Modeling as a culturological issue

The term "model" comes from the Latin "modulus" which has the following meanings: measure, beat, rhythm, melody, technical and architectural term used to describe the scale of proportionality. The linguistic status of the term, especially its functioning in language, allows us to consider the phenomenological aspects of modeling in cultural studies. We distinguish concepts that are often regarded as equivalent - "model" and "copy". The ontological existence of "copy" is an attempt to replace the original and dispute its presence. The model, first of all, allows reproducing the phenomenon or the object in an authentic form, i.e. saving all properties of the original source. Secondly, manipulations carried out with the model are equivalent to what we would carry out in respect of the original. Thus, the model serves as an adequate equivalent of the original. Speaking of the phenomenological component of the model, we define criteria necessary for its existence per se. We highlight the following significant and universal criteria: idealization, formalization, visualization, proportionality. The main reason for the use of modeling is the need to produce scientific knowledge. However, production of scientific knowledge is a process which can be carried out in various ways. And in this case, we note a few basic types of models that allow us to solve scientific problems: component, evolutionary, structural and functional. Modeling should also be regarded as an expert procedure. The cultural expertise is formed due to very specific scientific inquiries - to understand what is going on in the culture or in its individual segments. We are firmly convinced that the culturological expertise procedure should be based on the concept of "critical thinking". In this work we present our visualization model of the texts of culture. This model was the result of a culturological expertise or, rather, an attempt to understand the modern culture. When we talk about visualization, we, first, have a dynamic process in mind. Second, we understand visualization as the representation of certain trends in culture. We distinguish three levels in our model, which, as we think, allow to understand how certain trends assert themselves and enter into the cultural space. The model can be described as evolutionary, as it describes visualization as a process of gradual transformation of the cultural space. We single out three levels at which the model functions: distributional, operational, and transformational.

Keywords

Authors

References