Institute of Philosophy
of the Russian Academy of Sciences

  Results of research work of the department
Home Page » » Department of the History of Anthropological Doctrines » Results of research work of the department

Results of research work of the department

                                                                                                                                                  Русскоязычная версия страницы


Department of the History of Anthropological Doctrines

Results of research work of the department


In 2016, the development of the theme «The main facets of human being» was continued, the study was targeted at such phenomena of human being as life, death, love, work, play, and their transformations in modern philosophical consciousness.


Tasks of this research stage:

  1. To continue research on methodological approaches to the problem of human being;
  2. To offer a critical interpretation of modern naturalism, to show the influence of the achievements of biological sciences on traditional ideas of man;
  3. To make a conceptual analysis of a programme of new naturalisation in studies of man, society and culture;
  4. To show the role of the main phenomena of human being in philosophical thought of the past century, to analyse classical interpretations of work, love, death, play, language, etc.;
  5. To study transformation of facets of human being in modern philosophical thought.


The most important results of research work obtained by the department

  1. Much attention was paid to radical rethinking of philosophical anthropology itself. A critical analysis was given to nonclassical anthropology, which reinterpreted almost all basic positions of this area of knowledge, including the relevance of philosophical anthropology itself. In this sense, classical and nonclassical anthropologies were compared. The principles of classical anthropology are characterised and compared with nonclassical ones (Gurevich P.S. A new ontology of man; Gurevich P.S. Horizons of philosophical anthropology).
  2. Theoretical efforts of the department were aimed at restoration of the subject matter of philosophical anthropology – man (Gurevich P.S. Man as a subject is disappearing] (an interview with Pavel Gurevich)). Proponents of nonclassical anthropology withdraw from studying the natural and historical aspects of man. They hold that understanding of man is possible only in anthropopractices. This leads to depreciation of general theoretical work in interpretation of man and his destiny. The department analysed classical philosophical works related to the theme of man – Aristotle, А. Schopenhauer, F. Nietzsche (Gurevich P.S. The anthropological subjects of Aristotle; Gurevich P.S. An arsenal of a daily meaning. A preface; Gurevich P.S. In the book stream – To overcome man (a review of the book: Samokhvalova V.I. Sverkhchelovek: obraz, metafora, programma [The overman: image, metaphor, programme. М., 2015)).
  3. Preliminary results of studying facets of human being and their transformations in modern philosophical thought have been summed up. As is shown, the very concept of the «facets of human being» is a basic category of philosophical anthropology. It reflects the most significant sides of human being. Mutual, inherent relationship between facets of human being with one another has been shown, multiple correlations between them are demonstrated. As has been found, it is only through the main facets of human being that comprehension of the phenomenon of the «all-human» is possible (Gurevich P.S., Spirova E.M. The facets of human being).
  4. A conception of ontoprojecting has been developed – a way of projecting human being as an open opportunity, designed for realisation in the future (Reznik Yu.M. On the phenomenology of man’s possible worlds: an existential ontology of projecting; Reznik Yu.M. Philosophy as a metaproject practice; Reznik Yu.M. Man’s project philosophy as a philosophy of action; Reznik Yu.M. The possible being of man: from analysis to project).
  5. As has been shown in elaboration of the statement of the impossibility to conceive of philosophical anthropology without the linguistic component, one of the most adequate ways for philosophical anthropology to come to the transcendent sphere is through the transcendental gates, to which, in its turn, one can come through analysis of discursive – formal, semantic and syntactic – language forms, since the latter are transposed transcendentality (modifications of diversified combinatorics of acts of pure and linguistic consciousness and involved meaningful objects (Gogotishvili L.A. La forme interne immanente dialogique chez Bakhtine comme alternative à Humboldt et Potebnja / transl. P. Sériot; Gogotishvili L.A. Nominativeness and procedurality in Pavel Florensky’s philosophy of language (naming and discourse in reverse perspective)).

The current state and prognosis of further development of philosophical anthropology as a field of science:

The current situation in the field of philosophical comprehension of man is characterised by a dramatic delimitation between classical and non-classical anthropology. The department believes that a sharp change of paradigmatic thinking about man will not yield positive results. As has been shown, the potential of classical thinking has not been exhausted. At the same time, the department carried out work that permits to include new achievements of neurosciences in philosophical anthropology and give them a more comprehensive philosophical interpretation. Contradictions and negative aspects of new variants of the Nietzschean idea of the «overman» were also analysed. The scope of philosophical anthropological reflection has been significantly broadened.



In 2015, the department continued to develop the theme «The main facets of human being» principally aimed at studying phenomena of human being as an essential expression of human nature in its historical dynamics.


Tasks at the current stage of research:

  1. To lay out the specificity of philosophical anthropology, to specify current tendencies in the development of philosophical-anthropological knowledge;
  2. To analyze methodological approaches to the problem of human being;
  3. To consider the theme of Self as a subject of ordinary and philosophical research;
  4. To continue conceptual development of such facets of human being as life, death, love, lust for power, work, play;
  5. To show the improper character of modern projects of debiologization, deanthropologization and desacralization of man.


The most significant results of research work obtained by the department in 2015


  1. Specification of the major tendencies in the development of philosophical anthropology in the modern period. As has been shown, the prevalence of the postmodernist trend for the past decades has resulted in the loss of the subject-matter of philosophical anthropology. Man ceased to be an object of integral knowledge, he is studied in his fragmentary split and «grasped» in particular disclosures (through «figures» and «folds»). At the same time, transhumanists have come to the conclusion about urgent transformation of human nature (Gurevich P.S., Spirova E.M. Delimitations and tendencies of modern philosophical anthropology; Egorova I.V. Simplified interpretation of man).
  2. The relationships between man and transcendence were studied. As has been shown, man, being a gleam of transcendence, might be understood as transcendent immanence, the other being, awaiting to be manifested therein through human intentionality of harboured being, might be regarded a immanent transcendence, and being itself as transcendence presenting in its elusive mystery (Gurevich P.S., Spirova E.M. Delimitations and tendencies of modern philosophical anthropology).
  3. As has been demonstrated, remaining a local phenomenon in theory of knowledge, the quantum paradigm claim to realize the great experiment of utopic transformation of social and individual reality by behavioural patterns of elementary particles (paper by P.S. Gurevich «Transformation of values in the quantum paradigm»).
  4. The department continued to study facets of human being. As has been shown, within the framework of total desacralization of human being, removal of psychological context from analysis of emotions, total attempt to reduce man/s inner world to activity of genes of specific parts of the brain love has come to be interpreted as illness. But love is not only a feeling. It also has ontological and ethical aspects. Love can be regarded also as a powerful means of understanding live. It has a huge creative potential (paper by E.M. Spirova «Love as a facet of human being and knowledge»).
  5. We have shown that quantum thinking changes the evaluative attitude to life and death. Many philosophers interpreted death as a bodily tragedy. In this case, the problem is discussed in the channel biology, medicine, sociology or psychology. In the past year, we examined and critically rethought such an approach to the problem of immortality to which M.Heidegger referred as biological-ontic (Gurevich P.S.  Immortality in this and the other world).
  6. The question about the philosophy of work as a special bloc of modern knowledge has been raised. This is conditioned by devaluation of the very concept of «work» nowadays, its obligatoriness and significance. The consumer society carries the idea of such social environment, where man would abandon the sphere of labour activities, transferring these functions to machines. This desacralization of work produces multiple philosophical problems (Gurevich P.S. The philosophy of work).
  7. The problem of the «Self – the Other» has been viewed in the context of existential-phenomenological understanding (Reznik Yu.M. The problem of the «Self – the Other» in the context of existential-phenomenological understanding; Reznik Yu.M. Man as an existential project (phenomenological analysis); Reznik Yu.M. The philosophy of making a human being: a phenomenological approach).
  8. The problem of the Self as a subject of ordinary and philosophical self-knowledge continued to be developed. As is shown, for anthropology of the Self, imbibing the problems of transcendental and apriori levels of consciousness, the linguistic aspect remains an inalienable part (and sometimes a source) of any complete anthropological theory, since language is not only one of the most significant components of transcendental and apriori levels of consciousness, it is also involved in  constituting of these levels themselves (Gogotishvili L.A. The principle of unilateral duality in the non-philosophy of F. Laruelle: anthropological dimension and linguistic genesis).



