original form of reflexive methodologization as practice of exceptional intellectual type, centered on the orbit of his consciousness and self-consciousness around logic-canonical structure of the deed as idealized etalon philosophical-psychological re­search. Separately let’s note: novelty and ori­ginality impresses not itself the array of collected by the talented scientist cultural-historic mate­rial (from the symbols of primitive consciousness, folklore finds, religious beliefs, painting, music, sculpture and artistic writings to the philosophi­cal, scientific, ideological, social achievements) and even not created by him “new theory of historic-psychological process” and “consistent presentation of scientific searches”, implemented in relevant theories, systems, directions, schools in connection with the history of human culture” [17, p. 7] as stated in the author-report of the doctoral dissertation of the scientist (1990) because it is just only objective by language means, results of long intense cognitive creati­vity, so to speak “curtailed into the product” being existence of its dialectical committing thinking. Primarily the main and intransitively unique in life-giving individual image of V. A. Ro­menets – it’s committing-canonical organization of his think-activity, scilicet that scheme of orga­nization the humanitarian cognition which unite surprisingly differently-faced material of spiri­tual culture of mankind mentally and org-action, logically and historically, theoretically and me­thodologically, additionally in new philosophi­cal-psychological system of unreachable pano­ramic completeness which unites different types of knowledge from before differentiated sources and cultural niches, building a grandiose epi­steme reality with its “gold core” – conceptual-categorical manner of modern psychology. Confirmation of what was said is obvious: Romenets scheme of cognition, integrating in itself rational moments-components, representing “embryo” of new order or way of developmental functioning humanitarian sciences, is that “magical crystal” which sets the “look” of psychology in different historical periods of its development, creating closed in itself, majestic and self-sufficient, theoretical world.

So as a thinker, V. A. Romenets, certainly – evolutioner who rethinking creative heritage of other famous philosophers and scientists, and what more, evolutioner who is captious to de­tails, excessively responsible for each proclaimed word, standardly humane in everyday relation­ships and actions. But as methodologist of cul­tural-historical direction, psycho-sophian spirit and creative way of life, he certainly is revolu­tioner – brave and at the same time tolerant on well-trodden by themselves ways to the truth in the realm of jewelry methodically checked theorizing, personal think-committing and self creation. In this essential dimension of creative way, obviously overcrowded by transcendental actualizations of sphere matrix of own con­sciousness-self-consciousness, he truly revolu­tioner, innovator, pioneer.

 

 

Переглядів: 95 | Додав: yurikkk | Рейтинг: 5.0/1
Всього коментарів: 0