Typological systematics in the science of culture: foundations and prospects

The creation of a taxonomy is an important stage in the formation of culturology as a mature field of scientific knowledge. It presupposes a discussion of the question of the foundation - a taxonomic unit that specifically structures the universe of cultures and world history. Although many efforts have been made to create a type as a taxonomic unit, this problem remains unresolved. When discussing the issue of the typological taxon of culture, three of its characteristics are distinguished (integrity, qualitative certainty and the ability to express the natural order), and two reasons are identified that do not allow to solve the problem of the typology of cultures. The first is that the concept of «type» is constructed as a theoretical construct (being logically constructed, it does not express the uniqueness of civilization / culture). The second reason is found in typological strategies in the scientific program of organicism and philosophy of life (in particular, the philosophy of culture of O. Spengler). Declaring the idea of local civilizations (independent historical principles), they do not solve the problem of the structure of reality (do not introduce a discontinuous metaphysical structure). The article substantiates the idea of creating a discontinuous paradigm of culturology, and in this regard, the prospects of the results of the phenomenological tradition of philosophy. According to time analytics of M. Heidegger, the type of unique culture is understood as its fundamental hermeneutic structure of being. The typology of cultures is understood not as a methodological, but rather as an ontological problematics predominantly. In taxonomy, a typological taxon expresses the unique characteristics of a civilization (culture) and serves as a discrete unit that specifically structures the universe of cultures. Taking into account the uniqueness of the type as a taxonomic unit, the question of a single principle of typological taxonomy (or a single architectonics of cultural studies) is raised. This issue is solved by referring to E. Husserl's theory of objectivity, to the concepts of "quasi-region" ("pure objectivity" or formal ontology) and regional ontologies ("material ontologies"). “Quasi-region” in relation to regional ontologies acts as a formal logic of objectivity, but each region, being formally subordinate to the content, is not derived from “pure objectivity.” Each region creates its own eidetic ontology, therefore the prospect of creating a typological systematics presupposes the development of an eidetics of unique regions. Moreover, a single science of culture unites culturological discourses of unique civilizations and cultures.

Keywords

Authors

References