The general characteristic of the most important scientific achievements of the department during the past period (important published results of research work), including planned work and research grants:


 The structure of philosophical-anthropological knowledge nowadays has been determined. As has been shown, in contrast to other fields of philosophical knowledge philosophical anthropology today has lost its subject. As a result, it has been transformed into anti-anthropology, assumed the aspect of the apophatic project. As has been proven, no social or technological project can be realized without positive philosophical reflection on man. The «decline» of philosophical anthropology is intricately associated with advancement of these topics to the centre of all philosophical and even humanitarian knowledge (Spektr antropologicheskikh ucheniy [The spectrum of anthropological doctrines]. Issue 6 / Ed.-in-chief P.SGurevich; Gurevich P.S. Spetsifika antropologicheskogo znaniya [The specificity of anthropological knowledge]; Gurevich P.S. Velichie i bestsennost’ gumanitarnogo znaniya [The grandeur and pricelessness of humanitarian knowledge]; Spirova E.M. Spetsifika gumanitarnogo myshleniya [The specificity of humanitarian thinking]; Spirova E.M. Gumanitarizatsiya obrazovaniya [Humanitarization of education]).


 A philosophical expertise of the «posthuman» project has been presented. A critical analysis of the project of a live universal reasonable being has been started, where anthropomorphousness is only one variant of a human being (Gurevich P.S. New Versions of the Interpretation of Human Nature; Spirova E.M. The Symbol as an Anthropological Concept; Reznik Yu.M. The metaphysics of man: images of being)).


 A relationship between the subject matter of philosophy and existence of the thinker himself has been shown (Reznik Yu.M. Filosofia v moem ponimanii (opyt fenomenologicheskogo prochteniya) [Philosophy as I understand it (an experience of phenomenological interpretation)]. P. 2. Ot analitiki k pragmatike bytiya [From analytics to pragmatics of being]; Reznik Yu.M. Sub’ektivno-vseobshchee v mire fenomenov kak predmet filosofii [The subjective-universal in the world of phenomena as a subject of philosophy]).


 A distinction has been drawn between the notions «facets of human being» and «human existentials». The facets of human being imply such forms of people’s life and activity, without which their existence as a special kind of being is impossible. The facets characterize the limits of human existence. Conceptual development of such facets of human being as work and game has been continued. (Gurevich P.S. Igra kak odna iz graney chelovecheskogo bytiya [Game as one of the facets of human being]; Gurevich P.S. Trud kak odna iz graney chel ovecheskogo bytiya [Work as one of the facets of human being]).


 The linguistic consciousness of the person has been proposed to be regarded as a special facet of human being, where not only social communication is realized but also the «information» relationship of the mind with the transcendent sphere (Gogotishvili L.A. Le noyau radical de la « philosophie du nom » d'A.F. Losev).


A typological similarity of the ambivalent character of M.Bakhtin’s and A.Losev’s ideas has been revealed: about the general relative crisis of language; and about the overcoming of the crisis of language through antirelative discursive strategy. As has been shown, both philosophers have a theory of splitting of the self and two similar phases can be singled out in their movement to the common post-symbolic direction: 1) the relative phase and 2) the phase of adequacy, including such strategies of the birth of speech that overcome linguistic relativism (Losev’s relative mythologies and Bakhtin’s subjective voices) by effort of linguistic relativism itself (Gogotishvili L.A. K situatsii vokrug polifonii [On the situation around polyphony] (P. 1); Gogotishvili L.A. Bakhtinsksya immanentno-dialogicheskaya vnutrennyaya forma kak alternativa gumboldianskomu i potebnianskomu podkhodam [Bakhtin’s immanent-dialogue internal form as an alternative to Humboldt’s and Potebnya’s approaches]; Gogotishvili L.A. A.F. Losev kak sub’ekt i ob’ekt tezaurusnogo issledovaniya (k postanovke voprosa) [A.F. Losev as a subject and object of thesaurus study] (problem definition)).



The department of the history of anthropological doctrines has obtained the following results

1. As has been proven, modern anthropological knowledge is in seach of a new paradigmality. This is envouraged by unexpected discoveries in various scientific fields: biology, psychology, sociology. Particular scientific achievements have not formed yet a relatively integral new paradigm in modern philosophical anthropology. The paradox of the current situation is conditioned by the fact that traditional ideas about man co-exist nowadays with new breakthrough views on human nature. In particular, science proceeds from the fact, indisputable since the time of Descartes, that the content of consciousness is within consciousness itself. Hence much attention is paid to creating a model of the human brain. In the USA and Europe, brain-studying programmes are realized that, as is supposed, should answer the question how consciousness emerges. Referring to achievements of some western philosophers, the department has shown in its publications that consciousness is aimed not only at ensuring cognition but also at discovering human being. The brain does not engender thoughts but rather catches them.

(See: Gurevich P.S. Filosofskaya interpretatsia cheloveka [Philosophical interpretation of man] /Rus.Acad.Sci.,Inst.Philosophy;Inst. for Scientific Information in Social Sciences RAS.SPb: Petroglif, 2013. 428 p.; Spirova E.M. Gumanitarnoe znanie v poiskakh smysla [Humanitarian  knowledge in search of meaning] // Pedagogika i prosveschenie [Paedagogy and Education]. 2012. No 4 (08). P. 47-58; Spirova E.M. Fenomen dukha v filosofskoy antropologii [The phenomenon of spirit in philosophical anthropology] // Psikhologia i psikhotekhnika [Psychology and Psychotechnology]. 2013. No 1 (52). P. 26-34).

