Modeling methodologically factor of images of man

Abstract

On the basis of theoretical generalization of experience of scientific knowledge, the development of which occur in the first half of the twentieth century – Psychological Anthropology and ethnic psychology etnoantropolohiyi The methodological potential of the method as a way of modeling the image of man in the cultural context.

Proved that the question of what should be the man of the future is one of the most difficult as the philosophical and humanities background. However , the understanding of man as a cultural phenomenon is now attached and cultural studies, methodological tools which allows you to use a wide range of modern scientific approaches and methodological strategies, the totality of which provides unique opportunities for expanding research area of knowledge. Despite the widespread use of the named method in many fields of knowledge, from nuclear physics, computer technology, physiology, etc., and in different directions humanities, especially in the realm of philosophy, aesthetics, art criticism (D. Bell, V. Bran, J. Boryev, Moroz, A. Onishchenko, L. Stolovych, V. Fed etc.), lack of appropriate methodological reflection on modern scientific quests cultural orientation proves the relevance of the stated problems.

It is indicated that reference to the described problems caused by several factors. Thus, the observations show that the essential feature of modern culture is to develop alongside its traditional new image. The traditional image of world culture is associated primarily with the ideas of its historical and organic integrity, understanding of rules, regulations, traditions, customs and so on. The new image of culture is increasingly associated with the development of noosphere, global thinking, ideas ekohumanizmu and universalism, and includes the phasing out of the simplified routing schemes addressing cultural issues, understanding the growing role of reflection in relation to foreign cultures, the recognition of the legality of the existence of multiplicity of truths.

Practically oriented tasks must be solved primarily at a theoretical level. With this in mind the scope of Cultural Studies should be involved in such scientific methods of cognition, function and methodological potential of which contribute to productive implementation of appropriate research procedures. It is to this traditional, on the one hand and innovation on the other, in our opinion, may be classified as general scientific method modeling tool for learning, which is quite a long history of experience and an extensive theoretical study. As the designated method emerged from engaging in the practice of scientific concept of "model", it is now turn primarily to the analysis of the development of this concept.

In philosophy, the term "mode" is often used in speculative terms, such as an analogue of the "theory" in cases where this theory is not sufficiently developed and hides many ambiguities. analyzing the experience of the theoretical study of the concept of "model" and as a general method of modeling knowledge should be noted that the circuit model as an explanation of any phenomenon, and simulation as an analytical and prognostic factors were always under the watchful eye of philosophy of science, thus forming the classic tradition of philosophizing. This analysis shows how to reference the philosophical literature – namely, the philosophical vocabulary of the Soviet era and modern reference works.

The analysis of the method of modeling experience in various fields of humanities – philosophy, aesthetics and art criticism, lack of scientific studies showed a similar direction in the field of cultural studies, which actualizes the need for coverage of the historical dynamics of its involvement in the theoretical and practical aspects of cultural knowledge.

Methodological toolkit notion of "model" actively began to be used in the early twentieth century in various areas of humanitarian thought – sociology, psychology and ethnic psychology and the practice of such arts as literary works, visual arts, drama and more. The unifying factor in these processes was spread psychoanalytic tradition as a universal language and a common methodology entire complex humanities.

Within these disciplines there was an attempt to understand the relationship between psychology and culture , explore the culture and the individual in the complex – the individual as a representative of a particular culture, and also to clarify the relationship between culture, accepted in the society and the individual as the bearer of culture. These main areas of scientific research realized in the 20's and 30’s of the twentieth century. American " ethnopsychological school", headed by A. Kardyner and famous representatives were – F. Boas, R. Benedict. M. Mead, R. Linton, K. Klakhon, K. J. Honihman Dubois et al. As a result of research carried out by scientists and anthropologists was formed by the direction of "Culture-and-personality" and the beginning of a systematic theoretical research rules for the nation and the psychological components that are common to all members of ethnocultural communities.

In general, the development of well-known American and European anthropologists early twentieth century, the concept of "fundamental (basic) person", "modal personality", "basic personality structure" as key concepts contributed not only to the formation of important methodological tools within the research of cultural andpsychological anthropology, etnoantropolohiya and ethnic psychology, but also reveals the commonality of contemporary scientific research among a range of philosophical areas involved in the study of culture.

The main achievement of ethnic psychology schools were focusing on the concept and phenomenon of "personality" and attempt to detailed study in a particular cultural context. The primary reality for scientists and anthropologists had individual personality, so it is with the study of personality and individual, in their opinion, it was necessary to begin the study of every nation. It is important to note that members of the above named school focused its attention not on society as a whole, namely the culture.