The individual as the basis of the dialogical communication

Lyud­mi­la A. Marko­va
Insti­tute of Phi­los­o­phy, Russ­ian Acad­e­my of Sci­ences

The indi­vid­ual as the basis of the dia­log­i­cal com­mu­ni­ca­tion

Abstract. The log­ic of a new type, which was form­ing after the sci­en­tif­ic rev­o­lu­tion of the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry, is the oppo­site of the clas­sic one pri­mar­i­ly because it does not destroy its pre­cur­sor but enters with it into dia­log­i­cal rela­tions. Dia­logue requires at least two log­i­cal sub­jects. If you are unable to cope with a new prob­lem by means of clas­si­cal log­ic, its solu­tion is either post­poned for the future, or it is ignored as unre­solved. Non-clas­si­cal log­ic, how­ev­er, pos­sess­es its own way out. The evi­dence that can­not be explained is pro­vid­ed with a new log­ic, which enters into dia­logue with the clas­sics. The pecu­liar­i­ty of this train of thought is that the direc­tion of thought, its ori­en­ta­tion is aimed pri­mar­i­ly not at the object of research but at the sub­ject, and a turn of think­ing occurs, which philoso­phers and soci­ol­o­gists often argue about in dif­fer­ent con­texts. Log­ic is not so much writ­ten off from real­i­ty as it emerges in the head of a sci­en­tist (philoso­pher, logi­cian), though being cre­at­ed in dif­fer­ent ways. One or anoth­er prop­er­ty is select­ed from real­i­ty, and on their basis, the log­ic of all real­i­ty is being built. Clas­si­cal log­ic dis­tin­guish­es gen­er­al prop­er­ties of objects and events but ignores indi­vid­ual fea­tures. Non-clas­sic log­ic, on the con­trary, high­lights fea­tures that dis­tin­guish some objects from oth­ers. The pecu­liar­i­ty of non-clas­sics is that it does not destroy its pre­de­ces­sor since it needs it as an inter­locu­tor.

Key­words: real­i­ty, human, empir­i­cal, log­ic, gen­er­al, indi­vid­ual, con­text, think­ing, activ­i­ty