2. Unexpected relations between modern scientific knowledge and philosophical anthropology have been analyzed. The former idea that philosophical conceptualization of man is based mainly on scientific discoveries has been questioned. Nowadays philosophy is engaged in polemics not only with traditional theoretical views. It questions the very approach to man associated with the former scientific paradigm (biological foundations of consciousness, interpretation of spirituality only as a product of supreme states of mind). The department’s publications show that mind and spirit are impossible to explain with the help of the laws of chemical or physical reactions, even those that might be discovered in future, that it would be rightful to further study the fundamental aspects of human spiritual nature (Gurevich  P.S. Apofaticheskiy proekt cheloveka [The apophatic project of man] // Voprosy filosofii. 2013.No 8. P. 42-53; Gurevich P.S. Novaya paradigma v antropologicheskikh znaniyakh [A new paradigm in anthropological knowledge]. A paper at the scientific conference «New in the sciences of man» (The 13th Frolov’s Readings).Moscow: Institute of Philosophy RAS, 19-20 November 2013).

3. Transformation of the basic phenomena of human being has been analyzed, how they have appeared in modern culture and social practice (by the example of work), new interpretations of these phenomena as a result of transformation of human being have been specified. As is shown, work is one of the main facets of human being. It is a natural condition of human life. The history of philosophical thought has not paid sufficient attention to this phenomenon. Meanwhile, attitudes to work differed radically in different cultures. Various periods demonstrated different values of and attitudes to work. As A.Toynbee has shown, barbarians demonstrated contempt to constructive activities. Work was not regarded as a virtue in antiquity either, where the political man had a higher value. The late antique civilization did not acknowledge the high dignity of physical work. By the end of the antique era agricultural work was not among the civil virtues as it was during a more patriarchal period, in the times of Cincinnatus. In the period of the Roman empire, the idea of a natural baseness of people engaged in physical work was widespread among the upper class. Thought the cynics, Seneca, Epictetus and some other thinkers tried to overcome the negative assessment of work (Gurevich P.S. Sovremenny vek i ego svyatyni [Modern era and its sacred objects] (termination) // Pedagogika i prosveschenie [Paedagogy and Education]. 2012. No 4 (08). P. 3-5; Mikhalenko Yu.P. Adam Smith: stanovlenie uchenogo [Adam Smith: formation of a scientist] (part 1) // Filosofia i kultura [Philosophy and Culture]. 2013.No 7 (67). P. 1004-1019; Spirova E.M. Pokhval’noe slovo kapitalizmu [A praise to capitalism].On the book of Albert O.Hirschman «The Passions and the Interests: Political Arguments For Capitalism Before Its Triumph» // Vestnik analitiki. 2013.No 2 (52). P. 157-160).


4. An existential-phenomenological interpretation of man as a special kind of being has been offered, which displays himself in the personal-being as the abstract-being and an existential projection of free being. (See: Reznik Yu.M. K metafizike chelovecheskogo bytiya:ot refleksii k rekonstruktsii [On metaphysics of human being: from reflection to reconstruction] // Vestnik RUDN.Series: Philosophy. 2013.No 2. P. 132-146; Reznik Yu.M. Filosofia v moem ponimanii (opyt fenomenologicheskogo prochtenia) [Philosophy as I understand it (an experience of phenomenological interpretation)]. Part 1. Filosofia kak analitika bytiya [Philosophy as analytics of being] //Lichnost. Kultura. Obschestvo. 2013.Vol. XV. Issue 3-4 (79-80). P. 107-122).


5. The department continued the study of transpersonality as a border-line human being dividing human existence (self-being) and transcendence (other-being)

 (See: Reznik Yu.M. Chelovek v prostranstve transpersonalnogo vzaimodeystviya [Man in the space of transpersonal interaction] // Lichnost. Kultura. Obschestvo. 2012. Vol. XIV. Issue 4 (75-76). P. 83-100; Reznik Yu.M. Chelovek kak sub’ekt transpersonalnosti //Spektr antropologicheskikh ucheniy [The spectrum of anthropological doctrines]. Issue 5 / Rus. Acad. Sciences, Inst. of Philosophy; Ed.-in-chief P.S. Gurevich. M.: IPhRAS, 2013. 167 p. P. 113-138).

6. One of the aspects of the topic «the fundamental facets of human being»: «dislocation » (in the coordinate space of the fundamental philosophical categories) of the human «generic » has been investigated. Proceeding from the assumption that the defining significance for interpretation of the human generic belongs to understanding the category of the Real, two different in principle (associated with the names of A.Losev and F.Laruelle) interpretations of the Real have been compared. While Losev’s Real is related to the transcendent entity (with all known ensuing consequences in understanding the human generic that are manifested, in particular, in the original – imyaslav by genesis – synthesis of neo-Platonism and Christianity), for Laruelle the Real is radical immanence and as such it is proclaimed the most «human generic». The radical character of Laruelle’s interpretation of the immanent generic (Real) consists in the fact that it is interpreted as naturally un-dislocated not only in the transcendent but also in the transcendental spheres. Laruelle draws a metaphysical boundary between the immanent and the transcendental that resembles a boundary between the transcendent and the transcendental

(Gogotishvili  L.A. Filosofia yazyka Loseva i «Ne-filosofia» yazyka Laruelle [Losev’s philosophy of language and Laruelle’s «non-philosophy» of language] // Filosofia i kultura [Philosophy and Culture]. 2013. No 5 (65). P. 656-679).


In 2012, the department of the history of anthropological doctrines obtained the following results:


1. The fate of philosophical anthropology in the modern world was analyzed, its real role in the system of humanitarian knowledge at present was outlined. As was shown, the process of transformation of philosophical anthropology into anthropology has been completed. The paradox is that the «decline» of philosophical anthropology is fancifully accompanied by advance of these subjects into the centre of all philosophical and even humanitarian knowledge. (For more detail see: Gurevich P.S. Filosofskoe tolkovanie cheloveka [Philosophical interpretation of man ] / М.: Centre of humanitarian initiatives, 2012; Spektr antropologicheskikh ucheniy [The spectrum of anthropological doctrines]. Issue 4 / Ed.-in-chief P.S. Gurevich. М.: IPhRAS, 2012; Reznik Yu.M. Antropologia v sisteme nauk o cheloveke i kulture (vmesto vvedeniya) [Anthropology in the system of human and cultural sciences 9by way of introduction)] // Sotsiokulturnaya antropologia: Istoria, teoria i metodologia [Sociocultural anthropology: History, theory and methodology]. Encyclopaedic dictionary / Ed. by Yu.M. Reznik. М.: Academic project, 2012. С. 5-10; Spirova E.M. Simvol kak ponyatie i obraz [The symbol and a concept and an image] // Filosofia i kultura [Philosophy and culture]. 2012. No. 6 (54). P. 96-105).


