Consciousness as a problem of psychology: post-nonclassical interpretation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35774/pis2018.03.051Keywords:
methodology, post-nonclassical rationality, consciousness, subjectivity, cultural-analytical approach, transdisciplinarityAbstract
The content of the paradigm of consciousness in psychology changed along with a change in the ideals of rationality. In classical psychology consciousness was identical with the psyche, it was studied as an isolated reality through a methodology borrowed from natural science. In non-classical psychology the problem of consciousness was on the periphery of psychological research and methodological strategies that allowed to study the subjective nature of consciousness had latent development at this stage. The turn to the phenomenon of consciousness occurred at the post-non-classical stage of the development of psychology. It was formed under the influence of global socio-cultural transformations of the present, as well as the achievements of cognitive science and neuroscience. In the light of the post-non-classical ideal of rationality, a fluid, labile, procedural, supercomplex and multidimensional nature of consciousness was discovered and her research required the search for new research strategies. At the post-non-classical stage of psychology the problem of studying consciousness as a subjective reality became again topical. However this problem could not be solved solely within the framework of cognitive approaches and achievements of neuroscience. The post-non-classical interpretation of consciousness presupposed transdisciplinarity (allowing to unite the science and humanitarian approaches to the phenomenon of consciousness), processuality and multidimensionality, the anthropological principle (requiring the study of consciousness outside of separation from the person as a whole), contextuality (changes in consciousness in cultural, historical and sociocultural contexts) and subjectivity. In modern post-non-classical interpretation consciousness (like the psyche as a whole) appears as a complex self-organizing system, as well as subjective, dynamic and multidimensional reality. One of the important methodological resources of the post-non-classical ideal of rationality was the transdisciplinary study of the phenomenon of consciousness. An important role in the disclosure of the subjective nature of consciousness and the study of its cultural and historical variability is played by the humanitarian methodology implemented, in particular, in the cultural-analytical approach.
References
Agafonov A.Yu. Osnovy smyslovoi teorii soznaniya [Tekst]. A.Yu. Agafonov. M.: Rech’, 2003. 296 s. [In Russian].
Akopov G.V. Psikhologiya soznaniya: Voprosy metodologii, teorii i prikladnykh issledovanii? [Tekst]. G.V. Akopov. M.: Izd-vo “Institut psikhologii RAN”, 2010. 272 s. [In Russian].
Allakhverdov V.M. Soznanie kak paradoks. (Eksperimental’naya psikhologika, t. 1). [Tekst]. V.M. Allakhverdov. SPb.: Izdatel’stvo DNK, 2000. 528 s. [In Russian].
Anolli L. Psikhologiya kul’tury [Tekst]. L. Anolli. Khar’kov: Gumanitarnyi tsentr, 2016. 480 s. [In Russian].
Bakhtin M.M. Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva [Tekst]. M.M. Bakhtin. M.: Iskusstvo, 1979. . 424 s. [In Russian].
Brushlinskii A.V. Izbrannye psikhologicheskie trudy. [Tekst]. A.V. Brushlinskii. M.: IP RAN, 2006. 623 s. [In Russian].
Veber M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya [Tekst]. M. Veber. M.: Progress, 1990. 808 s. [In Russian].
Gusel’tseva M.S. Kul’turnaya psikhologiya: metodologiya, istoriya, perspektivy [Tekst]. M.S. Gusel’tseva. M.: Prometei, 2007. 292 s. [In Russian].
Gusel’tseva M.S. Kul’turno-analiticheskii podkhod k izucheniyu evolyutsii psikhologicheskogo znaniya: diss. .. dokt. psikhol. nauk [Tekst]. M.S. Gusel’tseva. M., 2015. . 459 s. [In Russian].
Gusel’tseva M.S. Metodologicheskie krizisy i tipy nauchnoi ratsional’nosti [Tekst]. M.S. Gusel’tseva. Vopr. psikhol. 2006. № 1. S. 3-15. [In Russian].
Zavershneva E.Yu. Printsipy neopredelennosti i dopolnitel’nosti v kvantovoi mekhanike i psikhologii: problema metodologicheskikh zaimstvovanii [Tekst]. E.Yu. Zavershneva. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 14 “Psikhologiya”. 2001. № 4. S. 67-77; 2002. № 1. S. 75-80. [In Russian].
Kelli Dzh. Teoriya lichnosti. Psikhologiya lichnykh konstruktov [Tekst]. Dzh. Kelli. SPb.: Rech’, 2000. 249 s. [In Russian].
Klochko V.E. Problema soznaniya v psikhologii: postneklassicheskii rakurs [Tekst]. V.E. Klochko. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 14 “Psikhologiya”. 2013. № 4. S. 20-35. [In Russian].
Mamardashvili M.K. Klassicheskii i neklassicheskii idealy ratsional’nosti [Tekst]. M.K. Mamardashvili. M.: Logos, 2004. 238 s. [In Russian].
Martin R. Myshlenie v stile “I”. Kak myslyat uspeshnye lidery [Tekst]. R. Martin. M.: Yurait, 2016. 228 s.
