The principle of Bakhtin`s dialogicity as a conscious overcoming of the monologization of consciousness
https://doi.org/10.25205/2541-7517-2022-20-3-89-100
Abstract
This paper presents an analysis and comparison of two conceptions related to the understanding of social phenomena and the relationship between “I and the other”. The first of them is P. Ricoeur`s theory of the mimetic circle, which presents a phased structure of understanding of social action and forming an attitude towards it in the subject. Secondly, we consider the idea of dialogicity by M.M. Bakhtin, which he understood in a broad sense, as a general method for the humanities. With the help of the first theory, we substantiate the consistency of the second. Also, we supplement it with the new concepts such us “reification” and “personification” introduced by M.M. Bakhtin, this gives the study an ethical and moral component and additionally establishes the importance of the role of the “other” in humanitarian knowledge in particular and the understanding of social phenomena in general.
Keywords
Supporting agencies: The study was supported by RFBR (project no. 20-011-00801 «P. Ricoeur’s concept of triple mimesis as a basis for verifiability of historical narratives»).
About the Author
A. L. Kaulin
Novosibirsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alena L. Kaulin, Master of Science (Philosophy), PhD-program applicant
Novosibirsk
References
1. Anikina A. В. Mimeticheskiy krug P. Rikoeur kak mekhanizm reprezentatsii proshlogo [P. Ricoeur’s Mimetic Circleas a Tool for Representing of the Past]. Siberian Journal of Philosophy, 2020, vol. 18, no. 4, рp. 130–144. (In Russ.)
2. Bakhtin M. M. Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva [Aesthetics of verbal creativity]. M., 1986, pp. 381–393, 429–432. (In Russ.)
3. Borisenkova A. V. Teoriya povestvovaniya Polya Rikoeur: ot narrativnoy organizatsii opyta k narrativnym osnovaniyam nauchnogo znaniya [Paul Rikoeur`s theory of storytelling: from the narrative organizations of experience to the narrative foundation of science knowledge]. Sociological Review, 2007, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 55–63. (In Russ.)
4. Cassirer E. Filosofiya simvolicheskikh form [Philosophy of symbolic forms]. M.; SPb.: Universitetskaya kniga, 2002, vol. 1. (In Russ.)
5. Rikoeur P. Vremya i rasskaz [Time and narrative]. M.; SPb.: Universitetskaya kniga, 1998, vol.1. (In Russ.)
6. Sychev A. A. M.M. Bakhtin ob osobennostyakh metodologii gumanitarnykh nauk [M.M. Bakhtin about the peculiarities of the methodology of the humanities]. Izvestiya Samarskogo nauchnogo tsentra Rossiyskoy akademii nauk. Sotsial’nyye, gumanitarnyye, mediko-biologicheskiye nauki [Proceedings of Samara Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Science. Social, humanities, biological sciences], 2018, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 85–89. (In Russ.)
7. Zenkin S. N. Sotsial’noye deystviye i yego smysl: istoricheskaya germenevtika posle Rikoeurа [Social action and its meaning: historical hermeneutics after Ricoeur]. Moscow, Rossiyskaya Akademiya nauk. Institut filosofii [Russian Academy of Science. Institute of Philosophy], 2013, pp. 327–345. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Kaulin A.L. The principle of Bakhtin`s dialogicity as a conscious overcoming of the monologization of consciousness. Siberian Journal of Philosophy. 2022;20(3):89-100. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/2541-7517-2022-20-3-89-100
Views:
371
Email this article 