2. A fundamental differentiation between the concepts «human nature» and «human essence» have been offered. As is shown, in modern literature they are erroneously regarded as synonyms. It has been proven that human nature really undergoes transformation. But the essence of man cannot be reduced to substance. It reflects existential and ontological strain of human existence. The essence of man is in his two dimensionality – immanence and transcendence. (Gurevich P.S.  Ischezla li sushchnost’ cheloveka? [Has the human essence disappeared?] // Spektr antropologicheskikh ucheniy [The spectrum of anthropological doctrines]. Issue 5. М.: IPhRAS , 2013 (in print); Gurevich P.S. . Filosofskoe tolkovanie cheloveka [Philosophical interpretation of man ]. М.: Centre of humanitarian initiatives, 2012; Reznik Yu.M. Chelovek i ego pogranich’e: mezhdu ekzistentsiey i transtsendentsiey [Man and his border-line: between existence and transcendence] // Voprosy sotsialnoy teorii [Problems of social theory]: Scientific almanac. 2012. Vol. 6. Chelovek mezhdu mirami (ontologicheskie, epistemologicheskie, sotsiokulturnye i psikhologicheskie problem pogranich’ya) [Man between worlds (ontological, epistemological, sociocultural and psychological problems of bolderline] / Institute of Phylogophy RAS; Russian Institute of Cultural Science; Yu.M. Reznik and M.V. Tlostanova. М.: Independent Institute of Civil Society, 2012. P. 25-45).


3. As has been shown, man is in the process of permanent lifelong self-determination (life choice). Realizing his choice in various situations, man generates a great variety of contexts of his existence (worlds, dimensions). These contexts or worlds of man appear as a projection (or projections) of various segments of his «internal» world – subjective and objective, ideal and real, imagined and actual. Each of these dimensions corresponds to man’s special «I» that embodies the source of the centre of activity (subjective and objective, ideal and real, etc.). (Reznik Yu.M. Alternativnost’ subyektivnogo mira lichnosti: vybor zhiznennogo puti [The alternativeness of the subjective world of the personality: life path choice] // Sotsiokulturnye praktiki: teoria i metody issledovaniya [Sociocultual practices: theory and methods of study]. Scientific almanac. 2011. Vol. 1. Identichnost’ i sotsialnoe konstruirovanie [Identity and social construction] / Ed. by P.K. Grechko and Yu.M. Reznik. М.: OOO «MEILER», 2012. P. 159-175; Reznik Yu.M. Osnovaniya tipologizatsii sotsiokulturnykh praktik v sisteme deyatelnosti lichnosti [Foundations of typologization of sociocultural practices in the system of personal activities] // Postneklassicheskie praktiki:opyt kontseptualizatsii [Postnonclassical practices: an experience of conceptualization] / Ed. by V.I. Arshinov and O.N. Astaf’eva. SPb.: Mir Publ.House, 2012. P. 302-329; Reznik Yu.M. Alternativnost’ subyektivnogo mira lichnosti: problema vybora variantov zhiznennogo puti [The alternativeness of the subjective world of the personality: the problem of choosing variants of a life path ] // Sotsiokulturnye praktiki: teoria i metody issledovaniya [Sociocultual practices: theory and methods of study]. Scientific almanac. 2011. Vol. 1. Identichnost’ i sotsialnoe konstruirovanie [Identity and social construction] / Intercollege centre of social theory RUDN; Ed. by P.K. Grechko and Yu.M. Reznik. М.: ООО « MEILER », 2012. P. 159-175).


4. The concept of the symbol was introduced into the arsenal of philosophical anthropology. As was demonstrated, the symbol opens the innermost secrets in comprehension of man. It permits to understand the puzzle of anthropogenesis, to reveal sophisticated interlacing of the explicit and the implicit in man, to understand the feeling of the transcendent, to get to the bottom of man as a special kind of being. Not infrequently, in the history of philosophy the comprehension of the symbol contributed to a deeper understanding of man and philosophical anthropological reflection lead to a more thorough comprehension of the symbol. (Spirova E.M. Filosofsko-antropologicheskoe soderzhanie simvola [The philosophical-anthropological content of the symbol]: a monograph. М.: «Kanon +» ROOI «Reabilitatsia»,2011; Spirova E.M. Simvol kak ponyatie filosofskoy antropologii [The symbol as a concept of philosophical anthropology]. Doctorate thesis \ dissertation. М., 2012).


5. It was shown that in Russia the ideas of Humboldt were interpreted not in the perspective of specificity of each language but in the perspective of universal and adequate strategies of speech formation. Shpet’s conception of the «internal form» as an algorithm of adequate speech formation adjoins the corresponding language strategies of Vyacheslav Ivanov, Florensky, Losev, Bakhtin and others. Certainly, the strategies of speech formation offered by these authors are different, nevertheless, there are also a number of common typological provisions, the main of which is the idea of overcoming the relativity of particular languages by relativity itself. (Gogotishvili L.A. Shpet and Humboldt: fenomenologicheskie variatsii na temu yazykovogo universalizma i relativnosti [Shpet and Humboldt: phenomenological variations on the theme of language universalism and relativity] // Vox / Philosophical journal. 2012. Issue 12. (


6. The programme of studying psychoanalytical interpretation of the personality was formulated. As was noted, in Russian literature there is a dangerous tendency – to view the mental world of man only through the eyes of a psychiatrist. The strain of the mind began to be interpreted as approaching insanity. Imagination as a human gift began to be considered only in the perspective of unhealthy fantasies. A critical analysis of a strong tendency to study man only as a clinical creature is offered. (Gurevich P.S. Psikhoanaliz lichnosti [Psychoanalysis of the personality]/ М.: Humanities Research Institute, 2012; Gurevich P.S. Literatura glazami psikhiatra [Literature in the eyes of a psychiatrist] // Filologia: nauchnye issledovaniya [Philology: scientific research]. 2011. No. 4 (04). P. 48-59).

Four round tables were held on the basis of the Institute of Strategic Studies and Analysis, where modern expertise of topical social problems was given («The role of the personality in history», «Political mythology», «The formula of power», «Is humanism in demand today?»). Materials of the round tables were published in the expert journal «Vestnik Analitiki». Researchers of the department were among members of the organizing committees of two Russian and two international conferences.


7. Substantiation of the conception and methods of philosophical study of the phenomenon of transpersonality as a borderline reality was offered (See: Reznik Yu.M. Transpersonalnost’ kak pogranicnyaya realnost’ [Transpersonality as borderline reality] // Bulletin of I.Ya.Yakovlev Chuvash State Pedagogical University. 2012.No. 3-2 (75); Reznik Yu.M. Chelovek i ego pogranich’e: mezhdu ekzistentsiey i transtsendentsiey [Man and his border-line: between existence and transcendence] // Voprosy sotsialnoy teorii [Problems of social theory]: Scientific almanac. 2012. Vol. 6. Chelovek mezhdu mirami (ontologicheskie, epistemologicheskie, sotsiokulturnye i psikhologicheskie problem pogranich’ya) [Man between worlds (ontological, epistemological, sociocultural and psychological problems of bolderline] / Institute of Phylogophy RAS; Russian Institute of Cultural Science; Yu.M. Reznik and M.V. Tlostanova. М.: Independent Institute of Civil Society, 2012. P. 25-45; Reznik Yu.M. Chelovek sredi ludey: osobennosti i urovni transpersonalnogo vzaimodeystviya [Man among people: specificities and levels of transpersonal interaction] // Voprosy sotsialnoy teorii [Problems of social theory]: Scientific almanac. 2012. Vol. 6. Chelovek mezhdu mirami (ontologicheskie, epistemologicheskie, sotsiokulturnye i psikhologicheskie problem pogranich’ya) [Man between worlds (ontological, epistemological, sociocultural and psychological problems of bolderline] / Institute of Phylogophy RAS; Russian Institute of Cultural Science; Yu.M. Reznik and M.V. Tlostanova. М.: Independent Institute of Civil Society, 2012. P. 140-160).