DOI: 10.5840/dspl20192455


  1. Bibler, V.S. Ot nauk­oucheni­ia – k logike kul­tu­ry. Dva filosof­skikh vve­deni­ia v dvadt­sat per­vyi vek [From the Sci­ence of Knowl­edge to the Log­ic of Cul­ture: Two Philo­soph­i­cal Intro­duc­tions into the Twen­ty-first Cen­tu­ry]. Moscow: Izda­tel­st­vo politich­eskoi lit­er­atu­ry Publ., 1991. 413 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  2. Frode­man, R. Anti-Fuller: Tran­shu­man­ism and the Proac­tionary Imper­a­tive, Social Epis­te­mol­o­gy Review and Reply Col­lec­tive, 2015, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 38–43.
  3. Fuller, S. Social Epis­te­mol­o­gy: A Quar­ter-Cen­tu­ry Itin­er­ary, Social Episte-mol­o­gy, 2012, vol. 26, no. 3–4, pp. 267–283.
  4. Gold­man, A.I. Knowl­edge in a Social World. Oxford: Oxford Uni­ver­si­ty Press. 2010. 407 pp.
  5. Heisen­berg, W. Sha­gi za gor­i­zont [Steps Beyond the Hori­zon; Ger­man: Schritte Uber Gren­zen] / trans. from Ger­man.; comp. by A.V. Akhutin. Moscow: Progress Publ., 1987. 368 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  6. Kasavin, I.T. Tekst. Diskurs. Kon­tekst. Vve­de­nie v sot­sial­nuiu epis­te­mologi­iu iazy­ka [Text. Dis­course. Con­text. Intro­duc­tion to the Social Epis­te­mol­o­gy of Lan­guage]. Moscow: Kanon + Publ., 2008. 437 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  7. Kasavin, I.T. Vik­to­ri­an­ska­ia filosofi­ia nau­ki: Uil­iam Khi­uell (razmysh­leni­ia nad knigoi) [Vic­to­ri­an Phi­los­o­phy of Sci­ence: William Whewell (Reflec­tions on the Book)], Voprosy filosofii [Prob­lems of Phi­los­o­phy], 2017, no. 3, pp. 63–73. (In Russ­ian)
  8. Kuhn, T. Struk­tu­ra nauch­nykh revoli­ut­sij [The Struc­ture of Sci­en­tif­ic Rev­o­lu­tions] / transl. from Eng­lish by I.Z. Nale­tov. Moscow: Progress Publ., 1977. 300 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  9. Latour, B. Peres­bor­ka sot­sialno­go. Vve­de­nie v aktorno-sete­vuiu teori­iu [Reassem­bling the Social: An Intro­duc­tion to Actor-Net­work The­o­ry.] / transl. from Eng­lish and ed. by S. Gavrilenko. Moscow: Izda­tel­skii dom Vysshei shkoly ekonomi­ki Publ., 2014. 384 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  10. Latour, B, Wool­gar, S. Lab­o­ra­to­ry Life: The Con­struc­tion of Sci­en­tif­ic Facts. Prin­ston, N.J.: Prin­ston Uni­ver­si­ty Press.1986. 296 pp.
  11. Mamar­dashvili, M.K. Strela poz­nani­ia. Nabrosok estestven­no-istorich­eskoi gnose­ologii [The Arrow of Knowl­edge: Sketch of Nat­ur­al His­tor­i­cal Epis­te­mol­o­gy] / ed. by Iu.P. Senokosov. Moscow: Iazy­ki Russkoi kul­tu­ry Publ., 1996. 305 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  12. Marko­va, L.A. Dru­ga­ia nau­ka, v rezul­tate – nova­ia nauch­na­ia poli­ti­ka [Oth­er Sci­ence, Result­ing in a New Sci­ence Pol­i­cy], Voprosy filosofii [Prob­lems of Phi­los­o­phy], 2017, no. 12, pp. 102–113. (In Russ­ian)
  13. Marko­va, L.A. Mate­ri­al­izat­si­ia mys­li v iazyke i risunke [Mate­ri­al­iza­tion of Thought in Lan­guage and Paint­ing], Voprosy filosofii [Prob­lems of Phi­los­o­phy], 2019, no. 4, pp. 34–44. DOI: 10.31857/S004287440004790-4. (In Russ­ian)
  14. Marko­va, L. Stud­ies in Rus­sia and in the West, Social Epis­te­mol­o­gy, 2017, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 38–50. DOI: 10.1080/02691728.2016.1227392.
  15. Marx, K. Kap­i­tal [Cap­i­tal. Ger­man: Das Kap­i­tal; vol. 2, book 3]. Prot­sess kap­i­tal­is­tich­esko­go proizvod­st­va, vzi­atyi v tselom [The Process of Cap­i­tal­ist Pro­duc­tion, Tak­en as a Whole], in: K. Marx, F. Engels, Sochi­neni­ia [Works], vol. 25, part 2. Moscow: Poli­tiz­dat Publ., 1962. 551 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  16. Paler­mos, O., Pritcharfd, D. Exter­nal Knowl­edge and Social Epis­te­mol­o­gy, Social Epis­te­mol­o­gy Review and Reply Col­lec­tive, 2013, vol. 2, no. 8,
    pp. 105– 120.
  17. Pen­rose, R. Teni razu­ma. V poiskakh nau­ki o soz­nanii [Shad­ows of the Mind: A Search for the Miss­ing Sci­ence of Con­scious­ness] / transl. from Eng­lish by A.R. Logunov, N.A. Zubchenko. Moscow; Izhevsk: Insti­tut kom­pi­uternykh issle­dovanii Publ., 2005. 688 pp. (In Russ­ian)
  18. Wittgen­stein, L. Izbran­nye rabo­ty [Select­ed Works] / transl. from Ger­man and Eng­lish by V. Rud­nev. Moscow: Ter­ri­tori­ia budushchego Publ., 2005. 440 pp. (In Russ­ian)

Comments are closed.