Mironenko Irina A, Sorokin Pavel S
Department of Psychology, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation.
Department of General Sociology, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation.
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2018 Jun;52(2):331-340. doi: 10.1007/s12124-018-9425-y.
This article takes as a starting point the critical analysis of attempts to define "culture", offered by Jahoda in 2012. Basing on the observed proliferation of various, often contradicting, definitions of "culture" (for instance, trying to refer to its both internal and external aspects), Jahoda arrives at the conclusion that attempts to define the concept of "culture" are vain and useless and it is quite practicable simply to use the term without seeking to define it. We find it hard to agree with this statement. Elaborating on Jahoda reflections and drawing on the recent debates in social sciences, cultural studies and philosophy, we argue that seeking for the definition of culture is necessary in the context of contemporary development of social and humanitarian knowledge. Moreover, we claim that the debates about culture indicate the need for a large-scale methodological reorganization of the social and humanitarian sciences, in response to the novel ontological congruence between internal and external, the fundamental "ontological shift", "reversing the poles" of the human-related reality. The human individual becomes its core element and pivot. Other "objects", "external" in relation to the individual (for instance, social structures and institutions), undergo such massive and rapid changes that grow progressively fuzzy and sometimes even less "real", comparing to the individual. The "inner" nature of the individual also transforms: from being "subjected" to think, act and feel according to certain external conditions, an individual becomes an Actor, who is empowered to change the environment following his purposive plans, desires and visions.
本文以对2012年雅霍达提出的“文化”定义尝试的批判性分析为出发点。基于观察到的“文化”的各种定义(往往相互矛盾)的激增(例如,试图同时提及文化的内部和外部方面),雅霍达得出结论,试图定义“文化”概念是徒劳无益的,不寻求定义而仅仅使用这个术语是完全可行的。我们很难认同这一观点。在详细阐述雅霍达的思考并借鉴社会科学、文化研究和哲学领域近期的辩论后,我们认为,在当代社会和人文知识发展的背景下,寻求文化的定义是必要的。此外,我们认为关于文化的辩论表明,社会和人文科学需要进行大规模的方法论重组,以应对内部与外部之间新出现的本体论一致性、根本性的“本体论转变”以及人类相关现实的“两极颠倒”。人类个体成为其核心要素和枢纽。与个体相关的其他“对象”(例如社会结构和制度)相对于个体是“外部的”,它们经历了如此巨大而迅速的变化,以至于与个体相比,它们变得越来越模糊,有时甚至不那么“真实”。个体的“内在”本质也发生了转变:从根据某些外部条件“被迫”思考、行动和感受,个体变成了一个行动者,有能力按照其有目的的计划、欲望和愿景改变环境。