In 2011, the department of the history of anthropological doctrines obtained the following results:

1. The tradition of profound study of the history and subject-matters of philosophical anthropology lost after the death of B.T. Grigoryan was restored. Fundamentally new evaluations of philosophical anthropological ideas, their conceptual meaning in the works by I. Kant (Spektr antropologicheskikh ucheniy [The spectrum of anthropological doctrines]. Issue 4 / Ed.-in-chief P.S. Gurevich. М.: IPhRAS, 2012. 206 p.), A. Schopenhauer (Gurevich P.S. Arthur Schopenhauer as a philosophical anthropologist // philosophical Философский журнал. 2011. No. 1 (6). P. 54-69), F. Nietzsche (Spektr antropologicheskikh ucheniy [The spectrum of anthropological doctrines]. Issue 4 / Ed.-in-chief  P.S. Gurevich. М.: IPhRAS, 2012. 206 p.) are offered.


2. Together with the chair of philosophical anthropology and problems of complex study of man of M.V.Lomonosov Moscow State University new versions of anthropogenesis are presented. Along with classical views analyzed in the works by N.V. Klyagin  (Klyagin N.V. Chudesa kauzalnosti [Wonder of causality] // Filosofia i kultura [Philosophy and culture. 2011. No.4 (40). P. 58-68; Klyagin N.V. Infantilnaya nauka [Infantile science] // Filosofia i kultura [Philosophy and culture. 2011. No. 7 (43). P. 19-29ff.), the conception of the origin of man first of all as a « man of fantasy, a dreaming man» not as a «labouring man» is discussed. To a considerable extent, the role of the unconscious in human evolution has been comprehended (Gurevich P.S. Fenomenologia bessoznatel’nogo: lichnost’ v psikhoanalize [Phenomenology of the unconscious: personality in psychoanalysis]: a monograph. Germany, Saarbrucken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2011. 650 p.).


3. Philosophical anthropological depths of the concept of the «symbol» were revealed. As was demonstrated, comprehension of this phenomenon invariably influenced accumulation of philosophical-anthropological knowledge. On the other hand, philosophical comprehension of man enhanced the view of the symbol, transformed its content as basic category of philosophical anthropology (Spirova E.M. The symbol and the philosophical interpretation of man: philosophic-anthropological reflection: a monograph. Germany, Saarbrucken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2011. 467 p.; Spirova E.M. Znak i simvol: psikhologo-filosofskie aspekty [The sign and the symbol:psychologo-philosophical aspects]: a monograph. М.:RGTEU Publishers, 2011. 186 p.).


4. A substantial analysis of a new anthropological situation in the modern world caused by serious restructuring of present-day culture under the influence of genetics is offered. Perils engendered by this situation, namely, transformation of man according to the patterns of technology, impoverishment of the emotional world, automation of thought, the idea of not the integral but fragmentary man have been outlined (paper by P.S. Gurevich «Tekhnologii svikhnuvshegosya razuma [Technologies of a crazy mind]» at the scientific conference «New technologies and the development of man (the 11th Frolov Readings)» (22 November 2011)).


5. The priority of philosophical anthropology in the system of other kinds of anthropological thinking is shown (Gurevich P.S. Filosofskaya antropologia [Philosophical anthropology] // Sotsiokulturnaya antropologia: Istoria, teoria i metodologia [Sociocultural anthropology: History, theory and methodology]. Encyclopaedic dictionary / ed. by Yu.M. Reznik. М.-Kirov, 2012. 1000 p. P. 627-637).


6. As was shown, the philosophical notion of death has passed through various stages of secularization, beginning with existential interpretation in the works of Heidegger and ending by thematization of death as a limit setting a measure of ethical attitude toward the other (Levinas).


7. A primary comprehensive analysis of F.Laruelle’s doctrine of «non-philosophy» that attracted close attention in France and other countries was offered (in particular, supporters of «speculative realism» – one of the most outstanding new philosophical trends in Europe – regard non-philosophy as part of the platform necessary for a fundamental renewal of humanitarian thinking).

Laruelle’s basic ideas were discussed: understanding of the Real as radical immanence not permitting penetration of not only transcendent, including materially embodied, but also transcendental fragments (i.e. thinking, language and consciousness in general also are dissociated from the immanentized Real); criticism of any «philosophical decisions» underlying each closed philosophical position; the theory of «one-sided duality» aimed at justification of special relationships between the Real and consciousness, philosophy, science and «man», ascertainment of non-positionality and non-theticity of «non-philosophical» discourse tending to axiomatics and kerygmaticity, etc. (Gogotishvili L.A. Immanentnoe, transtsendentnoe i dualnoe na pyatom etape «ne-filosofii» F.Laruelle [The immanent, the transcendent and the dual at the fifth stage of F.Laruelle’s «non-philosophy»] // Filosofia i kultura [Philosophy and culture]. 2011. No. 4. P. 111-129; Gogotishvili L.A. A foreword to the materials of the seminar «Interrelations between Russian and European philosophies» // Filosofia i kultura [Philosophy and culture]. 2011. No.4. P. 97-98).

Four round tables were held on the basis of the Institute of strategic стратегических оценок и анализа, where modern \ resent-day expertise of topical social problems was given («What is a stable society?», «The phenomenon of social shocks», «What does a collapse of multiculturalism mean?», «What is an ideal state?»). Materials of the round tables were published in the expert journal «Vestnik analitiki».



In 2010, the department paid considerable attention to interpretation of philosophical problems of man in the classical philosophy of the 19th – beginning of the 20th centuries. Theoretical articles about philosophical anthropological views of Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche were published. As has been shown, the anthropological crisis pushes thought toward the anthropological turn: to placement of anthropological problems in the centre of philosophical reflection and to related cardinal restructuring of the whole philosophical and, broader, whole humanitarian discourse. We witness the situation of intensive search and revision of the whole anthropological fund of European (and even world) thought; and in such a situation, the task of new reconstruction of the whole complex of anthropological ideas. Significant steps toward such a reconstruction were made in studying new French thought, post-structuralism of Foucault and, for the most part, Deleuze (Spektr antropologicheskikh ucheniy [The spectrum of anthropological doctrines]. Issue 3 / Ed.-in-chief  P.S. Gurevich.. – М.: ИФ РАН, 2010). A critical evaluation of the appearing tendency to turn anthropology into antianthropology is given. As is shown, in the course of its historical development philosophical anthropology developed many categories, They came to life at different time and in different contexts. Therefore, the necessity of a certain classification of these concepts, their internal relations, conceptual coherence was analysed (Spirova E.M. Filosofskaya antropologia kak sistema ponyatiy [Philosophical anthropology as a system of concepts] // Filosofia i kultura [Philosophy and culture]. 2010. No.11(35)). The role of the phenomenon of identity as a key problem of philosophical anthropology has been shown (Gurevich P.S.  Problema identichnosti v filosofskoy antropologii [The problem of identity in philosophical anthropology]. An introductory article to the volume of collected philosophical works / ed. by Yu. M. Reznik. М., 2010).