Nagel’ T. Kakovo byt’ letuchei mysh’yu? [Elektronnyi resurs]. T. Nagel’. URL: http://www.gumer.info/bogoslov_Buks/Philos/Article/nag_kak.php (data obrashcheniya: 27.04.2018). [In Russian].
Narrativnaya mediatsiya. Obzor rabot Dzh. Monka i Dzh. Uinsleida. [Tekst]. Obzor D.A. Kutuzovoi. Postneklassicheskaya psikhologiya. Sotsial’nyi konstruktsionizm i narrativnyi podkhod. 2006-2007. № 1 (3). S. 106-125. [In Russian].
Pasternak B.L. O predmete i metode psikhologii [Tekst]. B.L. Pasternak. Pasternak B.L. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii s prilozheniyami. V 11 tomakh. T. 5. M.: Slovo, 2004. S. 303-317. [In Russian].
Petrovskii V.A. Psikhologiya neadaptivnoi aktivnosti [Tekst]. V.A. Petrovskii. M.: TOO “Gorbunok”, 1992. 224 s. [In Russian].
Revonsuo A. Psikhologiya soznaniya [Tekst]. A. Revonsuo. SPb.: Piter, 2013. 336 s. [In Russian].
Rubinshtein S.L. Bytie i soznanie. Chelovek i mir [Tekst]. S.L. Rubinshtein. SPb.: Piter, 2003. 512 s. [In Russian].
Sokolov M.M. Chto znachit videt’ mir sotsiologicheski? [Elektronnyi resurs]. M.M. Sokolov. Lektsiya nauchno-obrazovatel’nogo proekta “Progress-Shkola”. 2015. URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAg-9j3D4pI (data obrashcheniya: 27.04.2018) [In Russian].
Stepin V.S. Teoreticheskoe znanie: Struktura, istoricheskaya evolyutsiya. [Tekst]. V.S. Stepin. M. : Progress-Traditsiya, 2000. 744 s. [In Russian].
Furman A.V. Svіdomіst’ yak peredumova psikhologіchnogo pіznannya і profesіinogo metodologuvannya [Tekst]. A.V. Furman. Psikhologіya і suspіl’stvo: ukr. teoret.-metod. sotsіogumanіt. chasop. 2017. № 4 (70). S. 16-38. [In Ukrainian].
Uilber K. Integral’naya psikhologiya: Soznanie, Dukh, Psikhologiya, Terapiya [Tekst]. K. Uilber. M.: ACT, 2004. 412 s. [In Russian].
Uilber K. Kratkaya istoriya vsego [Tekst]. K. Uilber. M.: Astrel’, 2006. 476 s. [In Russian].
Umrikhin V.V., Romashchuk, A.N. [Tekst]. V.V. Umrikhin, A.N. Romashchuk. Na perelome metodologicheskikh platform : ot klassicheskoi psikhologii k psikhologii ХХ veka sovremennaya psikhologiya: metodologiya, paradigmy, teorii. Anan’evskie chteniya 2009: sovremennaya psikhologiya: metodologiya, paradigmy, teoriya. T. 1. 2009. S. 109-114. [In Russian].
Umrikhin V.V. Put’ k funktsional’nomu ponimaniyu psikhiki kak predposylka psikhologii XX veka [Tekst]. V.V. Umrikhin. Uchenye zapiski kafedry obshchei psikhologii MGU. Vyp. 1. pod obshch. red. B. S. Bratusya, D. A. Leont’eva). . M.: MGU, 2002. . S. 166-174. [In Russian].
Khabermas Yu. Filosofskii diskurs o moderne [Tekst]. Yu. Khabermas. M.: “Ves’ mir”, 2003. 416 s. [In Russian].
Chalmers D. Soznayushchii um: V poiskakh fundamental’noi teorii [Tekst]. D. Chalmers. M.: URSS, 2013. 512 s. [In Russian].
Piaget J. Méthodologie des Relations Interdisciplinaires [Tekst]. J. Piaget. Archives de Philosophie. 1971. No. 34. P. 539-549. [In French].
The Science of Consciousness TSC 2018. Tucson, Arizona. 2018. URL: http://www.consciousness. arizona.edu/documents/TSC2018AbstractBook-final.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 27.04.2018). [In English].
Wilber K. The Spectrum of Consciousness [Tekst]. Theosophical Publishing House, 1977. 374 p. [In English].
Gusel’tseva M.S. Metodologіchna optika yak іnstrument pіznannya [Tekst]. M.S. Gusel’tseva. Psikhologіya і suspіl’stvo: ukr. teoret.-metod. sotsіogumanіt. chasop. 2017. № 4 (70). S. 39-55.
Downloads
Issue
Section
License
1. PROPOSED POLICY FOR JOURNALS THAT OFFER OPEN ACCESS
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
2. PROPOSED POLICY FOR JOURNALS THAT OFFER DELAYED OPEN ACCESS
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work [SPECIFY PERIOD OF TIME] after publication simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).