In 2010, interaction and inter-counteraction of linguistic methods of text formation with visual techniques of painting were analyzed. The idea of the presence of a certain correlation between these two spheres is supplemented by the inverse thesis and – taking this into account – the following general principle of correlating the techniques of visual pictures and linguistic exposition was formulated: if the methods of reverse perspective in painting are directly sensually visible, their language projections – are not such in principle. As has been hypothesized, certain internal incoherence of the inter-projection of techniques of painting and exposition observed in P.Florensky’s descriptions would be extinguished if the idea of the direct metaphysical significance of the sensual side of a word is disavowed. The name remains highly significant but in an outside-of-sensual meaning – it is interpreted as a kind of the genome of linguistic space, as an immaterial principle of the dynamic evolvement of discourse. The significance of this conclusion for modern discussions in the philosophy of language, cogitology and anthropology has been shown (Gogotishvili L.A. Teoria P.Florenskogo o korrelatsii izobrazitel’nykh i yazykovykh priemov  – obratnaya perspektiva i «krugly» diskurs [P.Florenski’s theory of correlation between artistic and linguistic techniques – reverse perspective and «round» discourse] // Voprosy filosofii [Problems of Philosophy]. 2010. No.11).


In 2010, also the analysis of the works of G.Shpet was summed up. According to the developed interpretational version, Shpet’s linguistic interpretation of phenomenology, being the consecutive development of an antithesis to Husserl’s propositions about the object non-productivity of language, has a common core, but on the other hand, Shpet’s position was developed and modified. A hypothesis was proposed that «languagization» of phenomenology was performed by Shpet in two directions that did not start simultaneously and were not synchronized in all respects: in the first direction (early Shpet) he performed languagization of noematics (for the purposes of proving the object non-emptiness of the word’s semantic intentions), in the second – languagization of noetics (for the purposes of proving the object productivity of the syntactics of language acts). By way of summing up, a conception of a special, Shpet’s type of discourse (combining noetic and noematic approaches) was developed – defocalized polycyclicism; it was such a discoursive strategy that supposedly was taking shape in the last Shpet’s works but he did not «have enough time» for its final development and complete explicit expression (Gogotishvili L.A. Kogitologicheskaya interpretatsiya idei vnutrenney formy G.Shpeta [Cogitological interpretation of G.Shpet’s idea of the internal form] // // Voprosy filosofii [Problems of Philosophy]. 2010. No.1).



As was shown in a number of publications, in the beginning of the new century many new approaches to philosophical understaiding of man developed. Radically non-traditional versions of the origin of man, his being and human nature (post-anthropology, humanology, symmetrical ontology, post-transmodernism) intensively develop (Gurevich P.S. Fenomen deantropologizatsii cheloveka [The phenomenon of deanthropologization of man] // // Voprosy filosofii [Problems of Philosophy]. 2009. No.3. P. 19-31; Egorova I.V. Istolkovanie prirody cheloveka v filosofii E.Fromma [Interpretation of  human nature in philosophy of E.Fromm // Chelovek. Nauka. Gumanizm [Man. Science. Humanism]. М.: IPhRAS, 2009. P. 173-179). As a result of a critical analysis of these trends, the ideas of a merger of life and a construction , conception of the Burnt sacrifice of Dasein, man’s disassembly, technologization of man’s life cycle and other discourses, the anti-being meaning of postmodernist and other subjects of philosophical understanding of man was revealed. The phenomenon of the loss of human identity was analyzed. A paradigm of conservative thinking in the form of phenomenologial realism was proposed (Gurevich P.S. Raskolotost’ chelovecheskogo bytiya [The split of human being]: a monograph. – М.: IPhRAS, 2009).


According to the results of the continuing work at reconstruction and development of anthropological and linguistic ideas of Russian philosophy of the 20th century the following propositions were substantiated:

1) Reception of phenomenology in Russian philosophy was characterized by its «languagization» and went at a fast pace. At first, the noematic constituent of Husserl’s conception was linguistically re-interpreted, which was aimed at demonstrating the ability of language to be a special and autonomous source of primary representative essence of an object (it correlated with the ideologema about the «word becoming flesh» characteristic for that time). At the second stage, along with external linguistic forms, the issues of internal forms and meanings were put in the centre of attention, therefore, languagization involved the noetic constituent of phenomenology, i.e. a theory of varied forms of the syntactics of acts of consciousness. While Husserl interpreted language – in its natural flow and spontaneity – as a non-productive and only representing layer of expression (moreover: as capable of leading and actually often leading to the situation when consciousness is drawn in language, overwhelmed by its semantic waves and – often – by others’ words and meanings, thus loosing any real relation with things), Russian philosophy was developing different variants of the idea that comprehension of an object would be preferable through language – through one’s own and others’ words or, according to Shpet’s imaginative words, «one should observe reading, not to read about observing». These general provisions had numerous consequences in the form of particular linguistic and philosophical innovations (Gogotishvili L.A Ranniy Shpet: motivatsiya i tseli povorota fenomenologii k «yazykovomy soznaniyu» [Early Shpet: phenomenology motivation and goals of turning to «language consciousness» // Tvorcheskoe nasledie Gustava Gustavovicha  Shpeta v kontekste sovremennogo gumanitarnogo znaniya [The creative heritage of G.G. Shpet in the context of modern humanitarian knowledge]:  G.G. Shpet / Comprehensio. The Fifth Shpet Readings / ed.-in-chief O.G. Mazaeva. Tomsk: Tomsk Univ.Publ., 2009; Vnutrennyaya forma Shpeta kak yazykovoy algoritm [Shpet’s internal form as a language algorithm] // Invited paper at the conference «Fogotten Academy» (GAHN), Berlin, 5 December 2009; G. Chpet et M. Bakhtine: divergences attendues et rapprochements inattendus // Slavica Occitania. Numéros 26 et 27. Gustav Chpet et son héritage. Aux sources russes du structuralisme et de la sémiotique. Toulouse. 2008. P. 66-84).


2) One of the consequences of languagization of the problems of consciousness was an interest taken in the problem of internal speech. In the course of analyzing this theme a thesis was substantiated that external forms of speech and forms of internal speech are not homogenous in principle. And in cases of the maximal genetic dependence on internal speech, external forms presuppose considerable transformation of its organic structural properties. This also refers to the «supreme forms» of using language (logic, poetry), there is always an insurmountable (similar to footlights) border; shifts from one side to the other seriously change the worded flesh of thought and thought itself between internal and external speech, between the immanent dialogism of self-consciousness and the «man-made» dialogism of external speech by some patterns or other. (Gogotishvili L.A Avtor i ego rolevye inversii [The author and his role inversions] // Vladimir Solomonovich Bibler. Series «Filosofia Rossii vtoroy poloviny ХХ veka [Russian philosophy of the second half of the 20th century]». IPhRAS. ROSSPEN. ISBN: 978-5-8243-1125-9. 2009. P.181-241).


3) The idea of the presence of mutual projections between linguistic techniques and painting techniques that was widespread in Russian philology. Based on analysis of forms of inter-projections between techniques of reverse perspective in painting and their linguistic analogues, a conclusion was formulated that while painting techniques of reverse perspective are directly visualizable and specially sensually accentuated, their language projections are not such in principle (they are realizable and sensible in verbal expression, but go into internal implicated layers of meaning without external language vestments). On the other hand, all non-sensual language projections of reverse perspective, like other semantically and syntactically invisible figures of meaning (in particular, tropes, etc.), remain – the principal moment – exactly language phenomena, though other, non sensual grips are required for grasping them (Gogotishvili L.A Perspektivnost’ «ne-perspektivnosti»: teoria P. Florenskogo o vzaimokorrelatsii zhivopisnykh i yazykovykh priemov [Perspectiveness of «non-perspectiveness»: P. Florensky’s theory]. Paper at the conference «Florensky and Europe». France, Bordeaux, 12 November 2009).



As shown in a number of publications, the idea of human nature has radically changed in modern philosophical anthropology. As distinct from classical versions, in which human nature was considered to be relatively stable, the theme of re-coding of man unexpectedly became very significant (see the paper by P.S.  Gurevich at the Frolov readings and his monograph «Philosophical anthropology» (М., 2008)). The problems of disassembly of a thing-bodily entity, the phenomenon of non-anthropologization, de-biologization, decoding of man were considered from critical positions. The problem of a new anthropological entity was studied. The theme of disintegration of human being was analyzed. As was shown, it is manifested in the system of various controversies, between the poles of some particular (being-nonbeing, immanent-transcendent, integral and disintegrated, individual and social, identical and featureless, creative and destructive) oppositions or other.


Based on a multi-vector comparison and opposition of Bakhtin, Losev, Shpet and Bibler, it was shown that a complex of problems prevailing in the beginning, middle and end of the 20th century can be singled out in Russian philosophy; among them – a crisis of language acquiring new forms, undermining the positions of the author, the addressee and the subject of speech, and, respectively, the continuing blurring (or rearrangement) of borders between traditional spheres of culture (including philosophical and artistic discourses). As was shown, Losev, Shpet, Bakhtin and Bibler offered integral doctrines that interpreted the on-going linguistic processes differently in principle, but on the other hand, differences found in these doctrines are analogous with the objective typological boundaries in modern cultural speech practice (they reveal objective break-ups in the developing new cultural architectonics), hence – a hypothesis that integration of these different conceptual viewpoints is potentially capable of creating a more integral picture of what is going on. This «multiple» configuration of common components indicates, according to the interpretation offered, that in the foundation of the «crisis of language» and of all transformations in modern discourses built on inversion of role-related positions of communicating participants, there lie implicit anchitectonic shifts in understanding the «subject-matter of speech» (Gogotishvili L.A. Bibler, Bakhtin i problema avtora [Bibler, Bakhtin and the problem of an author] // Voprosy filosofii [Problems of Philosophy], 2008, № 9; Gogotishvili L.A  Eydeticheskiy yazyk, govoryashchaya veshch i mnogosloynost’ smysla [Eudetic language, the speaking thing and the multi-layeredness of meaning] // Aleksey Fedorovich Losev. Russkaya filosofia vtoroy poloviny ХХ veka [Russian philosophy of the second half of the 20th century]. М.: ROSSPEN. 2008; Gogotishvili L.A G. Chpet et M. Bakhtine: divergences attendues et rapprochements inattendus // Slavica Occitania. Numéros 26 et 27. Gustav Chpet et son héritage. Aux sources russes du structuralisme et de la sémiotique. Toulouse. 2008).



– new versions of interpretation of human nature were itemized and analyzed. The difference between the classical understanding of this phenomenon as ontologically stable, persistent and having concrete signs, and neoclassical interpretations, in which «human nature» looses shape was pointed out. In the new conceptions of «transhumanists»,  human nature appears as an ephemeral, transient, unstable formation and in the ultimate variant is absent as such altogether. The intention to «overcome man» springs up. As is shown, the post-man is man’s descendant modified to the extent of being human no more (Gurevich P.S. Paper «New versions of human nature» at acad.I.T.Frolov IPhRAS conference), a number of publications in scientific journals «Lichnost’, kultura, obshchestvo [Personality, culture, society]» and «Znanie, ponimanie, umenie [Knowledge, understanding, ability]».


– within the framework of the continuing work on the phenomenology of language based on comparing the conceptions by G.G. Shpet, V.S. Bibler, L.S. Vygotsky, A.F. Losev, M.M. Bakhtin and others, the points of similarity and difference between «inner speech», «internal forms of language», «inner dialogicity of the word» were determined; within the framework of these concepts, the difference of understanding of the degree of proximity \  distance and isomorphicity \ non-isomorphicity of language and meaning was revealed; parallels of these conceptions with modern analytic-linguistic concepts (presupposition \ assertion, theme \ rheme, locution \ illocution, etc. were drawn (Gogotishvili L.A. Nepryamoe govorenie [Indirect speaking]. М., 2006), a paper at the Bordeaux conference (France) entitled «Expected differences and unexpected similarities of conceptions of G. Shpet and M. Bakhtin, 20 November 2004).


– a socio-philosophical approach was used to study the hypothesis of a psychological breakdown of «lost» post-war generations resulting from mental infantilism due to acceleration (Klyagin N.V. Modern scientific picture of the world: М., 2007).


– theoretic horizons of modern philosophical anthropology were outlined. As was shown, at the end of the past century many events took place that radically changed not only the anthropological theme itself but also the attitude to it. The paradoxality of the new situation was that the anthropological boom was counterposed by the idea of the «death of man». Many philosophers of this school pointed out that the desire of European writers to regard ontological and epistemological problems through the prism of man resulted in inadmissible distortion of theoretical consciousness. An attempt to present the anthropological theme as omnipresent and holding supreme power, as M. Foucault pointed out, was fraught with enormous miscalculations. As was noted, this concept was the most illustrative example of transition from philosophical and artistic modernism to culture of the post-modernistic type. Paradoxically, in the history of philosophy, premeditated rejection of some theme or another not infrequently stimulated a sharper understanding of the problem itself. That was why post-modernistic discourse, declaring the «death of man», objectively contributed to broadening of the spectrum of anthropological reflection. New subjects entered the space of philosophical anthropology. In particular, there appeared an enhanced interest in the diversity and ordinariness of human life. This refers to such themes as madness and unreasonableness, history of sexuality, depths of the unconscious, phantasms and language games, life world and loss of meaning (Gurevich P.S. Philosophical anthropology. М., 2007)


– the problem of the ontological split of human being received scientific reflection. The split of human being was interpreted through the binary oppositions of being and nonbeing, integral and disintegrated, bodily and spiritual, immanent and transcendent, individual and social, identical and faceless, creative and destructive (the collective monograph «Spektr antropologicheskikh ucheniy [The spectrum of anthropological doctrines]. Issue 2).



– The spectrum of philosophical anthropological knowledge was considerably widened after inclusion of the problems referring to the image of man in modern philosophical trends into the subjects studied by the department. Answering the question, whether a unified discourse about man is possible, the department showed that one can reconstruct the image of man by his particular modalities, to «re-discover» man, therefore, to give up the abstract rationalistic conception of man, to reject schematism, idealization of man as homo sapiens, to create his contemporary model that would include the bodily and physiological, conscious and unconscious sphere, reveal their determination by linguistic determinants – see books by R.M. Aleynik. «Chelovek v filosofskom modenizme [Man in philosophical modernism» (М., 2006), «Spektr antropologicheskikh ucheniy [The spectrum of anthropological doctrines]» (ed. by P.S. Gurevich).


– a version of the «phenomenology of indirect speech» is presented, which is based on study of the forms of non-isomorphic correlation between semantic and linguistic structures of consciousness  and the related phenomenon of indirect expression of meaning in language. Various interpretations of these phenomena in Russian symbolism, phenomenology, cognitive linguistic, semantics, analytic philosophy, structuralism, theories of reference, tropology, narratology, deconstructivism, etc. are compared. Various particular ways of indirect speech were revealed and analyzed: split, delayed, indirect reference, biphony, poliphony, antinomic constructions, looseninf of the act of naming, symbol and metaphor, intentional and attentional coherences, modal and tonal shifts, displacement and overlaying of foci of attention, split of the speaker’s «Self» into individual «voices», their alternating changes, alternation and overlaying,  self-reduction of the author’s voice and its degrees, a stage of the «author’s death». Within the framework of the proposed version of the «phenomenology of indirect speaking» criteria for general topology of these and other forms of indirect conveyance of meaning in a single conceptual space were developed and applied.

Within the framework of continuing work aimed at reconstruction, development and interpretation of linguo-philosophical and anthropological ideas of Russian philosophy of the beginning of the 20th century in modern philosophical context a hypothesis of funding Russian symbolism, a radical concept of the apriori «eudetic language» of symbols – in its fundamental difference and particular similarities with natural language – was developed. The hypothesis was built on the basis of A.F.Losev’s philosophy with involvement of other versions of symbolism. Points of contact and divergence of the concept of «eudetic language» with later influential trends of humanitarian thought were revealed. As was shown, being engendered at the point of junction of symbolism, first of all, with E.Husserl’s phenomenology, and also with neo-Kantianism and neo-Platonically re-interpreted name-glorification, the concept of «eudetic language» performed in symbolism the functions similar to those which soon were attached to binary mythological structures, to the sphere of the unconscious, impersonal language archetypes, «matrices» of inter-subjective, communicative and social practices, etc.

Also, a rationale was offered for the idea that the theoretical potential of the concept of «eudetic language» took another direction than that in which post- Husserl  phenomenology was going since early 60-s, in particular, along the Heidegger-Derrida line. As distinct from the tradition drawing eudetics closer to natural language, the conception of eudetic language in its development does not only phenomenologically demonstrates the possibilities of engendering a system of arguments in support of the thesis of the presence of non-language forms of meaning. This presupposes a shift of accents in the mainly existential and simultaneously linguocentric picture of modern anthropology (in its phenomenological branch) towards rational-referential, cogitological, narratological and partially directly analytical aspects. See: Gogotishvili L.A. Eydeticheskiy yazyk (Rekonstruktsiya i interpretatsiya v radikalnoy filosofskoy novatsii A.F.Loseva [Eudetic language (Reconstruction and interpretation in A.F.Losev’s radical philosophical innovation)]


– As was shown, modern philosophy of culture differs from classical philosophy of culture to a considerable extent. Not only new themes become objects of philosophical reflection, major themes of this field of philosophical knowledge  undergo transformation (what culture is, how it is related to nature and civilization, why there is diversity of cultures, etc.). As is shown in the works of the department, philosophy of culture changed its social status: now it claims to highlight all social problems, including those that traditionally were assigned to philosophy of history. Modern philosophy of culture regards the conflict between the rationalized, projected level of culture and predominance of traditional normative forms, life worlds and worldviews. Attention of the department was concentrated on spontaneously emerging forms of life, political and legal practice (for example, the practice of isolating people deviating from social order) as more profound foundations of targeted rationality and its structures. As a matter of fact, it is deconstruction of socio-cultural systems, especially late modernity, which display inability to govern their elements and lack a new, wider conceptual and practical rationale. (These ideas are expressed in the book by P.S. Gurevich «Cultural science» (М., 2006)).



Many researcher now write that man should be understood as a whole. However, no object can be evaluated as an integral or fragmentary. Eventually, there are particular entities that might be regarded as a fragment of another, more extensive entity. A thinkable whole is only a scheme of a certain idea, with which we operate.  Why does not man as an integral whole become an object of study for us? Any attempt at creating an integral scheme of man is doomed to failure. To the extent, to which the scheme corresponds to truth, it certainly manifests its particular, not all-embracing character and points to just another way of disassembling the «human». Human integrity is not a given but a certain ideal, a motive force of a breakthrough to being. Man is not integral in principle, his being is torn, full of collisions. However, man has a general possibility to acquire fullness of his existence. Integrity turns out to be a problem for man, eternal longing, particular achievement of harmony. Man can remain fragmentary, one-dimensional, principally torn. But he also is capable of revealing the limitless potential of human being. Integrity is not a border but a horizon.


These conclusions were presented in such publications as: Gurevich P.S. Filosofia [Philosophy]. М., 2005; Gurevich P.S. Filosofia cheloveka [Philosophy of man]. Lecture 1 // Lichnost. Kultura. Obshchestvo. An interdisciplinary scientific-practical j. of social and humanitarian sciences. Issue 1 (25). М., 2005, p. 262-294; Gurevich P.S. Filosofia cheloveka [Philosophy of man]. Lecture 2 // Lichnost. Kultura. Obshchestvo. An interdisciplinary scientific-practical j. of social and humanitarian sciences. Issue 3 (27). М., 2005, p. 189-216.



Many findings of human nature are indicative that man is an extremely eccentric creature. Not only has he various traits, contradictory characteristics. Human nature is complex in general. The unusualness of man as a creation is conditioned by the fact that in many respects he is excluded from the organic structure of the natural world, though he is rooted in it. Human properties are paradoxical, they give an idea of an exclusive creature. Man is a natural creature but at the same time he is alien to nature. He is a creation of nature, but at the same time he is out it its bosom. Man is born in nature,  but lives in society. He has instincts but he also has another programme of orientation – social, cultural. Consciousness and the unconscious also create radically different forms of perception. In man, various programmes work simultaneously and they, like demons, drag man in different directions: instincts and sociality, consciousness and the unconscious, desire and conscience. It is very likely that man is not integral in principle.

These conclusions might be used in the system of education, upbringing and politics.